na
Posts: 9724
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Tue Sep 22, 2015 5:55 pm

Quoting AABB777 (Reply 146):
I've heard the damage is not "substantial" but "minor".

Avherald, usually one of the best sources if it comes to accidents like this, also says "substantial damage".
 
N1120A
Posts: 26527
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Tue Sep 22, 2015 10:27 pm

Incidentally - I've flown on that plane.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
76er
Posts: 662
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:04 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:22 am

So the question is now, did the flightcrew themselves ask for T1, or was it assigned to them by ATC? The recording mentioned in reply 40 does not make that clear. It would be very interesting if someone is able to find the conversations between the crew and ATC from the very beginning of this flight.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:11 am

Quoting Airportugal310 (Reply 134):
I wouldn't worry too much about it...that poster has a history of "having to be right all the time" syndrome. Your experience in this industry is very much appreciated by others like myself. Please stick around and keep informing those of us who aren't total experts. I, for one, appreciate it!

And yet most of his contributions to this discussion has been insulting anyone that brings their own opinion to the discussion by repeating a talking point about "armchair experts" as if that is a valid response to legitimate arguments.

What kind of post history does that imply?
 
mmo
Posts: 1847
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 12:00 pm

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 153):
And yet most of his contributions to this discussion has been insulting anyone that brings their own opinion to the discussion by repeating a talking point about "armchair experts" as if that is a valid response to legitimate arguments.

What kind of post history does that imply?

If you are referring to me, then please have the courtesy and intestinal fortitude to use my screen name, otherwise, I apologize if you are not. However, when someone has no background in aviation or is between the ages of 13-21, then I stand by my comments of characterizing them as "armchair experts". They do not have a technical background nor the experience to make informed statements. Their statements are, at best, guesses, something they have read about or a cut and paste from Wikipedia. I don't know too many people who are less than 21 who are flying for a major airline, let alone a Captain.

I did take the time to look at the profile people posted before I responded and if you were to do that you might find your comments are somewhat out of place. I can only go by what people have put in their profile and if it is not right then they need to fix it.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6419
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 1:55 pm

Quoting 76er (Reply 152):
So the question is now, did the flightcrew themselves ask for T1, or was it assigned to them by ATC?

The fact that they pulled out numbers for T1 would indicate that they wanted that option. As long as it was possible, and the numbers allowed it ... it would save time. As noted above, this is common practice.

However, they were caught by the "gotcha" in the performance computer .... the very subtle difference between "09/T1" and "09#T1". It looks like they pulled out 09#T1, thinking it was 09/T1 and almost ended up on Miami Beach. They are very very lucky gentlemen!

I am guesing the scenario therefore was that they tried T1, saw that they could do it (or so they thought), then requested it. ATC normally will not query such a request.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6419
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:21 pm

To add to the above, as some may not be familiar with the performance computer ...

If you want numbers for full length, you click "09".
If you want numbers for intersection T1, you click "09/T1".

If however there are tempororary numbers for unusual circumstances ... say a boat in the harbour, or a temporary construction crane, etc. they are numbered T1, T2, T3, etc ... T for temporary. You see which applies to you, and you use those numbers ... "09#T1", "09#T2" etc.

It just happened on this day there were temporary numbers, T1, as well as an intersection T1 ... what are the odds???

It would appear that the only options they were presented were, 09 and 09#T1. They likely read that T1 as the intersection and not temporary performance figures. Other than T10 at ORD, I can't think of any other T-number intersection on the earth where this could happen.

Had T1 intersection been possible, they would have been presented the options, 09, 09/T1 and 09#T1 and caught the error.

I ran the numbers through our performance computer for the B777-300ER and the best I could do was 351,534 Kgs for full length and 329,100 Kgs for intersection T1.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
apfpilot
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 3:01 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 156):

That is GREAT info. Surprising that such a gotcha exists, how long has the OPC been in use on the 77W? I'm assuming that it is certified by the appropriate authorities for usage? Wonder how that slipped through. At a past company we were certifying some avionics for Part 23 use and had to change the orange color we used for some alerts because the shade was too close to that of the fire warning red.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
D L X
Posts: 12607
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 3:15 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 156):
If however there are tempororary numbers for unusual circumstances ... say a boat in the harbour, or a temporary construction crane, etc. they are numbered T1, T2, T3, etc ... T for temporary. You see which applies to you, and you use those numbers ... "09#T1", "09#T2" etc.

It just happened on this day there were temporary numbers, T1, as well as an intersection T1 ... what are the odds???

