[ventus45]

Transmogrification = the process of complete and usually extreme or grotesque change from one state or form to another.

The thought has crossed my mind on occasions too.

My worry is, complex systems, designed to "self detect" faults in parts of those systems, and to then autonomously "shut them down" (ie "graceful degradation") may sometimes get into a state where they get "confused" and the degradation is no longer "graceful", and suddenly "goes off the rails" and the system then "collapses", catastrophically.

Some light reading.
https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceeding...270078.pdf

[Peetwo]

Has ET claimed another aircraft?  It’s a sneaking suspicion which keeps popping up in the back of my conscious.  I know most think that by ET I mean the Extra Terrestrial movie star; and, I’ll own that I was quite happy for that notion to exist, but it’s not what I meant.

Electronic Transmogrification (ET) in the form of ‘virus’ or corrupt data creating problems is much more believable than some of the complex ‘conspiracy’ theories floating about.  You can, without to much trouble have your computer ’infected’ and made useless; your ‘details’ and identity can be stolen, government and industries spend millions, if not billions on computer security.  The ‘Black hats’ demonstrated a couple of years back that ‘aeronautical’ systems can be ‘hacked’.  

So I arrive at the parallels between MH 370 and MS 804 and a ‘what if’ question which, IMO, needs an answer.   This is not a ‘theory’ which I will defend to the death; just a simple, stray notion which intrigues me in quiet moments.  What say you?

In my past life as a SAR pilot in the tedious daylight hours on call & hanging around the base, one of our required tasks was to once a month download a Jeppesen database update to floppy discs or a USB stick. We then would power up the aircraft off the GPU and upload the update via the discs/stick into the aircrafts on-board FMS. The same procedure (more or less) was required to be completed of the secondary TSO'd GPS.

A similar procedure was also required on a mandated 50 hrly (kick the tyres & grease the nipples) maintenance inspection, where the LAME would insert a disc to download & upload information from the engine & systems database (i.e. ECTM).  

I often used to think how hard would it be to introduce a virus, either by default or by devious design, so the "K" hypothesis certainly has merit especially when dealing with 15-20+ year computer technology that carried far less software security protection, like with MH370 or MS-804. Certainly food for thought until such time as some computer boffin comes out and says.."that's impossible because..??" 

While on the subject of MS-804 here is the latest news cycle update from the cyber-sphere... :

EgyptAir crash: doomed plane's distress signal 'picked up by satellites'

Reports say aviation authorities have confirmed that the EgyptAir plane which crashed into the Mediterranean earlier this month emitted a distress signal.

Authorities in the US and Egypt have said that satellites picked up an emergency beacon after the airliner disappeared from radar on its way from Paris to Cairo.

The passenger jet with 66 people on board is thought to have plunged into the sea about 180 miles north of Alexandria.

Investigation teams are on their way to the area with deep water detection systems that it is hoped will help locate the flight recorders.

Debris including seats and luggage as well as body parts have already been found.

The French aviation safety agency has said the plane transmitted messages indicating smoke in the cabin and a fault in the flight control unit minutes before losing contact.

Egyptian and American investigators have claimed an emergency transmitter sent an automatic distress signal - according to a US official, seven minutes after the plane vanished from radar.

It's not known what caused the plane to come down so suddenly.

http://www.euronews.com/2016/05/31/egyptair-crash-doomed-plane-s-distress-signal-picked-up-by-satellites/

Back to Top

 &..

Doomed EgyptAir plane's black box FOUND as harrowing photos emerge of wreckage

Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi said on Sunday no particular theory is being favored to explain why EgyptAir MS804 plunged into the Mediterranean, after sending out an automated message signaling smoke on board.

EgyptAir flight MS804 crashed in the Mediterranean Sea on its way to Cairo from Paris, killing all 66 people onboard.

Egypt's aviation minister on Thursday said investigators hadn't ruled out any scenario, but that terrorism was a more likely cause than mechanical failure.

Sisi said "it is very, very important to us to establish the circumstances that led to the crash of that aircraft" even as he pointed out it "will take time" to determine the exact cause of the tragedy that has seen no survivors.

Speaking of Egypt's dedication to the search, Sisi said: 'They have a submarine that can reach 3,000 metres under water.

On Friday, search teams found wreckage including seats and luggage about 290 kilometres north of Egypt's coastal city of Alexandria, Egypt's military said.

The Daesh group was quick to claim responsibility for that attack, but there has been no such claim linked to the EgyptAir crash.

The data came through the Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System, or ACARS, which sends messages between planes and ground facilities.

It disappeared from radar early Thursday as it flew to Cairo - what should have been about a 3½-hour flight.

The 262-foot ship will aim to identify the sound of the underwater location beacons fitted to the crashed plane's cockpit voice and flight data recorders, known as black boxes.

A French navy spokesman said a French maritime surveillance plane "on Sunday (yesterday) detected a lot of floating objects, probably related to the aircraft, in the search area".

There were indications of problems with a heated window in the cockpit, a sliding window in the cockpit, smoke in the lavatory, smoke in the avionics compartment below the cockpit, a fixed window, the autopilot and the flight control system.

The official website of the Egyptian Aircraft Accident Investigation Directorate, which is affiliated with the Ministry of Civil Aviation, gave details of a 2013 incident in which the plane in question had to make an emergency landing. On Friday, IS issued a statement on clashes with the Egyptian military in Sinai, but said nothing about the plane crash.

The number of tourists fell 40 percent in the first quarter of 2016 compared to past year due in large part to the suspected bombing of a Russian plane carrying 224 people from a Red Sea resort in late October.

As of now, investigators have found nothing implicating the flight crew or security officials aboard the plane, an Egyptian official said.

An global flotilla of search ships, aided by surveillance planes, was scouring a section of sea 180 miles north of the port city of Alexandria, and retrieved some wreckage, belongings and human remains over the weekend.

"Most of the data is sensed and acquired at the front of the aircraft and travels by datalink to the recorders at the rear which are in simple terms, very large capacity non-volatile memory sticks", he added.

EgyptAir said 30 Egyptians, 15 French passengers, two Iraqis, and one passenger from Britain, Sudan, Chad, Portugal, Algeria, Canada, Belgium, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were on board.

The report further said there has been no official confirmation, and EgyptAir did not confirm or deny that the black boxes have been located. I told her to switch off her phone, but she said: "What if Samar calls?"

The European Space Agency says one of its satellites has spotted a possible oil slick in the same area of the Mediterranean Sea where Flight 804 disappeared.

http://info-europa.com/sports/doomed-egyptair-planes-black-box-found-as-harrowing-photos-emerge-of-wreckage/273575

Back to Top

     

MTF...P2

[Kharon]

FWIW - the - AIRLIVE  - link is worth checking out.

[Peetwo]

FWIW - the - AIRLIVE  - link is worth checking out.

Cheers P9 - Latest update as of 2016/06/02, 06:46. 

02/06/2016 06:40  BREAKING According to French public TV, the Airbus A320 made 3 emergency landings during the 24 hours preceding the crash

The Airbus A320's flight MS804 EgyptAir which crashed into the Mediterranean Sea on the night of Wednesday 18 to Thursday 19 May, was forced to turn around and emergency landing at least 3 times during the 24 hours before the crash, according to information from French public TV France 3 gathered Wednesday 1 June.

The aircraft made six rotations between Asmara (Eritrea), Cairo (Egypt), Tunis (Tunisia) and Paris when it suddenly disappeared from radar screens. 

In its different rotations between 18 and 19 May, ACARS messages sent to the ground signaled anomalies on board shortly after takeoff from 3 airports. We do not know yet the exact nature.

These alert procedures have caused each time a technical audit on the ground but the aircraft was allowed to take off again to continue his journey over the Mediterranean.

Also from AP via the Oz:

Black box signals picked up from missing EgyptAir Flight MS804

• AP
  
• 12:00AM June 2, 2016
  
  

Since the crash of Flight MS804 on May 19 small pieces of the wreckage and human ­remains have been recovered, while the bulk of the plane and the bodies of the passengers are believed to be deep under the sea.

A French ship has picked up signals from deep under the Mediterranean Sea, presumed to be from black boxes of the EgyptAir plane that crashed last month, killing all 66 passengers and crew on board.

Egypt’s Civil Aviation Min­istry last night cited a statement from the committee investigating the crash of flight MS804 as ­saying the vessel Laplace had ­received the signals.

It did not say when the signals were detected but the French navy confirmed the Laplace ­arrived in the search area on Tuesday. Laplace’s equipment picked up the “signals from the seabed of the wreckage search area, ­assumed to be from one of the data recorders”, it said.

Locator pings emitted by flight data and cockpit voice recorders, known as the black boxes, can be picked up from deep underwater.

