High winds force Emirates go-around 2013

Discuss all things 'aviation' that do not fit into a more appropriate forum
User avatar
MarkL
UKAR Supporter
Posts: 1860
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 5:44 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by MarkL »

This is why I believe all the technology in the world will never replace a human pilot.

Computer says NO!
HTAFC

User avatar
DerekF
Posts: 4828
Joined: Sun 07 Sep 2008, 7:54 am
Location: Handforth, Cheshire, UK

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by DerekF »

How do you know the autopilot wasn't flying it?

User avatar
MarkL
UKAR Supporter
Posts: 1860
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 5:44 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by MarkL »

If you have read the Boeing 777 FCOM you will know the maximum demonstrated take off and landing crosswind is 38 knots. The maximum crosswind under autoland is 25 knots. Given the wind to day at Birmingham was classified as gale-force (in the reports I have read, at least) that would indicate the crosswind was above this limit implying the autopilot was not in use as it would be outside limits. Also, as is generally reported, MOST pilots will only use Autoland 20% of the time. So yes, you are right to say I don't know s/he wasn't using autoland. I also do not know the crosswind was over 25 knots, but the video would indicate it was.

Of course, like yourself, I am only 'guessing' but I feel my comments are based on consideration of available facts.


Mark
HTAFC

User avatar
DerekF
Posts: 4828
Joined: Sun 07 Sep 2008, 7:54 am
Location: Handforth, Cheshire, UK

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by DerekF »

According to the METAR history, the wind at the time was 270 26G37. Assuming he was landing runway 33, it was certainly near the limit.
I'm not suggesting that they intended to fly an autoland but rather that the approach would be autopilot coupled to a manual landing. As it was a pretty late go-around, probably in the flare, it would have probably been manually flown. Anyway, he had a go three times then ended up at Gatwick.

Shame he went around, he looked he had it nailed - unlike the DHC-8 pilot in the other video. That looked pretty wild.

Mind you this one made me laugh

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILLG4e84108[/youtube]

Aeroplane moves in wind shocker. Of course it moves in the wind! How do you think it is able to fly!

Tangoringo
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 12:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Tangoringo »

Might have been nice had he/she tried to kick the drift off at some point. :grin: Landing sideways does tend to scuff those new Goodyears somewhat! :biggrin:

Tangoringo
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 12:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Tangoringo »

MarkL wrote:If you have read the Boeing 777 FCOM you will know the maximum demonstrated take off and landing crosswind is 38 knots. The maximum crosswind under autoland is 25 knots. Given the wind to day at Birmingham was classified as gale-force (in the reports I have read, at least) that would indicate the crosswind was above this limit implying the autopilot was not in use as it would be outside limits. Also, as is generally reported, MOST pilots will only use Autoland 20% of the time. So yes, you are right to say I don't know s/he wasn't using autoland. I also do not know the crosswind was over 25 knots, but the video would indicate it was.

Of course, like yourself, I am only 'guessing' but I feel my comments are based on consideration of available facts.


Mark


I believe the 20pc figure is a tad off the mark. Personally speaking it would be closer to about 3-5 PC subject to prevailing wx etc.

User avatar
MarkL
UKAR Supporter
Posts: 1860
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 5:44 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by MarkL »

Thanks for the correction Tangoringo, I didn't realise it was that low. I had it in my head it had to be used more than that to retain currency with the process.

Regards,

Mark
HTAFC

Tangoringo
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 12:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Tangoringo »

No worries and apologies if the reply seemed a bit brusque- I typed it in a bit of a rush!

We do tend to most landings manually a) out of professional pride and b) being honest, we tend to do a better job........most of the time :lol: :whistle: Also, as mentioned above, there are certain wind limits (head,cross and tail ) that vary between types and ground factors as well. Certainly, in the conditions we had yesterday I would have no hesitation in dropping the automatic option.

User avatar
AlexC
Posts: 6040
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 6:40 pm
Location: New Forest

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by AlexC »

He/she was crabbing (sorry, don't know the correct technical term) the way that I've seen pilots very impressively do at Heathrow in a strong cross-wind, but he/she didn't appear to try to straighten up just before touch-down.
Pte. Aubrey Gerald Harmer, R. Suss. R. (att. to the Sherwood Foresters) KIA 26/9/1917 Polygon Wood, aged 19, NKG. RIP

Andy Hill
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu 29 Jul 2010, 7:13 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Andy Hill »

I'd be surprised if I do 1% of Autolands :shock:

We no longer require any on the aircraft for currency - all done in the Sim. So I'll only do one when weather conditions require it. I do not subscribe to the school of doing one in "marginal" conditions - if the protections are not in force, then I cannot see how I can monitor it accurately enough? As the SQ777 @ MUC unfortunately demonstrated...

Tangoringo
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 12:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Tangoringo »

Hi Andy,

You are right. On further inspection of my ..ahem...current logbook my total is closer to your guesstimate than mine. The ones I did do were only at the request of Der Management for the 318 :grin:

User avatar
RRconway
Posts: 2359
Joined: Sat 04 Jul 2009, 4:09 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by RRconway »

Tangoringo wrote:Hi Andy,

You are right. On further inspection of my ..ahem...current logbook my total is closer to your guesstimate than mine. The ones I did do were only at the request of Der Management for the 318 :grin:


That's interesting Tangoringo.
Assuming your log log is the same as the main fleets log you have those tick boxes at the bottom left.
I know you tick the one for auto land but you also have the AWOPS box, or LVOPS in new speak. I was under the impression if you ticked that it was an 'in anger' auto land and that by default allows you to leave it unticked if it was for recency reasons.
I also understood there was a requirement for a certain amount of auto lands for company recency?

