3 ms·
They already botched a gear down landing, which is almost never mentioned. They retracted the gear and did a teardrop go around from a headwind into a tailwind
by gazchop 2y ago
They already botched a gear down landing, which is almost never mentioned. They retracted the gear and did a teardrop go around from a headwind into a tailwind belly flop.
Stinks of bad crew resource management and ATC which is why the ATC and airline for raided by SK officials.
- whycome 2y agoBotched how?
- mianos 2y agoBotched by not using the manual gravity gear drop. Maybe they didn't have enough time. But losing a single engine is not necessarily fatal at that flight phase. Most professionals are still questioning why the rush to get it down. If there is some valid reason, aside from accidentally shutting down the other engine, when we do find out the details, maybe the professionals won't call it botched.
- whycome 2y agoCan’t really call it botched until we know the reason…
- fl7305 2y agoWhat should ATC have done differently?
- K0balt 2y agolol. People often have an idea that ATC actually controls what happens. They just give advisory guidance to pilots, who ultimately decide what to do. A clearance to land or the lack of one does not absolve the pilots from making their own judgments and decisions about how to conduct the navigation of the aircraft, and where and when to land. Usually, it’s a bad idea to not follow ATC guidance, but in the case of emergencies especially, pilots call the shots.
- ptsneves 2y agoDon’t know why you are downvoted. I was even taught that if after reporting an emergency you are overwhelmed by information requests you should just mute the radio and focus on solving the emergency . ATCs job is to get everybody out of the way including themselves.
- bombcar 2y agoATC can cause crashes by vectoring planes at the same altitude. But the tower at an airport, their job is to supply information, and once you call mayday you’re in total control - you can ask them to do whatever you think will help you save the flight, including (and usually automatically done) diverting all other flights, clearing all runways, and cancelling any departures pending until the issue is resolved. Pilots have to be trained to ignore ATC as necessary, because planes have crashed because of trying to be polite to requests (and not declaring mayday or pan pan).
- cratermoon 2y agoArguably, ATC trying to override the decisions of the pilot caused this crash at Houston Hobby Airport in 2016: https://www.flyingmag.com/aftermath-cirrus-crash-june-2016/ https://www.flyingmag.com/aftermath-cirrus-crash-june-2016/
- cratermoon 2y agoAviate. Navigate. Communicate.
- loeg 2y agoYeah, especially given the mayday call, ATC is trying to give pilots the information they need, prepare emergency services, and get the fuck out of the way.
- gazchop 2y agoPossible comms failure. ATC are responsible for reporting surface wind. It may have lead to a bad decision by the pilots. Go around versus teardrop etc.
- K0balt 2y agoWe don’t know why the pilot elected to double back instead of go around. There may have been indications of a progressive failure that indicated that course of action, but it does seem hasty. That haste may have caused them to not be able to set up a stabilized, minimum speed approach, and may have contributed to the long touchdown, which certainly was a contributing factor. If there were significant winds it would have compounded those factors. It is curious that the gear was retracted. I can only think that this was due to some kind of system failure? Perhaps that same failure explains the decision to double back instead of going around? Lots of questions, hopefully there will be answers. Still, the structure does not seem to meet the standard for frangibility that is indicated for objects in the approach path within 300m, although it’s not like it was at the very end of the runway. Runway over/undershoots are actually quite common, and the building of a nonfrangible structure on an otherwise safe skid zone is a significant error in design principles that is not common or conformal to industry standards. If those antennas had been placed on property designed towers instead of a concrete bunker, the passengers and crew very well may have walked away without a scratch, despite any errors on the part of the crew or procedures of the airline.
- gazchop 2y agoThey retracted the gear after the first landing attempt. I suspect they either missed it on the teardrop or had secondary hydraulic failure and no time to do a gravity drop. I would err on the side of crew error because there were clear signs the hydraulic systems were functioning (thrust reverser and that they could retract the gear in the first place). Hydraulics don’t fail instantly and one engine was spooling still on landing. That's why EASA says put the plane down if there’s a strike on approach. Ryanair 4102 is a good example of a close one there as a reference.