The Airbus A320 had been cruising normally in clear skies on a night flight from Paris to Cairo early on May 19 when it suddenly lurched left, then right, spinning all the way around and plummeting 11,582m into the sea. A distress signal was not issued.

Since the crash, small pieces of the wreckage and human ­remains have been recovered while the bulk of the plane and the bodies of the passengers are believed to be deep under the sea.

A Cairo forensic team has ­received the human remains and is carrying out DNA tests to identify the victims. The search has narrowed to a 5km area in the Mediterranean.
David Learmount, a consulting editor at website Flightglobal, said the black boxes’ batteries could transmit signals up to 30 days after the crash. But even if the batteries expire, locating the boxes remains a possibility.

Nearly two weeks after the crash off Egypt’s northern coast, the cause of the tragedy still has not been determined.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

FWIW - the - AIRLIVE  - link is worth checking out.

Black box signals picked up from missing EgyptAir Flight MS804

• AP
  
• 12:00AM June 2, 2016
  
  

Since the crash of Flight MS804 on May 19 small pieces of the wreckage and human ­remains have been recovered, while the bulk of the plane and the bodies of the passengers are believed to be deep under the sea.

Update: 05 June 2016 

Courtesy Gerry Soejatman...

MS804: Claims of 3 emergencies versus the facts!
June 4, 2016 Gerry Soejatman

Having spent a week away from dealing with the MS804 crash, I was quite shocked to return finding new allegations that the aircraft has had 3 emergencies within 24 hours of the accident. Much to my dismay, one reputable newspaper wrote about this allegation:

The doomed EgyptAir plane that plunged into the Mediterranean last month with the loss of 66 lives was forced three times to turn around after taking off and return to three different airports in the 24 hours preceding the crash, reports say.

The Airbus A320’s warning systems signalled anomalies on board three times during the plane’s six rotations – between Asmara in Eritrea, Cairo, and Tunis – in the 24 hours before it disappeared on its final flight, according to French media.

But each time when it returned to the airport it had just taken off from, it was quickly allowed to leave again after inspectors carried out a technical audit and found nothing amiss, the reports said.

I find it unbelievable that this information would have been missed by the hundreds if not thousands of airplane geeks around the world looking into this accident. Let’s not forget that there is evidence of the aircraft’s movements. Had it suffered 3 anomalies requiring the aircraft to return to the airport it had just departed from, we would have seen a pattern of delays within the records.

The Evidence

Screenshot of the aircraft’s recorded movements at Flightradar24

If we see the evidence above, in the last 24 hours of the aircraft’s life, it suffered no or little delays. In one occasion, it even landed early. This is inconsistent with allegations of three RTBs (return-to-base). This isn’t secret evidence, this is publicly available information that doesn’t require a lot of brainpower to churn through and make a conclusion that the allegation is false. However, if you insist on an official version, well, here goes:

“For me it is not true,” Safwat Musallam said on the sidelines of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) annual meeting in Dublin.

It seems that this latest allegation is just another in a string of attempts to paint a bad light on the Egyptians. I personally don’t care whether the Egyptian authorities are to be trusted or not, but independent data exist, and even if one does not trust the Egyptian (as many would tell you they would tell lies in a desperate bid to save their tourism industry) one must give credit where it’s due. As for the Egyptair chairman, Safwat Mussalam, I doubt he’s lying in this instance.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

FWIW - the - AIRLIVE  - link is worth checking out.

Black box signals picked up from missing EgyptAir Flight MS804

• AP
  
• 12:00AM June 2, 2016
  
  

Since the crash of Flight MS804 on May 19 small pieces of the wreckage and human ­remains have been recovered, while the bulk of the plane and the bodies of the passengers are believed to be deep under the sea.

MS804: Claims of 3 emergencies versus the facts!
June 4, 2016 Gerry Soejatman

Update 16 June 2016:

Short factual report from the Egyptian AAIC:

Cairo 15 june 2016
Investigation Progress Report (8) by the Egyptian Aircraft Accident Investigation Committee

 

 

John Lethbridge; the vessel contracted by the Egyptian government to join the search efforts for the data recorders and the wreckage of the doomed A320; had identified several main locations of the wreckage, accordingly the first images of the wreckage were provided to the investigation committee. Based on the wreckage locations; The search team and investigators onboard of the vessel will draw a map for the wreckage distribution spots.

Immediately a meeting was held between the investigation committee members to study thoroughly the progressive actions taken during the past period and in order to plan how to best handle the wreckage in the coming period.

It is worth mentioning that the debris retrieved earlier are still in possession of the forensic evidences under supervision of the criminal prosecution; to carry out standard procedures then it will be handed to the technical investigation committee after concluding such procedures. 

And from Reuters via the SMH:

Missing EgyptAir flight MS804 plane wreckage spotted in Mediterranean Sea
Date June 16, 2016 - 8:06AM

New York: A deep ocean search vessel hunting for the remains of an EgyptAir jet that crashed in the eastern Mediterranean last month has identified several main locations of its wreckage, the Egyptian investigation committee said on Wednesday.

The committee said that a vessel contracted by the Egyptian government to join the search efforts for the data recorders and the wreckage of the doomed A320 "had identified several main locations of the wreckage, accordingly the first images of the wreckage were provided to the investigation committee."

The wreckage of a missing EgyptAir plane has reportedly been found. Photo: AP

Based on the wreckage locations the search team and investigators on board the vessel will draw a map for the wreckage distribution spots, it added

The plane disappeared with 66 people on board, including the crew, on May 19 while the plane was over the Mediterranean Sea. No group has claimed responsibility for a terror attack involving the plane.

The announcement has come at a crucial time for the investigation, with the flight data recorders expected to stop emitting signals on June 24. Without the "black boxes", investigators say there is not enough information to explain why flight MS804 crashed.

Debris and personal belongings from MS804 which were earlier recovered from the sea. Photo: Egyptian Armed Forces

It was not immediately known which parts of the plane had been found, nor whether the two flight recorders were nearby. The recorders, one for voice and another for data, were contained in the tail of the Airbus A320.

The Egyptian-led investigation committee had already accepted a request by the United States' National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to have a representative join the investigation team.

Investigators said last week that radar imagery obtained from the Egyptian military confirmed previous reports based on Greek and British radar data indicating that the plane had swerved in mid-air before crashing.

Friends and relatives of EgyptAir hostess Yara Hani mourn last month Photo: Getty Images

Egyptian Air Navigation had previously said that the plane suddenly disappeared off the radar at cruising altitude around 37,000 feet. Those comments contradicted the Greek defence minister's account on the day of the crash that the plane had turned sharply to the left, then 360 degrees to the right before disappearing from radar at 15,000 feet.

That conclusion is important, said one aviation source, because it goes some way to excluding the possibility that the plane was brought down by a mid-air explosion.
France's air accident investigation agency, the BEA, which is advising Egypt on the underwater search, has said that one of the search ships has continued to pick up locator signals from one black box, whose position has been narrowed to within 1 to 2 km.
To recover the black boxes from the seabed, 3,000 metres below the surface, investigators will need to pinpoint the signals to within a few metres and establish whether the pingers are still connected to the recorders. 
AP, Reuters


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/missing-egyptair-flight-ms804-plane-wreckage-has-been-found-reports-20160615-gpk1pe.html#ixzz4BhbVzbzf

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

FWIW - the - AIRLIVE  - link is worth checking out.

Update 16 June 2016:

Short factual report from the Egyptian AAIC:

Cairo 15 june 2016
Investigation Progress Report (8) by the Egyptian Aircraft Accident Investigation Committee

 

 

John Lethbridge; the vessel contracted by the Egyptian government to join the search efforts for the data recorders and the wreckage of the doomed A320; had identified several main locations of the wreckage, accordingly the first images of the wreckage were provided to the investigation committee. Based on the wreckage locations; The search team and investigators onboard of the vessel will draw a map for the wreckage distribution spots.

Immediately a meeting was held between the investigation committee members to study thoroughly the progressive actions taken during the past period and in order to plan how to best handle the wreckage in the coming period.

It is worth mentioning that the debris retrieved earlier are still in possession of the forensic evidences under supervision of the criminal prosecution; to carry out standard procedures then it will be handed to the technical investigation committee after concluding such procedures. 

And from Reuters via the SMH:

Missing EgyptAir flight MS804 plane wreckage spotted in Mediterranean Sea
Date June 16, 2016 - 8:06AM

New York: A deep ocean search vessel hunting for the remains of an EgyptAir jet that crashed in the eastern Mediterranean last month has identified several main locations of its wreckage, the Egyptian investigation committee said on Wednesday.

The committee said that a vessel contracted by the Egyptian government to join the search efforts for the data recorders and the wreckage of the doomed A320 "had identified several main locations of the wreckage, accordingly the first images of the wreckage were provided to the investigation committee."

