B767-400er From Hong Kong, joined Apr 2000, 290 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5085 times:
First picture is a typical crosswind landing at Kai Tak. Perhaps the pilot didn't kick the rudder fast enough to shrighten out before touch down. If you don't use crab capibilities of the 747, the events in the second picture will happen. You should see the Korean Cargo pilots. Fresh out of fighter jet school(doing the same things with a 747)
Sophiemaltese From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2064 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5048 times:
"Real men never go around!"
Maybe this is why, when I was flying with an instructor other than my usual one and I went to make a go around, he grabbed the controls and finished the landing. My regular CFI told me, "He should have let you go around."
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5862 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4819 times:
Alas, I can't remember which airline was operating the aircraft in the first image, but I've been told that there is a sort of honour code between Asian pilots, where a go-around would mean a great shame for the pilot, as it indicates that he has not been focusing enough on landing the aircraft.
B767-400er From Hong Kong, joined Apr 2000, 290 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4773 times:
I've flown into Kai Tak around 70 times during the period of 1994 until closing of that airport. In fact, my father used to work there managing the radio systems. I can't say it's an fequent occurance, but if there is a slight amount of crosswind, perhaps a gust that the pilot didn't anticapate, it would result in a crab landing because there is very little time for correcting with a bank after(or during) the 47 degree starboard turn. I've remembered about 5 (noticable ones anyways) crab landings, 2 of them were during typhoons.
As to pilots worrying about harming their pride in a go-around, I think most pilots (note I said MOST ) are smart enough to know that killing 200+ pax and more then likely him/herself plus a 180 million dollor plane, is worst then maybe a couple of laughs from other pilots.
The good old days at Kai Tak will be missed. Espically now with the not-that-exciting CLK.
CYYZ RWYs 24R-06L and 24L-06R are now 23-05 and 24R-06L!
A/c train From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 501 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4730 times:
Sorry mate but that has got to be the biggest load of crap i've heard in a long time , you cannot justify a tradition being the result for the death of 450 + people, think about what your saying, you can't kamikazee a 747!!!!! I dont know were you've heard that from but in this industry you have to learn to seperate the good knowledge from the b'' '' '' ''shi'', put your brain into gear before typing,
ThirtyEcho From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 1638 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4693 times:
Only explanation is that this is a former J-3 pilot trying to land across the runway rather than down it. Actually, if good landings come out of good approaches, I'd love to see a video of the whole approach. It was bound to never have been stabilized and should have been a go-around.
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5862 posts, RR: 3 Reply 16, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4546 times:
Like I said, please correct me if I was wrong. And so, obviously I was.
By the way, show me one point where I said that it was OK to kamikaze the 747. I just said that there was some sort of thing going on, where a go-around meant a great shame.
Norseman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 41 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 4514 times:
Sorry folks, I've heard on numerous occasions from people who train Asian pilots that this mentality does exist. I'm not saying it happens regularly, but it does exist. Pilots get so focused on landing the plane that going around doesn't even come into their mind. The idea of electing a go-around means that they have failed. I hate to tell you, but It's not like this stuff doesn't happen state-side as well. There have been many incidences caused by pilots electing to not go-around when they obviously should have.
NormalSpeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4521 times:
Guys, just an observation:
Using traditional crosswind technique (landing with one wing low) is not an option in a 747, or any other airplane with engines hanging off the wings. And you don't think the engineers at Boeing were aware of this? These airplanes are designed for this.
The pilots of this particular flight had two options - land with the crab angle, or divert. I do not know what I would have done, because I was not at the controls during the approach. But I think instantly pass judgements like "they should have gone around" is to do so without all the facts.
Cx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6448 posts, RR: 56 Reply 20, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4496 times:
It is correct that the 747 is designed to be capable of this kind of landing, but pilots are not taught to land like that on a dry runway. We are taught to kick out the rudder upon flaring, whilst using aileron to keep the wings level. By this time, you will not drift off centreline too much.
When landing on a wet runway it is permissable (But not very good technique) to land with the crab, the slippery runway will aide in helping you to correct and track the centerline.
The photos show landings quite often done when flying the IGS with a tailwind. Pilots tend to forget that they're going to get blown wide, and have to get a very large crab angle to get back over the centerline. Often they land still in that attitude rather than go-around.
Musang From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 794 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (11 years 10 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4404 times:
Mr BA - If you kick in left rudder the aircraft yaws left, right wing travels through the air faster, develops more lift, so rolls left also. On that basis the answer would have been to feed in left rudder and simultaneous co-ordinated right aileron. Thats the technique for x-wind landings in aircraft which are able to land wing low.
A/c train - CPH-R is correct, there is a cultural trait amongst Asians which equates seniority with infallibility, and makes it difficult for juniors (read co-pilots) to correct or even to question the actions of their seniors (i.e. Captains, or even FEs).
Its known as "saving face", and going around does indeed mean, to many, that mistakes were made leading up to the GA. This is unspeakable, and to admit it is disgrace.
For evidence of the phenomenon, and to allow you to apologise to CPH-R for your post, read the Delta Airlines safety audit which they did on Korean Air a couple of years ago. It contains numerous references to the issue in question, as well as being a frightening inditement of Korean's safety culture.
I haven't seen the Korean Stansted 747F crash report, but believe the FE and FO both made verbal references to the attitude problem, but neither took positive action. The FO, with a functioning attitude indicator, sat and watched the captain slice it into the ground.
For a junior crew member, daring to infer a critisism of the captain wouldn't be worth the risk of the disgrace if he found himself wrong.
Its not only other cultures. A classic example which now figures prominently in CRM training involves an American (but NOT AA) 727 crew landing at night. Throughout the flight the Captain and FE have been ganging up on the FO, making fun of him etc. The captain sets up an approach which the FO thinks will end up landing long, on a short runway. The FO voices his concerns several times, only to be shot down by the other two. The Captain of course drives it off the end of the runway, in a classic "Told You So" incident. The difference between this and the Asian idea is that the FO correctly spoke up, but the Captain wouldn't accept critisism.
Saving Face, and unconditional respect for authority/seniority are, unfortunately, known cultural traits in several Asian cultures, and completely at odds with safe flying.
What was going on the original Kai Tak picture we don't know, but I just thought I'd lend support to CPH-R against the uninformed reply to his post.