Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
777 Data Entry Error When Landing At MEL  
User currently offline747megatop From United States of America, joined May 2007, 716 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3489 times:

I was reading an article on Flightglobal where a waypoint data entry error on a 777 led to it's rapid descent when approaching MEL. The crew luckily recovered and did a low approach into MEL and landed safely

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-led-to-777s-rapid-descent-390804/

This brings me to one question - How come sophisticated software such as one found on modern airplanes cannot do a simple validation on data entered and prevent invalid entries? Is there something i am missing or don't understand?

From what the article describes one shudders to think what would have happened if the crew hadn't recovered in time; perhaps another SFO OZ like incident if they hadn't taken corrective action? Bravo to the crew for recovering and a safe landing.

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3735 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (10 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3330 times:

It would seem the crew somehow entered an improper VNAV constraint when entering the VFR approach to the runway and sequencing it to the FMC route.
As they were following the LNAV/VNAV profile, the set up the MDA in the MCP and let VNAV take care of the descent profile. VNAV then tried to 'dive' down to make the 'wrong' alitude constraint.

I don't know exactly how that constraint could have been entered, though it would seem the crew confused the Runway point and the centerline extension point created by the FMC and entered the altitude constraint on the wrong one.

It doesn't say how high the aircraft was when it started to descend and how long the crew took to react, but I'm guessing it was pretty low already. That's where it pays to always double guess what LNAV/VNAV are doing so as to be able to revert to more basic modes if anything's amiss.

Quoting 747megatop (Thread starter):
Is there something i am missing or don't understand?

Don't overestimate how smart FMCs are. Your smartphone has 20 times the computing power of a 777 FMC.
Additionally, every line of code has to be carefully considered as any programmed command could have unintended consequences.
But then it doesn't need to be foolproof. FMCs are meant to be a convenience, a workload reducing tool. Pilots aren't supposed to let it take first stage unchecked. Other Autopilot modes are always available, or they can even actually fly the thing, for a change...  



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4363 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3277 times:

Quoting 747megatop (Thread starter):
From what the article describes one shudders to think what would have happened if the crew hadn't recovered in time; perhaps another SFO OZ like incident if they hadn't taken corrective action?

Well, no need to shudder, your fears would be somewhat more realistic if this was a crew that allowed the automation to fly them without keeping an eye on things and intervening if necessary (Like Asiana)


These things can happen, a competent crew will do exactly what this one did. Disengage the Autopilot, correct the approach and fly it manually, as they did.


An alternative would have been to go around but their response was a very reasonable and correct one.


Automation errors occur, that's why there are PILOTS in the cockpit to correct them.


I have intervened manually on more than one occasion myself for various different reasons. The number one priority is always:


FLY THE AIRCRAFT.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16992 posts, RR: 67
Reply 3, posted (10 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3269 times:

It is an often repeated anecdote that the most frequently uttered phrase in a modern cockpit is, "what's it doing now?" 

Contrary to common belief, airline pilots are not infallible gods of the sky. Well, ok they are but they are also human beings.   Programming errors happen all the time, a bit like how you press the wrong icon on your iPhone or click the wrong button on your TV remote. That's why you keep checklists and human brains handy in the cockpit. Even a well trained crew makes errors perhaps once in a thousand actions. (Pilots without much experience are closer to one error per hundred actions). By errors here I don't mean flying off course or below glide path. I mean selecting the wrong mode or twisting the HDG knob the wrong way, or as in this case entering wrong information in the FMS.

Since errors are unavoidable, trying to eliminate them entirely is futile and counter-productive. The focus is on discovering and recovering from errors before they affect safety. As happened here. It hardly seems as if the flight was in danger. As Max Q says, the danger is when the crew does not take over and fly manually in the face of events which are obviously not going according to plan. If you don't understand what the automation is doing, disconnect and hand fly.

Even in basic instrument training in a plane far less sophisticated than a 777, my instructors impressed upon me the importance to monitor the automation (such as it was in a Cessna 172) and never hesitate to take over if I felt that events weren't going the way I felt they should. I can't tell you how many times I've engaged the autopilot and gone "whoa!" before immediately pressing the disengage button. Flying manually may be more work but I know exactly where the plane is going to go, meaning that at least the "aviate" bit is taken care of. Much better than trying to reprogram while also monitoring a deteriorating situation due to bad programming.