The wreckage of a missing EgyptAir plane has reportedly been found. Photo: AP

Based on the wreckage locations the search team and investigators on board the vessel will draw a map for the wreckage distribution spots, it added

The plane disappeared with 66 people on board, including the crew, on May 19 while the plane was over the Mediterranean Sea. No group has claimed responsibility for a terror attack involving the plane.

The announcement has come at a crucial time for the investigation, with the flight data recorders expected to stop emitting signals on June 24. Without the "black boxes", investigators say there is not enough information to explain why flight MS804 crashed.

Debris and personal belongings from MS804 which were earlier recovered from the sea. Photo: Egyptian Armed Forces

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/missing-egyptair-flight-ms804-plane-wreckage-has-been-found-reports-20160615-gpk1pe.html#ixzz4BhbVzbzf

Update 17/06/16 - CVR/FDR found & recovered

Courtesy the AP via the Oz:

Searchers retrieve black box of missing Egyptian airliner

• AP
  
• 12:00AM June 17, 2016
  

Searchers have narrowed the search area to a site with a radius of 500m.

Egypt’s investigation committee says the cockpit voice recorder of the doomed EgyptAir plane has been found and pulled from the Mediterranean Sea.

The committee says the so-called black box has been damaged but that the vessel searching for the wreckage has managed to safely pull the “memory unit which is the most important in the recorder”.

The announcement late last night cames a day after the committee said that the vessel John Lethbridge, which was contracted by the government to join the search for the plane debris and flight recorders, had spotted and obtained images from the wreckage of the EgyptAir plane.

The search team and investigators had completed a map that shows the location of debris within a 500m radius of the site, the sources said.

The committee said earlier yesterday the ­vessel John Lethbridge, which was contracted by the Egyptian government, had spotted and obtained ­images of the fuselage of the Airbus A320.

It said the survey vessel “had identified several main locations of the wreckage” and obtained ­images of the wreckage located between Crete and the Egyptian coast. The 75m-long vessel is equipped with sonar and equipment capable of detecting wreckage at depths of just over 1800m.

The A320 en route to Cairo from Paris had been cruising ­normally in clear skies on an overnight flight on May 19. The radar showed that the doomed aircraft turned 90 degrees left, then revolved a full 360 degrees to the right, plummeting from 38,000 feet to 15,000 feet before disappearing at about 10,000 feet. Leaked flight data indicated a sensor detected smoke in a ­lavatory and a fault in two of the plane’s cockpit windows in the final moments of the flight.

The cause of the crash has not been determined. Ships and planes from Egypt, Greece, France and the US have searched the Mediterranean north of Alexandria for the jet’s voice and flight data recorders, as well as more bodies and parts of the aircraft. Since the crash, only small pieces of wreckage and human remains have been recovered.

Civil Aviation Minister Sherif Fathi has said he believed terrorism was a more likely explanation than equipment failure or some other catastrophic event. But no hard evidence has emerged on the cause, and no militant group has claimed to have downed the jet.

Yesterday’s announcement came nearly two weeks after the French ship Laplace detected black box signals from the missing plane. Locator pings emitted by flight data and cockpit voice ­recorders can be picked up from deep underwater.

The Laplace, which left the search area last night, is equipped with three detectors designed to pick up those signals, which in the case of the EgyptAir plane are believed to be at a depth of some 3000m. By comparison, the wreckage of the Titanic is lying at a depth of some 3800m.

On Sunday, investigators said time was running out in the search for the black boxes. They said nearly two weeks remained ­before the batteries of the data and cockpit voice recorders expired and they stopped emitting signals.

If retrieved, the boxes could ­reveal whether a mechanical fault, a hijacking or a bomb caused the disaster.

The voice recorder should contain a record of the last 30 minutes in the cockpit, and is equipped to detect even loud breathing.

The data recorder would contain information on the engines, wings and cabin pressure. Investigators hope the black boxes will offer clues as to why there was no distress call.

DPA, AP
AVIATION P28,29

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

MS804 AAI - Problems with the CVR/FDR

Courtesy WSJ via the Oz:

EgyptAir Flight 804: crash teams struggle to crack black boxes

• Robert Wall, Dahlia Kholaif
  
• The Wall Street Journal
  
• 12:00AM June 24, 2016
  

A week after recovering the black boxes from EgyptAir Flight 804, which plunged into the Mediterranean last month, Egyptian officials appear to be struggling to get the devices ready for analysis.

Search teams on Thursday last week ­retrieved the Airbus A320’s cockpit voice recorder and a day later the flight-data recorder.

The Egyptian-led team investigating the crash began tests on the devices on Sunday. The crash team said it was “conducting thorough inspection and tests on the electronic boards of both” the recorders “in order to start the uploading process”.

The black boxes offer the best clues to determining why the plane crashed on May 19, killing all 66 people on board.

It was headed to Cairo from Paris when it deviated from its course while cruising at 37,000 feet, first turning left before rolling to the right and completing a full circle, say investigators.

Probes sometimes can identify the likely cause of a plane crash within days, if not hours, of extracting data from the black boxes.

The French air accident investigation office, the BEA, which is aiding the Egyptian crash probe team, has extensive experience in extracting and analysing ­information stored on flight data recorders.

Black box-maker Honeywell International has also been asked by Egypt to provide technical ­assistance.

“Inspection and removal of salt accumulations for more than 200 electrical circuits are ongoing to determine the circuit that doesn’t function properly in order to reach accurate reading of the memory units of the ­recorders,” Egyptian officials said, adding that the process was being witnessed by French and US officials.

The flight-data recorder is ­designed to store technical ­parameters for the last 25 hours of an aircraft’s movements.

It monitors basic information such as aircraft speed and altitude, but also smoke alarms, autopilot mode and control inputs made by the crew.

The cockpit voice recorder ­retains the last two hours of crew conversation.
Egyptian officials last week said the data analysis could “take several weeks”.

Flight 804 broadcast a number of fault messages before contact was lost, indicating the possibility of smoke in the nose of the plane, ­including a critical electronic equipment hub beneath the cockpit.

The messages alone have not proved sufficient to determine a likely cause for the crash, investigators have said.

Radar data also indicated it was not a sudden explosion that tore the plane apart mid-air.
The flight’s black box data should allow investigators to ­determine the sequence of events on board and what actions the crew might have taken.

Investigators also said that a specialised vessel, the John Lethbridge, belonging to Deep Ocean Search, was continuing to map the debris field of the plane’s wreckage for potential recovery later.

The ship was used to recover the black boxes from a depth of about 3000m, crash ­investigation officials said.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Flight SQ368 today.

Via the Oz:

Singapore Airlines’ jet catches fire

• Mitchell Bingemann
  
• The Australian
  
• 3:23PM June 27, 2016
  [img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/4c134add4c3a9e4881f7841b69d9ac85/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/vertical/author/widget[/img]
  

A Singapore Airlines’ jet carrying 241 passengers and crew caught fire after conducting an emergency landing at the city’s Changi Airport.

The plane – flight SQ368 - was forced to abort its trip to Milan and return to Singapore after an engine-oil warning sounded.

The right engine of the Boeing 777-300 ER burst into flames shortly after the aircraft touched down at 6.50am local time.

Emergency crew were on hand to immediately extinguish the blaze. There were no injuries to the 222 passengers and 19 crew on board, the airline said.

“Passengers disembarked through stairs and were transported to the terminal building by bus,” the airline said. “Singapore Airlines will be co-operating fully with the authorities in their investigations.”

Passengers have been transferred to another aircraft which will depart later today.

Video of burning plane and black smoke billowing from the runway has been posted to social media by witnesses at the airport.

 


MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

MS804 AAI - Problems with the CVR/FDR

Courtesy WSJ via the Oz:

EgyptAir Flight 804: crash teams struggle to crack black boxes

Update 29/06/16:

AP via the Oz:

French fix downed EgyptAir black box

• AP
  
• 12:00AM June 29, 2016
  

[url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/french-fix-downed-egyptair-black-box/news-story/b36fd21cce79f2b3cbc012a70400535a#comments][/url]
An EgyptAir Airbus A330-300 takes off for Cairo from Charles de Gaulle Airport outside of Paris in May.

French authorities opened a manslaughter inquiry yesterday into the May crash of an EgyptAir plane that killed 66 people, as one of the Airbus A320’s black boxes was repaired.

Prosecutor’s office spokesman Agnes Thibault-Lecuivre said the inquiry was launched into the downing of the Paris to Cairo flight as an accident investigation, not a terrorism investigation into the May 19 crash.

She said French authorities were “not at all” favouring the ­theory that MS804 was downed deliberately into the Mediterranean, though the status of the inquiry could eventually change if new evidence emerged.

Investigators decided to start the probe before waiting to analyse the Airbus A320’s flight data and voice recorders, based on evidence gathered so far, she said, without elaborating.