So, does this suggest pilot error, but not pilot negligence? Like, maybe people have been too hard on the pilots, and that a change may be beneficial in the way the computer inputs are given? Or, renaming the intersection?
 
anjin
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:49 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 5:02 pm

To those asking or trying to find pictures of the aircraft damage can I please repeat again - YOU WONT SEE THEM.
QR will have pictures for sure, when the report comes out from the FAA in xx months you'll probably see them. This is the Middle East we're talking. Its unlikely QR will fire the crews (if they are to blame) as they know they won't want to jump the gun pending the FAA investigation.
It's all about image and saving face - This is the Middle East for the second time!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6419
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:40 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 158):
So, does this suggest pilot error, but not pilot negligence? Like, maybe people have been too hard on the pilots, and that a change may be beneficial in the way the computer inputs are given? Or, renaming the intersection?

People that really don't understand aviation safety think the best way to solve the problem is to fire the pilots, stone his wife, sell his house, kill his dog ... there, the problem is solved ... wrong. The best way to solve the problem is to go beyond what happened to how it happened. And this is an excellent example of the Reason (swiss cheese) error model.

On that day, the holes happened to line up! A very well qualified and experienced crew made an error. Probably one that no one thought could ever happen ... except that it did happen.

As some on this site know, I am actively involved with safety where I fly. I have done two things. One is I have advised our safety department about this, so that a warning can be issued to our pilots. While it is unlikely we would ever bring a B777-300ER into MIA, you never know. Secondly, I am going to use this as an example for our next Annual Recurrent Training when we talk about Error and Threat Management.

Neither of these two things can be done, if the investigation stops at "pilot error".
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
AIRWALK
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 9:33 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 7:45 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 160):

This is a brilliant attitude to have and I applaud it. Too often the fear of punishment prevents open dialogue on errors and valuable lessons being learnt.
I'm sure this thread will take off soon
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 7:50 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 160):
eople that really don't understand aviation safety think the best way
to solve the problem is to fire the pilots, stone his wife, sell his house, kill his dog ... there, the
problem is solved ... wrong. The best way to solve the problem is to go beyond what happened
to how it happened

Absolutely but it is kind of the basic in problem solving in general and not really unique to aviation safety.
1. "What happen?" -> 2. "Why did it happen?" and ->3. "how do we/I prevent it from happening again?".
In that order.

Three question that applies to all problems from when you fail with your hard boiled eggs  
to cruise ships that sinks.

[Edited 2015-09-23 12:55:19]
Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky. Il Drago Ruggente
 
hivue
Posts: 2005
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:11 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 156):

Wow. Thanks, longhauler. Great description for all us non-aviation folks.

I know that some/many aircraft are equipped with automation to assist in braking, especially on contaminated runways. My understanding is the aircraft knows by GPS how much runway is left, the weight of the aircraft, and the runway conditions. Are there similar systems (not necessarily on the 777) for takeoff?
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1379
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:29 pm

longhauler, why would both 09 and 09#T1 be options? Seems that if a temporary is in effect, it should be mandatory... what makes it selectable?
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6419
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:38 pm

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 164):
longhauler, why would both 09 and 09#T1 be options? Seems that if a temporary is in effect, it should be mandatory... what makes it selectable?

Temporary performance figures can occur for a lot of reasons. The most common would be a temporary reduction in runway length (but only during certain hours, and would have to be the "other" end), or perhaps a crane near the runway, but the temporary restriction would only be when the crane is above a certain height or operational.

The restriction would not be 24 hours a day, and would only apply when reported.

A less common temporary restriction would be FLL or YYJ, when a cruise ship is in the harbour!
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6419
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:58 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 163):
I know that some/many aircraft are equipped with automation to assist in braking, especially on contaminated runways. My understanding is the aircraft knows by GPS how much runway is left, the weight of the aircraft, and the runway conditions. Are there similar systems (not necessarily on the 777) for takeoff?

I know of no aircraft where the GPS counts down runway length. A cool idea, but we normally just use the signage on the side of the runway. There have been some aircraft that use main gear sensors that detect aircraft weight (and balance), but I don't know of any airline using them operationally. Runway conditions/contamination are assessed by airport authorities and are entered manually into performance calculations.

As most of these parameters are pilot input, there can be errors. How an airline manages that error threat varies by airline. But the fact that we are discussing one occurrence out of what ... 50,000 departures a day ... shows how rare these errors occur.