Quoting 747megatop (Thread starter):
This brings me to one question - How come sophisticated software such as one found on modern airplanes cannot do a simple validation on data entered and prevent invalid entries?

Look at it this way: What constitutes an invalid entry? How could the FMS "know" that the entered routing isn't the desired one.

Quoting francoflier (Reply 1):
Don't overestimate how smart FMCs are.

Quite. They are really very basic computers by modern standards, and for good reason. Keep It Simple, Stupid!



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6761 posts, RR: 76
Reply 4, posted (10 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3256 times:

WTH?
OK, error entry is one thing, it happens all the time, and there are ways to check it (in ideal conditions of course)... but the question I got from this is, why the heck did they kept using the LNAV/VNAV from waypoint SHEED?

On LIZZI 7V arrivals, you go to SHEED at 257 heading and hit SHEED at 2500ft or above, you then make the turn to runway 34.... From SHEED to runway 34 is about 5NM direct line, make the turn and you should have about 8-9NM in a turn, and a nice 80deg turn.

My question is, why keep it on the LNAV/VNAV in a visual turn to final? It's a no-no in some of the airlines where I am, LNAV/VNAV for guidance is acceptable and advised, but not on AP. Had this occured at some Asian carrier, would some then scream "automation dependence syndrome"?

Am just baffled...



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3735 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (10 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3169 times:

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 4):
My question is, why keep it on the LNAV/VNAV in a visual turn to final? It's a no-no in some of the airlines where I am, LNAV/VNAV for guidance is acceptable and advised, but not on AP. Had this occured at some Asian carrier, would some then scream "automation dependence syndrome"?

Not really...
It is perfectly acceptable to keep Robopilot on duty as long as you have proper LNAV/VNAV guidance, all the way to the MDA if you are flying an RNAV/GPS/Non-precision approach, or to the minimum A/P disengage altitude if you're doing a visual approach.

I'm sure policies differ from airline to airline, but according to Boeing (in this case), it's absolutely fine. Setting up a VFR approach on the FMC makes it calculate a 3.0 degrees angle approach to the RWY waypoint, just like any other non precision approach.
Unless, of course, you accidentally set up a ridiculously low altitude constraint on the 3 miles runway centerline fix...

What Boeing and every operator will tell you, however, is to avoid FMC programming during high workload periods such as the final stages of the descent and approach. In this case, it's better to go back to basic modes or F/D off - manual flight altogether. Lest this happens...



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (10 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3120 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 2):
Automation errors occur, that's why there are PILOTS in the cockpit to correct them.

   I've found that the automation is the least reliable system on the plane when it comes to its ability to do what the pilot wants it to do.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3920 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (10 months 5 days ago) and read 2835 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):
How could the FMS "know" that the entered routing isn't the desired one.

Most automated system can be programmed to validate user input if the result falls within (or outside) a certain range. It would take a very sophisticated system to tell you a route is wrong, but that doesn't preclude checking certain parameters from the route, such as speed of descent.



I've got $h*t to do
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 777 Data Entry Error When Landing At MEL
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Brake Temperatures After Landing At London City posted Mon Apr 25 2011 08:28:52 by Luftfahrer
Landing At Greater Than MLW posted Sat Jul 3 2010 14:35:30 by faro
Engine Notes When Landing - Q300 posted Wed Dec 10 2008 22:07:25 by NZ8800
Cabin Lights Dimmed During Landing At Night posted Tue May 6 2008 12:57:00 by Krje1980
Gulfstream Flir Landing At Aspen (video) posted Thu Feb 14 2008 20:19:27 by 2H4
Landing At Taipei -- R/T Question posted Tue Feb 12 2008 17:49:56 by Brenintw
JetBlue Emerg Landing At RSW posted Mon Oct 8 2007 07:04:33 by Stratosphere
Why Not Fully Extend Flaps When Landing? posted Mon Feb 26 2007 03:46:10 by Theflcowboy
Aborted Landing At BUR posted Tue Dec 26 2006 19:19:46 by ArcrftLvr
Cabin Lighting At Take-off And Landing At Night posted Mon Dec 18 2006 03:04:40 by Goodday

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format