Egypt’s investigation commission said yesterday that one of the two black box flight ­recorders retrieved from the depths of the Mediterranean had been repaired, prompting hopes it could provide clues on why the aircraft went down.

The two black box recorders were found two weeks ago, but were too damaged to extract ­information on what caused the passenger jet to go down.

They were sent to France’s BEA air safety agency — which also extracted data from the black boxes of the ill-fated Rio de Janeiro to Paris flight that crashed in 2009 — to be ­repaired, where they arrived on Monday.

The flight data recorder “has been successfully repaired ... by the French accident investigation agency laboratory”, the commission said.

“Tests have been carried out ... and we can be sure the flight ­parameters were properly ­recorded. Work to ­repair the ­second black box will commence tomorrow.”
The second black box is the cockpit voice recorder.

An official at the ministry of civil aviation said Egyptian authorities haven’t been notified of the French prosecutor’s decision and that all scenarios remain on the table. “There is no evidence that backs up or rules out any of the possible scenarios of what caused the crash, including whether it is a terrorist act or technical problems,” he said.

The Egyptian investigation committee is in charge of issuing a final report, but France can also investigate because the plane was manufactured by France-based Airbus and French citizens were among those killed.

The reason for the crash ­remains unclear. The pilots made no distress call and no group has claimed to have brought down the aircraft.

The BEA has said the aircraft transmitted automated ­messages indicating smoke in the cabin and a fault in the flight control unit minutes before it disappeared. Egyptian investigators ­confirmed the aircraft had made a 90-degree left turn ­followed by a 360-degree turn to the right ­before hitting the sea.

The crash followed the bombing of a Russian airliner over Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula last ­October, killing all 224 passengers and crew. Islamic State claimed responsibility for that attack, but there has been no claim linked to the May 19 crash.
AP,

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Without fear nor favour - Final Report is out on TransAsia ATR72-600 crash...
 Via ATW online:

Final report: TransAsia ATR 72-600 crash ‘could have been prevented’
Jun 30, 2016 Victoria Moores


Emergency workers clear debris on Feb. 5, 2015, a day after the TransAsia Airways ATR 72-600 crash in Taipei, Taiwan.
Getty Images/ChinaFotoPress

Taiwan’s Aviation Safety Council (ASC) has concluded the TransAsia Airways ATR 72-600 crash on Feb. 4, 2015 was caused by the crew shutting down the wrong Pratt & Whitney PW127 engine after a technical fault.

The ATR 72-600 was operating as flight GE235 between Taipei’s Songshan Airport and Kinmen with 58 people on board, when the crew lost control during the initial climb. The aircraft stalled and crashed into the Keelung River in Taipei, killing 43 people and injuring 15.

In its final report, released June 30, ASC said: “The accident was the result of many contributing factors which culminated in a stall-induced loss of control.”

ASC said engine 2 was automatically shut down during the initial climb, possibly triggered by an “intermittent signal discontinuity” in its auto-feather unit. The pilots did not follow company procedure and incorrectly shut down engine 1.

“The flight crew’s non-compliance with TransAsia Airways ATR 72-600 standard operating procedures—abnormal and emergency procedures for an engine flameout at takeoff—resulted in the pilot flying reducing power on and then shutting down the wrong engine,” ASC said.

The aircraft stalled, but the crew did not respond to warning signals “in a timely and effective manner,” and there was not enough time to restart the healthy engine before impact.

“Had the crew prioritized their actions to stabilize the aircraft flight path, correctly identified the propulsion system malfunction—which was the engine number 2 loss of thrust—and then had taken actions in accordance with procedure of engine number 2 flameout at takeoff, the occurrence could have been prevented,” the final report stated.

ASC also criticized the pilots for poor communication and coordination. “The pilot flying did not appropriately respond to, or integrate input from the pilot monitoring,” it said.

The final report, which follows a provisional version released in January, includes 25 findings and 16 safety recommendations, covering the auto-feather unit, human error, flight operations processes and regulatory oversight.

ASC said it has “issued a series of safety recommendations to TransAsia Airways, CAA and aircraft/engine/component manufacturers to correct the serious safety deficiencies identified during the investigation. The manufacturers of aircraft, engine and auto-feather unit have also implemented various safety actions in response to the occurrence.”
TransAsia Airways was criticized for human resources, training and crew resource management weaknesses and ASC called for a “thorough review” of the airline’s flight crew training.
ASC also said the CAA’s oversight was “in need of improvement” and that TransAsia Airways should undergo a “detailed review.”

“The systemic TransAsia Airways flight crew non-compliances with standard operating procedures identified in previous investigations, including GE222 [fatal TransAsia ATR 72-500 crash in July 2014], remained unaddressed at the time of the GE235 occurrence,” ASC said.

Now that's how an investigation should be conducted and in less than 514 days - WOW!


MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

MS804 Update: Unconfirmed report, courtesy of AP the Big Story.

EgyptAir pilots tried to put out fire in doomed plane
By BRIAN ROHAN
Jul. 5, 2016 1:44 PM EDT 

CAIRO (AP) — Pilots tried to extinguish a fire on board the EgyptAir flight that crashed into the Mediterranean Sea in May, Egyptian investigators said Tuesday after analyzing a recovered cockpit voice recorder.

The recordings were consistent with data previously recovered from the plane's wreckage that showed heat, fire, and smoke around a bathroom and the avionics area, they said, speaking on condition of anonymity because an official press statement has yet to be released.

The crash of the flight from Paris to Cairo killed all 66 people on board. The pilots made no distress call, and no militant group has claimed to have brought the aircraft down, deepening the mystery surrounding its fate.

The Egyptian investigators say no theories — including terrorism — are being ruled out, especially since it is rare for such a catastrophic fire to break out so suddenly.

EgyptAir Flight 804 disappeared from radar about 2:45 a.m. local time on May 19 between the Greek island of Crete and the Egyptian coast.

Radar data showed the aircraft had been cruising normally in clear skies before it turned 90 degrees left, then a full 360 degrees to the right as it plummeted from 38,000 feet (11,582 meters) to 15,000 feet (4,572 meters). It disappeared when it was at an altitude of about 10,000 feet (3,048 meters).

Deep ocean search teams have been recovering human remains and bringing them to Egypt's port city of Alexandria. French authorities opened a manslaughter inquiry late last month, but said there is no evidence so far to link the crash to terrorism

RIP -

[Kharon]

Courtesy of the NYT - HERE   Big effort being made with the search and the media.  Well done Egypt.

[Peetwo]

Emirates B777-300 crash lands Dubai & bursts into flames -   . Remarkably it is reported all pax & crew were safely evacuated.

Courtesy Aviation Herald:

Accident: Emirates B773 at Dubai on Aug 3rd 2016, touched down during go-around without gear, aircraft on fire
By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Aug 3rd 2016 09:32Z, last updated Wednesday, Aug 3rd 2016 12:57Z

An Emirates Airlines Boeing 777-300, registration A6-EMW performing flight EK-521 from Thiruvananthapuram (India) to Dubai (United Arab Emirates) with 282 passengers and 18 crew, was on final approach to Dubai's runway 12L at 12:41L (08:41Z) but attempted to go around from low height. The aircraft however did not climb, but after retracting the gear touched down on the runway and burst into flames. All occupants evacuated safely, no injuries are being reported. The aircraft burned down completely.

The airline reported: "Emirates can confirm that an incident happened at Dubai International Airport on 3rd August 2016 at about 12.45pm local time."

United Arab Emirates Government confirmed an Emirates aircraft arriving from India suffered a crash landing at Dubai Airport, all passengers have been evacuated, there are no reports of injuries.

According to ATC recordings the aircraft performed a normal approach and landing, there was no priority or emergency declared. Upon contacting tower tower reminded the crew of lowering the gear and cleared the aircraft to land. Another approach reported on tower frequency. About 2 minutes after EK-521 reported on tower, the crew reported going around, tower instructed the aircraft to climb to 4000 feet, the crew acknowledged climbing to 4000 feet, a few seconds later tower instructs the next arrival to go around and alerts emergency services. The position of the aircraft is described near the end of the runway.

