BA near miss

tut · Post by **tut** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:40 pm

Good point Graeme, I dont actually know as it has never been applicable to me, but one of the commercial fixed wing pilots should know.

I may even be wrong and it is not in place yet, but that would make no sense as there is no point in allowing CAT 3C landings in zero viz if they can not then clear the R/W and taxi back to their bay.

Will keep looking or ring ATC.

tut

tut · Post by **tut** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:52 pm

Whilst checking on the above, I found this clip. It is headed zero visibility, but they get the R/W and lights above 100', with plenty of engines and two pilots, the second one calling altitude out continuously. Bloody luxury.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5f0_1183152276

He then lands it at least three times, and the co-pilot in the right seat seems to collapse over to the left with a "f***ing hell" in the background.

tut

ps found this gem on line. I checked to see if it was true, and it is actually documented. Many years ago though, Hastings and Varsity prop aircraft.

"Crew flying to Bedford Airport in really grotty weather. You know the stuff. Low cloud, heavy rain, nil viz. Listening to Bedford ATC. One aircraft in the circuit. Tower asking the circuit traffic about conditions. Circuit traffic replies describing near fantastic conditions. Crew trying to look out windscreen can't believe what they are hearing. What fortunate luck.

Crew continues to Bedford, still listening to happy circuit traffic. Crew are unable to appreciate the fantastic conditions as they are unable to see past the nose of their aircraft.

Crew eventually manage to land after the most dreadful approach conditions with no viz. Baffled crew curse the loonies in the circuit and watch it land, to be confronted by a Varsity Aircraft emblazoned with â€œBLIND LANDING EXPERIMENTAL UNIT.â€

mac · Post by **mac** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Don't they just follow the wee car which will escort them back to the correct gate?

Mac

tut · Post by **tut** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:51 pm

As long as they can see it Mac, but 0/0 actually means just that.

tut

Post by **pete** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:14 pm

graeme wrote:
tut wrote:The A/C would have then taxied itself back to the loading bay. No use it landing in 0/0 if it then can not get off the runway.
Awesome. What's the system that get the plane from the runway to the gate? I thought (and I know SFA about these things) that Standard Terminal Arrival Routes / ILS got you from top of decent to a runway, but didn't realise there was anything other than flashy lights and ground ATC to get planes to a specific gate. There must be something more accurate than VOR behind it too. Are the taxi routes in the flight computer too? How does it work?

Tut/pete/tenkfeet: Does the flight computer actually know how to get to the gate on its own? Is the same taxi route followed every time from runway to gate? Surely other ground traffic could get in the way?

Just curious, but not really sure what to Google for...

Edit: just read more about the ILS, but none the wise about what happens after a landing...

The actual minima in which a/c can land is a function of the ground equipment, the actual pilots flying, the a/c fit and the company SOPs.

So the same plane can have different minima at the same airport day to day depending on the crew, or even depending on how current the crew are in carrying out the required number of autolands.

AFAIK CAT3c that Tut describes was never implemented, certainly there are none in Scotland, I'm pretty sure none in UK. I don't remember anyone claiming to be able to land below below 75m visibility. Now 75m is nothing, but they can land in less, just not taxi... In theory ground navigation advice could be provided by ATC using SMR (surface movement radar) but in practice the equipment isn't approved for this, the staff aren't trained, there are no procedures - well certainly not at Glasgow - and a thousand other reasons. Not only that but there wouldn't be the need, it is very rarely below 75m visibility.
Otherwise ground navigation (ie from the runway to the stand) is done by taxiway centreline lights (with switchable "stopbars" lights which cross the taxiway), by very limited movements of both a/c and v/h all of which require express permission and more recently with the SMR to make sure everyone is doing what they are told. Worst case you can send a "Follow Me" (a car with an illuminated sign on the back that says "Follow Me") but frankly if the pilot can't see the ground and the bright taxiway lights is he really going to be able to see a Shogun in front of him any easier?

We do practice using the SMR to guide fire vehicles in Low Vis so in the event of an incident they can still get there quickly, even though they may not be able to see where they are going. (This statistic always impresses me - Airport fire vehicles have to be able to get to any point on an airfield in 120secs. That's measured from the crash button being pressed to squirting the first foam. That's why the big airports sometimes need more than one fire station (so the engines are never more than 120 secs from any point), and why the crash button at some places doesn't just sound the claxons, it also open the Fire station doors and starts the trucks too. Some places will have one or two fire engines that are slightly smaller than the others - they'll be the quick ones to keep those response times down...).

tut · Post by **tut** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:35 pm

Thanks Pete, I am well out of date, but I thought that they were actually carrying out 0/0 landings now.

If you take your absolutely allowed minima for a manual landing at say Heathrow, assuming that they are state of the art CAT 3C and you and the A/C are likewise, what are the present limits?

How do you assess your overshoot point with 75m viz and almost 0ft AGL cloud base if you are carrying out an auto landing, which you would have to? If it is less than 75m I cannot imagine that you have any time/space to intervene?

tut

graeme · Post by **graeme** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:46 pm

Cheers Pete.

Post by **pete** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:27 pm

tut wrote:Thanks Pete, I am well out of date, but I thought that they were actually carrying out 0/0 landings now.

How do you assess your overshoot point with 75m viz and almost 0ft AGL cloud base if you are carrying out an auto landing, which you would have to? If it is less than 75m I cannot imagine that you have any time/space to intervene?

tut

The minima is a company dependant thing, and my understanding is that they are laid down for taxi-ing requirements, effectively the a/c can land in 0/0, in fact arguably is doing because as you say they have no time to react to anything, and roll out can still be under the guidance of the ILS back beam. As the company SOPs (Standard Operasting Procedures for anyone else reading) dictate minima we don't ask what they are, nor do we police they are being complied to. We only enquire to manage holding, so we can shuffle inbounds so that those who can take our Wx are vectored in front of those that cannot. This is why my knowledge of the variou minimas isn't quite as complete as you might expect.

I'll get a full answer in the next couple of days, because I want to know now!

Pete

woody · Post by **woody** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:49 pm

Pete, I thought if it was a bit foggy you just sent them down to PIK for the wife to deal with?

tut · Post by **tut** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:09 pm

Pete

I presume that you are like me, if the sh*t is going to hit the fan, I like an idea of what I am going to do beforehand........

tut

Rich H · Post by **Rich H** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:03 am

I know they did fit an autoland to the Torandos a while back, awesome piece of kit, the trouble was no one had appreciated how good it was, it quickly destroyed the dit of runway they were all hitting!

Turns out they were hitting a 10' patch every time.

Fog is known as Liney sunshine as its pretty much all that grounds jets reliably. Cloud and wind are just delays and they would take off though any old patch of sky blowing through but the good old Fife sea fog, once that was in it was staying.

r055 · Post by **r055** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 11:28 am

sorry to lower the tone, but the news is just in what REALLY caused the flight to crash land....

tut · Post by **tut** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 7:58 pm

Now that is what you call tits.........

tut

Mr Momo · Post by **Mr Momo** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 8:58 pm

Is that classed as a 'Rough Lie' ?

/I'll get my coat

Smclean · Post by **Smclean** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 5:38 pm

hi guys,

I work for BA and our minima is 75m, you cant go below that.

Also the aircraft cant taxi itsself back to stand! We disconnect the A/P after touchdown then taxi it back ourselfs!

Also we have to do 2 Automatic landings in between recurrent sim checks ie 2 every 6 months - and the day of the crash the crew were carry out a manual landing....