I hate to tell you how many times we have to go over performance calculations where I fly, from when we sit down in the cockpit till the tires leave the earth ... but it is about a dozen times in various forms. It is irritating as hell, but .... there IS a reason!
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:03 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 160):
People that really don't understand aviation safety think the best way to solve the problem is to fire the pilots, stone his wife, sell his house, kill his dog ... there, the problem is solved ... wrong. The best way to solve the problem is to go beyond what happened to how it happened. And this is an excellent example of the Reason (swiss cheese) error model.

In the USA or Canada or Europe, sure...but in Doha, Qatar, management is thinking about the indignity and dishonor heaped upon their company by this incident/accident. If this gains any sort of publicity (beyond enthusiast web sites), firing will probably occur swiftly...

Quoting longhauler (Reply 160):
On that day, the holes happened to line up! A very well qualified and experienced crew made an error. Probably one that no one thought could ever happen ... except that it did happen.

Admittedly, I don't know for sure about QR and their hiring practices, but I know that at least one of the ME3 (*cough* EK *cough*) are known to hire western air crews with shiny jet syndrome, and part of that allure is you, too, can fly a widebody with a fresh ATP and not get stuck being paid like a minor league ball player in the pointy end of a Barbie jet    Part of that is that the UAE doesn't exactly have a huge pool of native born labor that's qualified to fly an airliner. As a result, their crews tend to be less experienced...(but by no means less professional or well trained).

Quoting anjin (Reply 159):
To those asking or trying to find pictures of the aircraft damage can I please repeat again - YOU WONT SEE THEM.QR will have pictures for sure, when the report comes out from the FAA in xx months you'll probably see them.

...and if those pictures magically show up (not as part of the accident investigation), you can rest assured that whoever took the pictures will be looking for work   After all, this is the Middle East...and company management would want heads to roll if that was leaked.
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 12:55 am

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 167):

Admittedly, I don't know for sure about QR and their hiring practices, but I know that at least one of the ME3 (*cough* EK *cough*) are known to hire western air crews with shiny jet syndrome, and part of that allure is you, too, can fly a widebody with a fresh ATP and not get stuck being paid like a minor league ball player in the pointy end of a Barbie jet

American pilots are regionals can get right seat in the smaller jets at those carriers and work their way up the ladder. But you are not hired with little time and placed in a heavy unless it is as relief officer.
 
MKIAZ
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 5:24 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:24 am

Thank you longhauler, great info. Question, what would happen if you were using an intersection AND there was a temporary situation? 09/T1#T1?
 
hivue
Posts: 2005
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:29 am

Quoting MKIAZ (Reply 169):
Thank you longhauler, great info. Question, what would happen if you were using an intersection AND there was a temporary situation? 09/T1#T1?

He mentioned that:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 156):
Had T1 intersection been possible, they would have been presented the options, 09, 09/T1 and 09#T1 and caught the error.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6419
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:35 am

Quoting MKIAZ (Reply 169):
Thank you longhauler, great info. Question, what would happen if you were using an intersection AND there was a temporary situation? 09/T1#T1?

Funny you should say that as it has happened to me. Or, what if two of the Temporary restrictions apply?

But, because of performance T# restrictions, it is not likely an intersection takeoff is possible. So the full length (with the restriction) is used. However, if two T# restrictions apply even with the full length, technically you use the most restrictive of the two. In thoery, you can tell as it will have the lowest possible TOW.

You can never take-off without proper performance calculations, so I just defer to Flight Dispatch and ask which numbers to use. They query Flight Engineering and send us the results in the aircraft.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
hivue
Posts: 2005
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:48 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 166):
A cool idea, but we normally just use the signage on the side of the runway.

Would the A350 or 787 be able to tell where it is on a runway and, using the aircraft weight (which surely it knows), winds, temp, anticipated takeoff performance, etc., decide whether there's enough runway available? The A380 and A350 have Brake to Vacate and Runway Overrun Protection so it seems like it wouldn't be hard to do.

[Edited 2015-09-23 19:52:07]

[Edited 2015-09-23 19:52:47]
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 8:55 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 156):
It would appear that the only options they were presented were, 09 and 09#T1.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 156):
Had T1 intersection been possible, they would have been presented the options, 09, 09/T1 and 09#T1 and caught the error.

But then, if taking off from intersection T1 was not possible (and hence it did not appear in their computers), why were they sent to T1 by the MIA tower? Or were they?
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6419
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:24 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 173):
But then, if taking off from intersection T1 was not possible (and hence it did not appear in their computers), why were they sent to T1 by the MIA tower? Or were they?

I'll say this again.