Related NOTAM:
A1156/16 - AD CLSD. 03 AUG 11:20 2016 UNTIL 03 AUG 14:00 2016. CREATED: 03 AUG 11:18 2016

A1155/16 - AD CLSD. 03 AUG 10:00 2016 UNTIL 03 AUG 12:00 2016. CREATED: 03 AUG 10:07 2016

Metars:
OMDB 030900Z 11021KT 3000 BLDU NSC 49/07 Q0993 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 1500
OMDB 030800Z 14012KT 100V180 6000 NSC 48/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000 DU
OMDB 030749Z 14012KT 110V180 6000 NSC 47/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000DU
OMDB 030700Z 06007KT 360V100 8000 NSC 44/10 Q0995 NOSIG
OMDB 030600Z 06005KT 350V100 8000 NSC 42/12 Q0995 NOSIG

The last seconds of slide out after failed go-around:

The aircraft erupting into flames (Video: Kazim Abbas):

And from Ben Sandilands Plane Talking:

Emirates 777 destroyed in Dubai crash landing, all onboard reported safe

Whatever the causes of the crash, the evacuation of the Emirates 777 under extreme pressure was as good as its gets in saving lives

Ben Sandilands




Social media view of burning Emirates jet from Dubai terminal

All 300 people on board an Emirates 777 which crash landing at Dubai airport today are reported to have been evacuated from the burning jet unharmed.

The most authoritative report, posted by the Aviation Herald, is somewhat blunt in its detail. It says the Dubai tower reminded the flight from Thiruvananthapuram in India to lower the landing gear while on what seems to have been short finals.

The jet subsequently performed an attempted go-around, but after briefly climbing lost height and hit the ground near the end of the runway and burst into flames.  The Boeing 777-300 has been been totally destroyed.

Expect to hear much more about the circumstances of this crash in coming hours and days. The complete success of the evacuation procedures in a fast, real life crisis should be underlined by video footage taken by external cameras.

This is the first hull loss of an Emirates jet.

The photo at the top of the post, on Twitter by Krishna Bhagavathula, has been taken through the green tinted glass wall of a terminal overlooking the crash scene.

A clearer view (below) has been posted by Aviation Herald credited to an airport webcams site.


The Emirates 777 burning near end of Dubai runway

MTF...P2  

[ventus45]

12
Apr
Low Missed Approach Altitude Restrictions
2 comments

A question concerning a recent change to the missed approach procedures in Dubai UAE (OMDB) has raised some interesting points about the 777 in this flight regime: high thrust, low altitude, high pilot workload, and ATC procedures that would seem to be not too well thought out.

Specifically the new procedure introduces a not-above altitude of 1300 ft AMSL after going around from a near sea level Precision or GPS approach minimum (1000 ft missed approach climb).

As any pilot of a two engine jet aircraft can tell you that an early level off in the missed approach is not a good thing. Typically, anything below 3000 ft introduces a significant workload on the pilots – and that’s when the missed approach is straight ahead, the autopilot is engaged and the aircraft fully functional. Add some manual flight and a non-normal element to this… the Sandpit pilots must be just loving this new procedure in the simulators in Dubai. The French did an extensive study on errors made during the missed approach and the folly of low altitude requirements in the missed approach path was just one of their conclusions.



This new procedure initially tracks straight ahead from the Missed Approach Point (MAP) (that’s a good thing) to DB710 – but requires the crew to level off at 1300 ft AMSL (Not so good). It then requires level flight for approximately 3nm (why? why?) during which a turn must be commenced (at DB710), and then finally the missed approach climb segment may be continued (from DB711) to the final Missed Approach Altitude (MAA) of 3000 ft AMSL.



Multiple altitude requirements in missed approaches are nothing new. Typically, however, they are must-reach-by or at-or-above requirements to ensure terrain clearance, rather than “Stop” altitudes like this one. I haven’t looked around for a while, but I can’t actually recall a missed approach quite like this one.

That’s why I jumped into the simulator today and ran through it just to see what it looks like. Looking at the chart it looks like a dog’s breakfast; looking at it in the simulator I was not disappointed.

There clearly must be a reason driving this procedure. For the life of me I can’t think of an obstacle related one, unless a Sheikh has placed a permanent hot air balloon at 2000 ft off the end of the runway to see the sights, one of which is watching aircraft sailing by under his balloon at 1300 ft. Remember, this is Dubai… it could happen.
I can only assume that this altitude requirement in some way keeps aircraft going round from tangling with aircraft either (a) going around; or (b) approaching in the opposite direction on the other runway. In either case it’s a poor excuse for the potential cluster this introduces into the flight deck.

Thrust, Lots of Thrust

The biggest problem with these early level offs is Thrust. The 777 Autothrottle is supposed to limit thrust on a two engine go-around from full thrust back to a setting that guarantees at least 2000 fpm. It does this very, very well. In fact, it does this so well that you usually get well over 3500+ fpm by the time things have settled down, which by definition is at least 2000 fpm, but it’s not particularly helpful when you’re trying to keep control of your aircraft.

You have to remember these engines are designed to lift 350 Tons of aircraft (with one engine failed). Lifting the aircraft’s 250 ton landing weight on both engines is an underwhelming task to say the least. All two engine aircraft are fundamentally overpowered right up until the point where one of the engines fail.

Additionally, the link between the software of the Autothrottle and the software of the AFDS Takeoff Go-Around (TO/GA) and Altitude Capture (ALT) modes is a tenuous one – in fact there isn’t one really. As such each and every time I ran this scenario – unless the pilot intervened – the 1300 ft restriction was exceeded by at least 100 ft because there was simply too much thrust/energy for the autopilot to capture the altitude adequately. This probably won’t set off alarm bells in the ATC center or the airline Flight Data Monitoring (FDM) programs. But it doesn’t look good in the sim on your check.

The really cool thing is that after this minor bust you’re about 1300 feet above the ground shortly after a go around and sinking back down to your required altitude – you guessed it, several times the GPWS activated to give me a stern “DON’T SINK” caution. It’s a good thing really. Because I spend far too much time operating this aircraft safely within the best practice envelope, I just don’t get enough practice at listening to GPWS warnings. It’s nice to know I can go somewhere in the world and operate the aircraft as the manufacturer intended but still get to hear “DON’T SINK” after the go-around.

What to do?

Well, you have a couple of options, all based around manual flight intervention. You could disconnect the AP early in the maneuver and manually capture the altitude, avoiding the altitude bust. Nothing is for free however, your workload will increase significantly also increasing the likelihood of error. Meanwhile, your thrust won’t be behaving any differently, so as you push forward manually on the flight controls to capture your altitude (giving your passengers a free roller-coaster feeling) you’re likely to get an small overspeed as the thrust levers struggle to catch up. Options to fix that include overriding the Autothrottle temporarily and reducing thrust to contain the speed/altitude, or going full manual on the thrust. You thought the workload was higher going manual early in the missed approach? How is it now? The truth is that there just isn’t a simple, appropriate fix to this problem. If there was, the Autopilot would have been able to do it.

When to Accelerate

With an intermediate level off prior to the final MAA, the question occurs – when will you accelerate and retract Flap? Initially, the speed will be flown based on the approach speed, with one stage of flap retracted in the go-around maneuver. You will typically be operating at Flap 20 and you’re a few knots below Flap 20 minimum speed, which is considered acceptable when you have a massive amount of thrust on and you’re rocketing up for the sky. But since you have not reached the final MAA, most airlines will require their pilots to retain this slower speed to ensure terrain clearance in the subsequent sectors of the missed approach procedure until reaching MAA or an earlier altitude that guarantees terrain clearance. As discussed elsewhere, typically terrain clearance for intermediate acceleration in the missed approach is not assessed – and there’s no indication that it has been assessed here. The presence of a 768 ft obstacle just at DB711 where you’re still held down at 1300 ft for no obvious reason isn’t encouraging. So the chances are you’ll want to retain your initial missed approach speed until you finally reach the MAA of 3000 ft AMSL.



But as your Autopilot Flight Director System (AFDS) captures 1300 feet as set in the Mode Control Panel (MCP) Altitude Selector – the speed automatically jumps up and the aircraft accelerates away, taking the decision away from the unaware pilot. Thrust – which is already very high for a 1000 ft altitude change – now increases as it’s released from the shackles of only needing to provide at least 2000 fpm, and instead drives to full GA thrust in order to accelerate the the Flap limit speed. Given this occurs as you’re still trying to level at 1300 ft – you can see why the altitude bust keeps occurring.

Dubai NOTAM

It’s worth noting that any physical change in the MCP Selected Speed after the TO/GA mode has been activated disarms the speed jump up when ALT captures. I demonstrated this several time today. Once established safely in the go-around (Flight Mode Annunciator (FMA) modes verified; positive climb; Gear Up) – when the “Four Hundred” foot call was made I reached up and increased the selected speed by one knot. With this done, the speed remains at go-around speed when the AFDS ALT captures. This technique works even if you change the speed and then reset it to the initial go-around speed; or simply set it to the minimum speed for your go-around flap setting (Flap 20 or Flap 5) for a more comfortable level segment at 1300 ft.

In any case, since most international airlines do not accelerate in the missed approach until reaching either MAA or a point at which terrain clearance is assured, you will NOT want to let the aircraft accelerate. This means winding the speed back after ALT capture. The later you managed to do this, the longer you’ll be under large thrust settings.