Andy, are you another BAite?

Cheers,
Jeff.
I know you think you understood what I said, but I'm not sure you realise that what I said is not what I meant.

Tangoringo
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 12:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Tangoringo »

Hi Jeff,

You are absolutely right. .LVOPS ticked only if wx qualifies and auto land done in anger ie below Cat I conditions. As Andy alludes to above we used to have to do a certain number (3?) between sim checks but this no longer a requirement although from a familiarity/airmanship point of view it is advisable to do them fairly regularly as the SOP's and calls obviously differ. Again though as mentioned above it can cause more problems than its worth when in Cat I or better weather. That being said it can be a useful tool for workload management in non normal ops. It's all down to the commander on the day to use it as he see's fit.

Hope yr well btw. You still busy with the new' 'toys' ?

Maisie
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed 28 Oct 2009, 5:02 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Maisie »

This was taken on the same day... He is up very early!

Photo by Stephen Davies.

Image
6D | 7D | 60D
11-16 f/2.8 | 24-105 IS L | 70-300 IS USM | 50 f/1.4 | 100 f/2.8 | 400 f/5.6

User avatar
747woody
Posts: 359
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 9:53 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by 747woody »

One point to note is that it is the crosswind component that is limiting, not the actual wind strength.

Another consideration is the automatic windshear alert, if that goes off you are obliged to go-around.

One day last year I watched a bunch of aircraft landing at Vegas when the wind was 45 knots gusting to 60, at 30 to 40 degrees off the runway heading. The only things actually getting in seemed to be the older generation aircraft (presumably the ones without the automatic windshear warning?!)

Tangoringo
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 12:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Tangoringo »

747woody wrote:One point to note is that it is the crosswind component that is limiting, not the actual wind strength.

Another consideration is the automatic windshear alert, if that goes off you are obliged to go-around.



Not strictly true ( in our mob anyway ) Our windshear warnings may be disregarded in certain conditions. That being said, having done the roughest approach I have even had in to Geneva with 60 plus knot winds ( plus hills...not a good combination! ) earlier this year the bloom in' thing never triggered anyway and I ran out of moral fibre long before it started shouting at us!! :lol:

exocet_uk
Posts: 401
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 5:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by exocet_uk »

Another consideration is the automatic windshear alert, if that goes off you are obliged to go-around.

Not necessarily, well not on our fleet. Depends on the alert, whether it's 'W/shear ahead (Red/Amber) or just 'Windshear'.

User avatar
747woody
Posts: 359
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 9:53 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by 747woody »

exocet_uk wrote:
Another consideration is the automatic windshear alert, if that goes off you are obliged to go-around.

Not necessarily, well not on our fleet. Depends on the alert, whether it's 'W/shear ahead (Red/Amber) or just 'Windshear'.


OK, interesting. Obviously different operators have different attitudes to it!

User avatar
DerekF
Posts: 4828
Joined: Sun 07 Sep 2008, 7:54 am
Location: Handforth, Cheshire, UK

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by DerekF »

I would be surprised if anyone ignores a red windshear warning. Red warning is for decreasing performance and I would have thought was a mandatory go-around. On some aircraft the autothrottle will use N1max - higher even than N1ref to get away from the ground.
An amber windshear warning or increasing performance can be "ignored" but it is given as a decreasing performance windshear is coming along very soon.
The story of Delta 191 makes sobering reading and an insight into the consequences of encountering windshear.

exocet_uk
Posts: 401
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 5:19 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by exocet_uk »

OK, interesting. Obviously different operators have different attitudes to it!

Different types too; mine was in reference to the Babybus.

I would be surprised if anyone ignores a red windshear warning. Red warning is for decreasing performance and I would have thought was a mandatory go-around. On some aircraft the autothrottle will use N1max - higher even than N1ref to get away from the ground.
An amber windshear warning or increasing performance can be "ignored" but it is given as a decreasing performance windshear is coming along very soon.

Of course, just using the distinction to highlight the different potential circumstances.

blueskytoday
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Dec 2013, 6:48 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by blueskytoday »

There is a video from the other end of the runway at http://youtu.be/NjamSDt4SZU , which shows more clearly what happened - and that the scare stories of a sideways landing attempt are way off the mark.

blueskytoday

Andy Hill
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu 29 Jul 2010, 7:13 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Andy Hill »

I would be surprised if anyone ignores a red windshear warning. Red warning is for decreasing performance and I would have thought was a mandatory go-around
I have briefed to ignore a Windshear warning (not PWS) iaw our rules. Personally only after a 1st attempt and gone round and then discuss if a 2nd attempt warranted, and whether the W/S warning can be heard without a G/A...

User avatar
Petedcollins
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 8:45 pm

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Petedcollins »

Fascinating reading guys

I'm part way through my PPL and crosswind still gives me jitters, really interesting reading about the big boys handling :D

User avatar
Russ
Posts: 5592
Joined: Wed 23 Jul 2008, 6:51 am
Location: UK

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around

Post by Russ »

Another angle of the Emirates 777 go-arounds at BHX has been posted on Youtube.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjamSDt4SZU[/youtube]

Check out the wing flex on the first go-around. :shock:

Stagger2
Posts: 1507
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2011, 8:46 am

Re: High winds force Emirates go-around 2013

Post by Stagger2 »

That's not wing-flex....it's full-thrust + 'flapping' to climb away right now! :wink:

Post Reply