Missed Approach Commenced Above MAA

In my Procedures and Techniques document, I have a small paragraph on commencing the Missed Approach from above MAA and a suggested technique for it. We experience this occasionally in KLAX where the approaches often commence from 4000 ft – but the MAA is 2000 ft.

When commencing a missed approach like this one where you’re actually higher than an altitude requirement – the standard procedure of TO/GA, pitch/thrust, gear won’t help – you actually want to continue the descent down the approach to the altitude restriction (1300 ft). For a precision approach the priority is to deselect Approach (APP) mode. By design an engaged APP mode will fly you straight through your 1300 ft requirement.

Additionally if you’re in APP mode at 1500 ft it locks in and you’re only way out of LOC/GS at that point is to disconnect the Autopilot AND cycle both Flight Directors OFF. Having deselected APP the AFDS should be in HDG/TRK and VS. Laterally, LNAV is probably the best choice (is your active waypoint ahead of you?), and VS will suit you fine until you capture either MAA or the lower requirement (in this case the 1300 ft). If you’re capturing MAA (such as in KLAX) you now have the option of accelerating and cleaning up. But for this strange procedure – you may need to maintain your approach speed flying level until you eventually reach the final MAA of 3000 ft. Don’t forget to raise the gear at some point!

In Summary

Odd procedures like this expose some of the limitations of our aircraft, it’s systems and our procedures. It’s worth running a few of these low altitude captures next time you’re in the simulator.

Finally, a recent NOTAM indicates that UAE ATC may have had a change of perspective on this procedure. Whether this comes from operational experience and results in a permanent change – we’ll have to wait until the next documentation cycle to find out.

[Peetwo]

Courtesy Aviation Herald:

Accident: Emirates B773 at Dubai on Aug 3rd 2016, touched down during go-around without gear, aircraft on fire

The last seconds of slide out after failed go-around:

The aircraft erupting into flames (Video: Kazim Abbas):

And from Ben Sandilands Plane Talking:

Emirates 777 destroyed in Dubai crash landing, all onboard reported safe





The Emirates 777 burning near end of Dubai runway

Update 05/08/16: By 'that man' via the Oz...

Dubai plane crash: Fears plane failed to climb in ‘thin air’ caused by intense heat



The crashed Emirates plane at Dubai airport.


On-leave Qantas pilot Jeremy Webb, left, was believed to be co-piloting the plane.

• Ean Higgins
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 5, 2016
  
• @EanHiggins
  [img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/0573acb566bb47c45e64e4c55a998aba/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/vertical/author/widget&td_bio=false[/img]
  

An Emirates airliner co-piloted by an Australian on leave from Qantas that crashed on landing in Dubai may have failed to perform an attempted go-around because intense heat meant it could not get enough lift.

The Boeing 777 slid along the runway on its belly, catching fire almost immediately on impact at the end of a flight from southern India, leading to a panicked but successful evacuation of all 282 passengers and 18 crew.

However, a firefighter died trying to douse the flames, the only fatality of the accident.
Emirates chairman Sheik Ahmed bin Saeed al-Maktoum said the co-pilot of the plane was an Australian with about 7000 hours of flying experience. The captain was Emirati. It was not known which pilot was flying the aircraft at the time of the crash.

Media reports last night identified the co-pilot as Jeremy Webb, said to be on leave from Qantas.

Emirati officials said there was also an Australian passenger on the flight among 20 different nation­alities, although most passengers were Indian.

Sheik Ahmed rejected any suggestion that the crash was related to an act of terrorism, describing it as an “operational” accident.

An amateur video posted on ­social media showed the aircraft, already heavily engulfed in smoke, twisted to a stop on the runway.

Another video depicts a chaotic scene in the aircraft cabin, with some oxygen masks deployed and cabin crew trying to organise the evacuation.

Some passengers were slowing the exit by reaching into overhead lockers for their ­baggage, contrary to instructions. In one video, an anguished female flight attendant screams at a passenger: “Just stop, leave your bags behind, jump everyone, jump!”
Passenger Sharon Maryam Sharji described the landing and evacuation as “really terrifying”. “There was smoke coming out in the cabin,” she said.

“People were screaming and we had a very hard landing. We left by going down the emergency slides and as we were leaving on the runway we could see the whole plane catch fire: it was horrifying.”

Another video shows a huge explosion soon after the passengers and crew escaped, with what looks like a wing blown sky-high.

Although there were conflicting accounts and no immediate determination of the cause of the crash, attention focused on reports of a go-around attempt and severe weather conditions that might have led to its failure.

The airport faced a combina­tion of wind shear, dust storms, and heat approaching 50C.

Some reports said air traffic control recordings indicated the flight crew had decided to abort the landing and go around, in which case the pilots would have retracted the landing gear, partly raised the flaps, applied full throttle and pointed the nose up.

However, the severe heat would have produced very thin air, making it difficult for the plane to gain purchase and climb out of a descent.

While not speculating on the cause of the accident, Australian Federation of Air Pilots president David Booth said such weather conditions were well known to aviators as dangerous.

“The airplane performance is reduced, the aircraft engines don’t generate as much thrust and the wings don’t provide as much lift,” Captain Booth said.

Such conditions could produce a sudden increase in tailwind, further reducing the ability of the aircraft to pull up, he said.

“It’s all running against you

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

12
Apr
Low Missed Approach Altitude Restrictions
2 comments

A question concerning a recent change to the missed approach procedures in Dubai UAE (OMDB) has raised some interesting points about the 777 in this flight regime: high thrust, low altitude, high pilot workload, and ATC procedures that would seem to be not too well thought out.

Specifically the new procedure introduces a not-above altitude of 1300 ft AMSL after going around from a near sea level Precision or GPS approach minimum (1000 ft missed approach climb).

As any pilot of a two engine jet aircraft can tell you that an early level off in the missed approach is not a good thing. Typically, anything below 3000 ft introduces a significant workload on the pilots – and that’s when the missed approach is straight ahead, the autopilot is engaged and the aircraft fully functional. Add some manual flight and a non-normal element to this… the Sandpit pilots must be just loving this new procedure in the simulators in Dubai. The French did an extensive study on errors made during the missed approach and the folly of low altitude requirements in the missed approach path was just one of their conclusions.



This new procedure initially tracks straight ahead from the Missed Approach Point (MAP) (that’s a good thing) to DB710 – but requires the crew to level off at 1300 ft AMSL (Not so good). It then requires level flight for approximately 3nm (why? why?) during which a turn must be commenced (at DB710), and then finally the missed approach climb segment may be continued (from DB711) to the final Missed Approach Altitude (MAA) of 3000 ft AMSL.



Multiple altitude requirements in missed approaches are nothing new. Typically, however, they are must-reach-by or at-or-above requirements to ensure terrain clearance, rather than “Stop” altitudes like this one. I haven’t looked around for a while, but I can’t actually recall a missed approach quite like this one.

That’s why I jumped into the simulator today and ran through it just to see what it looks like. Looking at the chart it looks like a dog’s breakfast; looking at it in the simulator I was not disappointed.

There clearly must be a reason driving this procedure. For the life of me I can’t think of an obstacle related one, unless a Sheikh has placed a permanent hot air balloon at 2000 ft off the end of the runway to see the sights, one of which is watching aircraft sailing by under his balloon at 1300 ft. Remember, this is Dubai… it could happen.
I can only assume that this altitude requirement in some way keeps aircraft going round from tangling with aircraft either (a) going around; or (b) approaching in the opposite direction on the other runway. In either case it’s a poor excuse for the potential cluster this introduces into the flight deck.

Thrust, Lots of Thrust

The biggest problem with these early level offs is Thrust. The 777 Autothrottle is supposed to limit thrust on a two engine go-around from full thrust back to a setting that guarantees at least 2000 fpm. It does this very, very well. In fact, it does this so well that you usually get well over 3500+ fpm by the time things have settled down, which by definition is at least 2000 fpm, but it’s not particularly helpful when you’re trying to keep control of your aircraft.

You have to remember these engines are designed to lift 350 Tons of aircraft (with one engine failed). Lifting the aircraft’s 250 ton landing weight on both engines is an underwhelming task to say the least. All two engine aircraft are fundamentally overpowered right up until the point where one of the engines fail.

Additionally, the link between the software of the Autothrottle and the software of the AFDS Takeoff Go-Around (TO/GA) and Altitude Capture (ALT) modes is a tenuous one – in fact there isn’t one really. As such each and every time I ran this scenario – unless the pilot intervened – the 1300 ft restriction was exceeded by at least 100 ft because there was simply too much thrust/energy for the autopilot to capture the altitude adequately. This probably won’t set off alarm bells in the ATC center or the airline Flight Data Monitoring (FDM) programs. But it doesn’t look good in the sim on your check.

The really cool thing is that after this minor bust you’re about 1300 feet above the ground shortly after a go around and sinking back down to your required altitude – you guessed it, several times the GPWS activated to give me a stern “DON’T SINK” caution. It’s a good thing really. Because I spend far too much time operating this aircraft safely within the best practice envelope, I just don’t get enough practice at listening to GPWS warnings. It’s nice to know I can go somewhere in the world and operate the aircraft as the manufacturer intended but still get to hear “DON’T SINK” after the go-around.

What to do?

Well, you have a couple of options, all based around manual flight intervention. You could disconnect the AP early in the maneuver and manually capture the altitude, avoiding the altitude bust. Nothing is for free however, your workload will increase significantly also increasing the likelihood of error. Meanwhile, your thrust won’t be behaving any differently, so as you push forward manually on the flight controls to capture your altitude (giving your passengers a free roller-coaster feeling) you’re likely to get an small overspeed as the thrust levers struggle to catch up. Options to fix that include overriding the Autothrottle temporarily and reducing thrust to contain the speed/altitude, or going full manual on the thrust. You thought the workload was higher going manual early in the missed approach? How is it now? The truth is that there just isn’t a simple, appropriate fix to this problem. If there was, the Autopilot would have been able to do it.

When to Accelerate

With an intermediate level off prior to the final MAA, the question occurs – when will you accelerate and retract Flap? Initially, the speed will be flown based on the approach speed, with one stage of flap retracted in the go-around maneuver. You will typically be operating at Flap 20 and you’re a few knots below Flap 20 minimum speed, which is considered acceptable when you have a massive amount of thrust on and you’re rocketing up for the sky. But since you have not reached the final MAA, most airlines will require their pilots to retain this slower speed to ensure terrain clearance in the subsequent sectors of the missed approach procedure until reaching MAA or an earlier altitude that guarantees terrain clearance. As discussed elsewhere, typically terrain clearance for intermediate acceleration in the missed approach is not assessed – and there’s no indication that it has been assessed here. The presence of a 768 ft obstacle just at DB711 where you’re still held down at 1300 ft for no obvious reason isn’t encouraging. So the chances are you’ll want to retain your initial missed approach speed until you finally reach the MAA of 3000 ft AMSL.



But as your Autopilot Flight Director System (AFDS) captures 1300 feet as set in the Mode Control Panel (MCP) Altitude Selector – the speed automatically jumps up and the aircraft accelerates away, taking the decision away from the unaware pilot. Thrust – which is already very high for a 1000 ft altitude change – now increases as it’s released from the shackles of only needing to provide at least 2000 fpm, and instead drives to full GA thrust in order to accelerate the the Flap limit speed. Given this occurs as you’re still trying to level at 1300 ft – you can see why the altitude bust keeps occurring.

Dubai NOTAM

It’s worth noting that any physical change in the MCP Selected Speed after the TO/GA mode has been activated disarms the speed jump up when ALT captures. I demonstrated this several time today. Once established safely in the go-around (Flight Mode Annunciator (FMA) modes verified; positive climb; Gear Up) – when the “Four Hundred” foot call was made I reached up and increased the selected speed by one knot. With this done, the speed remains at go-around speed when the AFDS ALT captures. This technique works even if you change the speed and then reset it to the initial go-around speed; or simply set it to the minimum speed for your go-around flap setting (Flap 20 or Flap 5) for a more comfortable level segment at 1300 ft.

In any case, since most international airlines do not accelerate in the missed approach until reaching either MAA or a point at which terrain clearance is assured, you will NOT want to let the aircraft accelerate. This means winding the speed back after ALT capture. The later you managed to do this, the longer you’ll be under large thrust settings.

Missed Approach Commenced Above MAA

In my Procedures and Techniques document, I have a small paragraph on commencing the Missed Approach from above MAA and a suggested technique for it. We experience this occasionally in KLAX where the approaches often commence from 4000 ft – but the MAA is 2000 ft.

When commencing a missed approach like this one where you’re actually higher than an altitude requirement – the standard procedure of TO/GA, pitch/thrust, gear won’t help – you actually want to continue the descent down the approach to the altitude restriction (1300 ft). For a precision approach the priority is to deselect Approach (APP) mode. By design an engaged APP mode will fly you straight through your 1300 ft requirement.

Additionally if you’re in APP mode at 1500 ft it locks in and you’re only way out of LOC/GS at that point is to disconnect the Autopilot AND cycle both Flight Directors OFF. Having deselected APP the AFDS should be in HDG/TRK and VS. Laterally, LNAV is probably the best choice (is your active waypoint ahead of you?), and VS will suit you fine until you capture either MAA or the lower requirement (in this case the 1300 ft). If you’re capturing MAA (such as in KLAX) you now have the option of accelerating and cleaning up. But for this strange procedure – you may need to maintain your approach speed flying level until you eventually reach the final MAA of 3000 ft. Don’t forget to raise the gear at some point!

In Summary

Odd procedures like this expose some of the limitations of our aircraft, it’s systems and our procedures. It’s worth running a few of these low altitude captures next time you’re in the simulator.

Finally, a recent NOTAM indicates that UAE ATC may have had a change of perspective on this procedure. Whether this comes from operational experience and results in a permanent change – we’ll have to wait until the next documentation cycle to find out.

Courtesy Aviation Herald:

Accident: Emirates B773 at Dubai on Aug 3rd 2016, touched down during go-around without gear, aircraft on fire

The last seconds of slide out after failed go-around:

The aircraft erupting into flames (Video: Kazim Abbas):

And from Ben Sandilands Plane Talking:

Emirates 777 destroyed in Dubai crash landing, all onboard reported safe





The Emirates 777 burning near end of Dubai runway

Update 05/08/16: By 'that man' via the Oz...

Dubai plane crash: Fears plane failed to climb in ‘thin air’ caused by intense heat



The crashed Emirates plane at Dubai airport.


On-leave Qantas pilot Jeremy Webb, left, was believed to be co-piloting the plane.

• Ean Higgins
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 5, 2016
  
• @EanHiggins
  [img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/0573acb566bb47c45e64e4c55a998aba/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/vertical/author/widget&td_bio=false[/img]
  

An Emirates airliner co-piloted by an Australian on leave from Qantas that crashed on landing in Dubai may have failed to perform an attempted go-around because intense heat meant it could not get enough lift.

The Boeing 777 slid along the runway on its belly, catching fire almost immediately on impact at the end of a flight from southern India, leading to a panicked but successful evacuation of all 282 passengers and 18 crew.

However, a firefighter died trying to douse the flames, the only fatality of the accident.
Emirates chairman Sheik Ahmed bin Saeed al-Maktoum said the co-pilot of the plane was an Australian with about 7000 hours of flying experience. The captain was Emirati. It was not known which pilot was flying the aircraft at the time of the crash.

Media reports last night identified the co-pilot as Jeremy Webb, said to be on leave from Qantas.

Emirati officials said there was also an Australian passenger on the flight among 20 different nation­alities, although most passengers were Indian.

Sheik Ahmed rejected any suggestion that the crash was related to an act of terrorism, describing it as an “operational” accident.

An amateur video posted on ­social media showed the aircraft, already heavily engulfed in smoke, twisted to a stop on the runway.

Another video depicts a chaotic scene in the aircraft cabin, with some oxygen masks deployed and cabin crew trying to organise the evacuation.

Some passengers were slowing the exit by reaching into overhead lockers for their ­baggage, contrary to instructions. In one video, an anguished female flight attendant screams at a passenger: “Just stop, leave your bags behind, jump everyone, jump!”
Passenger Sharon Maryam Sharji described the landing and evacuation as “really terrifying”. “There was smoke coming out in the cabin,” she said.

“People were screaming and we had a very hard landing. We left by going down the emergency slides and as we were leaving on the runway we could see the whole plane catch fire: it was horrifying.”

Another video shows a huge explosion soon after the passengers and crew escaped, with what looks like a wing blown sky-high.

Although there were conflicting accounts and no immediate determination of the cause of the crash, attention focused on reports of a go-around attempt and severe weather conditions that might have led to its failure.

The airport faced a combina­tion of wind shear, dust storms, and heat approaching 50C.

Some reports said air traffic control recordings indicated the flight crew had decided to abort the landing and go around, in which case the pilots would have retracted the landing gear, partly raised the flaps, applied full throttle and pointed the nose up.

However, the severe heat would have produced very thin air, making it difficult for the plane to gain purchase and climb out of a descent.

While not speculating on the cause of the accident, Australian Federation of Air Pilots president David Booth said such weather conditions were well known to aviators as dangerous.

“The airplane performance is reduced, the aircraft engines don’t generate as much thrust and the wings don’t provide as much lift,” Captain Booth said.

Such conditions could produce a sudden increase in tailwind, further reducing the ability of the aircraft to pull up, he said.

“It’s all running against you

MTF...P2

P2 comment: Given the possible significance of the "V" linked Flight.org blog piece I have regurgitated here..

[Peetwo]

12
Apr
Low Missed Approach Altitude Restrictions
2 comments

Courtesy Aviation Herald:

Accident: Emirates B773 at Dubai on Aug 3rd 2016, touched down during go-around without gear, aircraft on fire

The last seconds of slide out after failed go-around:

The aircraft erupting into flames (Video: Kazim Abbas):

And from Ben Sandilands Plane Talking:

Emirates 777 destroyed in Dubai crash landing, all onboard reported safe





The Emirates 777 burning near end of Dubai runway

Update 05/08/16: By 'that man' via the Oz...

Dubai plane crash: Fears plane failed to climb in ‘thin air’ caused by intense heat



The crashed Emirates plane at Dubai airport.


On-leave Qantas pilot Jeremy Webb, left, was believed to be co-piloting the plane.

• Ean Higgins
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 5, 2016
  
• @EanHiggins
  

Further update - 05/08/16 02:00 UTC:

Another "V" sourced link...

And for my very much related 'closing the safety loop' post:

Aviation safety: The auto-dependency spectrum??

Opposite ends of the spectrum? - Duck'n'dive:

Flight below minimum permitted altitude involving Cessna 441, VH-EQU

Near Wollongong Airport, New South Wales, 3 August 2015

Versus...well duck'n'dive??    


Courtesy Flight.org blog...

SHEED, MESEN and Melbourne’s RW34. A Look Back at Virgin Australia’s Boeing 777 Flight Path Incident.
4 comments -

Emirates EK521 Dubai accident puts focus on autoflight systems

• Joseph Wheeler
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 5, 2016
  

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Byron Bailey OBS so far on EK521 -

In terms of subject matter and experience there is no debate that BB should know a thing or two about flying in & out of Dubai, the B777 and the safety culture of Emirates, courtesy the Oz:

Emirates’ Boeing 777-300 crash: when go-around comes around

The Emirates plane after crash landing in Dubai this week.

• Byron Bailey
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 6, 2016
  

Aviation has a way of throwing up unexpected challenges. This certainly was the case this week for the pilots of the Boeing 777-300 that crashed during an emergency landing in Dubai.

Thankfully, all 300 on board were safely evacuated, although one firefighter was killed when the plane burst into flames.

Let us examine the possibilities of why the event occurred to one of the safest airlines in the busiest international airport. Emirates pilots are trained to a high level, practising emergency/abnormal procedures every six months in simulators. The B777 aircraft are probably the safest flying. First, Dubai airport on the Gulf coast: huge, modern and in 15 years of flying out of Dubai I never once encountered windshear (which was a suggested reason for the aborted landing). There is no mountainous terrain nearby and thunderstorms are exceedingly rare. What I have encountered is gusty crosswinds around the landing crosswind limit of 35 knots.

Whatever reason the pilot decided to abort the landing it was the correct decision. However, now come certain factors that can catch out an unwary pilot.

When the B777-300 was introduced several years after the B777-200 it brought new problems because of its extreme length, about 74m, making it one of the longest aircraft.

As a pilot, it is easy to forget you have 70m of hardware behind you. New takeoff procedures were introduced with a slower rotation rate on takeoff and stopping at a deck angle of 12 degrees as against 15 degrees for the B777-200. Tail strikes have occurred on takeoff by various airlines but that incidence is now rare.

Go-arounds — aborted landings — from a very low altitude are not common. Once on approach to land in London Heathrow airport following an Air Canada A340, the tower instructed me to expect a late landing clearance, so I left the autopilot of the B777-300 engaged. Suddenly a Canadian voice said, “Missed it, we’ll take the next one” (missed the high-speed runway exit taxiway). Tower said, “Emirates go round”, so click TOGA switch on the thrust levers and from a wheel height of 50 feet above the runway the aircraft gracefully performed its automatic go-around. Co-pilot called “positive climb” and I called for “gear up”. Job done — but that Canadian pilot cost Emirates three tonnes of extra fuel, burned as we rejoined the queue for landing.

When you have about 250 ­tonnes of aircraft descending on approach at 800 feet a minute, there is a lot of momentum, and height loss will occur after the decision to go-around. The aircraft rotates about its centre of gravity, which means initially, as the pilots are rapidly ascending, the tail is rapidly descending. I suggest the pilots felt they were climbing clear of the runway and retracted the gear just as the tail struck the runway, causing the aircraft to crunch down on the runway.

This is only speculation but the gear was retracted and the pilots were performing a go-around.

I am sure now all operators of B777-300 will introduce extra go-around training for their pilots during their recurrent six-monthly simulator training. It’s a lesson for all pilots, really — just when you think everything is hunky-dory the Goddess of Gravity is just waiting to smite you.

Byron Bailey, a veteran commercial pilot with more than 45 years’ experience and 26,000 flying hours, was a senior captain with Emirates for 15 years.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

EK521 accident uncovers a TOGA flaw -

Excellent article by BB in the Oz today possibly slices up the first piece of Swiss cheese in the EK521 Dubai accident :

Emirates B777 crash was accident waiting to happen

• Byron Bailey
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 9, 2016
  

The crash of an Emirates B777 during an attempted go-around in Dubai last Wednesday was always an accident waiting to happen.

It was not the fault of the pilots, the airline or Boeing, because this accident could have happened to any pilot in any airline flying any modern glass cockpit airliner — Airbus, Boeing or Bombardier — or a large corporate jet with autothrottle.

It is the result of the imperfect interaction of the pilots with supposedly failsafe automatics, which pilots are rigorously trained to trust, which in this case failed them.
First, let us be clear about the effect of hot weather on the day. All twin-engine jet aircraft are certified at maximum takeoff weight to climb away on one engine after engine failure on takeoff at the maximum flight envelope operating temperature — 50 degrees C in the case of a B777 — to reach a regulatory climb gradient minimum of 2.4 per cent.

The Emirates B777-300 was operating on two engines and at a lower landing weight, so climb performance should not have been a problem. I have operated for years out of Dubai in summer, where the temperature is often in the high 40s, in both widebody Airbus and Boeing B777 aircraft.

Secondly, a pilot colleague observed exactly what happened as he was there, waiting in his aircraft to cross runway 12L. The B777 bounced and began a go-around. The aircraft reached about 150 feet (45 metres) with its landing gear retracting, then began to sink to the runway.

This suggests that the pilots had initiated a go-around as they had been trained to do and had practised hundreds of times in simulators, but the engines failed to respond in time to the pilot-commanded thrust. Why?

Bounces are not uncommon. They happen to all pilots occasionally. What was different with the Emirates B777 bounce was that the pilot elected to go around. This should not have been a problem as pilots are trained to apply power, pitch up (raise the nose) and climb away. However pilots are not really trained for go-arounds after a bounce; we practise go-arounds from a low approach attitude.

Modern jets have autothrottles as part of the autoflight system. They have small TOGA (take off/go-around) switches on the throttle levers they click to command autothrottles to control the engines, to deliver the required thrust. Pilots do not physically push up the levers by themselves but trust the autothrottles to do that, although it is common to rest your hand on the top of the levers. So, on a go-around, all the pilot does is click the TOGA switches, pull back on the control column to raise the nose and — when the other pilot, after observing positive climb, announces it — calls “gear up” and away we go!
But in the Dubai case, because the wheels had touched the runway, the landing gear sensors told the autoflight system computers that the aircraft was landed. So when the pilot clicked TOGA, the computers — without him initially realising it — inhibited TOGA as part of their design protocols and refused to spool up the engines as the pilot commanded.

Imagine the situation. One pilot, exactly as he has been trained, clicks TOGA and concentrates momentarily on his pilot’s flying display (PFD) to raise the nose of the aircraft to the required go-around attitude — not realising his command for TOGA thrust has been ignored. The other pilot is concentrating on his PFD altimeter to confirm that the aircraft is climbing due to the aircraft momentum. Both suddenly realise the engines are still at idle, as they had been since the autothrottles retarded them at approximately 30 feet during the landing flare. There is a shock of realisation and frantic manual pushing of levers to override the autothrottle pressure.

But too late. The big engines take seconds to deliver the required thrust before and before that is achieved the aircraft sinks to the runway.

It could have happened to any pilot caught out by an unusual, time-critical event, for which rigorous simulator training had not prepared him.

Automation problems leading to pilot confusion are not uncommon; but the designers of the autoflight system protocols should have anticipated this one. Perhaps an audible warning like “manual override required” to alert the pilots immediately of the “automation disconnect”.

My feeling is the pilots were deceived initially by the autothrottle refusal to spool up the engines, due to the landing inhibits, and a very high standard of simulator training by which pilots are almost brainwashed to totally rely on the automatics as the correct thing.

MTF...P2