It is my guess that they looked at options for Runway 09, and were presented with 09 and 09#T1. They chose 09#T1 thinking it was intersection T1, saw it could be done (or so they thought), then requested T1 from ATC. ATC cleared them to T1 as they requested.

ATC is not aware of aircraft capabilities, and are not supposed to be. If they requested T1, ATC will not likely query that request unless it is blatantly an error. Looking at our performance computer, I see that intersection T1 is an option so I have to imagine it is a common operation.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:25 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 174):
It is my guess that they looked at options for Runway 09, and were presented with 09 and 09#T1. They chose 09#T1 thinking it was intersection T1, saw it could be done (or so they thought), then requested T1 from ATC. ATC cleared them to T1 as they requested.

That might be. But why would they choose to take off with less than the whole length of the runway, if the whole length was available? I would think that flights would take off from T1 because ATC told them (because of whatever operational issues), and not because the pilots decided it'd be fun to take off with less runway and more engine.
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:32 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 175):

Quoting longhauler (Reply 174):
It is my guess that they looked at options for Runway 09, and were presented with 09 and 09#T1. They chose 09#T1 thinking it was intersection T1, saw it could be done (or so they thought), then requested T1 from ATC. ATC cleared them to T1 as they requested.

That might be. But why would they choose to take off with less than the whole length of the runway, if the whole length was available? I would think that flights would take off from T1 because ATC told them (because of whatever operational issues), and not because the pilots decided it'd be fun to take off with less runway and more engine.

And around around we go......

Intersection take offs happen all the time, Longhauler and others have explained it many times. What more do you want?
 
hivue
Posts: 2005
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:35 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 175):
But why would they choose to take off with less than the whole length of the runway, if the whole length was available? I would think that flights would take off from T1 because ATC told them (because of whatever operational issues), and not because the pilots decided it'd be fun to take off with less runway and more engine.

longhauler has very carefully explained all this. Please read his posts above.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:42 pm

Quoting Whiteguy (Reply 176):
Longhauler and others have explained it many times. What more do you want?
Quoting hivue (Reply 177):
longhauler has very carefully explained all this. Please read his posts above.

I have of course read those posts. Yet, typically, crews do not decide on their own to take off with less than the whole available length of the runway, unless instructed to do so. Therefore, why did this crew choose 09#T1 (which they confused with 09/T1) over the available T1?
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:57 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 178):

Quoting Whiteguy (Reply 176):
Longhauler and others have explained it many times. What more do you want?
Quoting hivue (Reply 177):
longhauler has very carefully explained all this. Please read his posts above.

I have of course read those posts. Yet, typically, crews do not decide on their own to take off with less than the whole available length of the runway, unless instructed to do so. Therefore, why did this crew choose 09#T1 (which they confused with 09/T1) over the available T1?

Yes crews can and do decide if they use an intersection for takeoff, happens all the time....

We always input our numbers for the specific runway with an intersection departure, if available and used.....even if we use full length, the numbers are based on an intersection departure....

You have to ask the QR crew why they chose 09#T1 over 09/T1.......oh wait Longhauler explained that too....
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 5:09 pm

Quoting Whiteguy (Reply 179):
You have to ask the QR crew why they chose 09#T1 over 09/T1.......oh wait Longhauler explained that too....

Except that that is not my question! My question is

Quoting UALWN (Reply 178):
Therefore, why did this crew choose 09#T1 (which they confused with 09/T1) over the available T1?
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Thu Sep 24, 2015 5:12 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 180):
Quoting Whiteguy (Reply 179):
You have to ask the QR crew why they chose 09#T1 over 09/T1.......oh wait Longhauler explained that too....

Except that that is not my question! My question is

Quoting UALWN (Reply 178):
Therefore, why did this crew choose 09#T1 (which they confused with 09/T1) over the available T1?

Then I'm obviously not understanding your question......choose it in the FMC programming or choose to depart from T1? Either way it's been explained...
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:43 am

Quoting Whiteguy (Reply 181):
Then I'm obviously not understanding your question......choose it in the FMC programming or choose to depart from T1? Either way it's been explained...

The second, which has not been explained. Few pilots would choose an intersection take off for a 13-hour flight if given the chance to use the whole runway. So did ATC tell them to use T1? And if so, why?
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Fri Sep 25, 2015 1:50 am

Quoting UALWN (Reply 182):

Quoting Whiteguy (Reply 181):
Then I'm obviously not understanding your question......choose it in the FMC programming or choose to depart from T1? Either way it's been explained...

The second, which has not been explained. Few pilots would choose an intersection take off for a 13-hour flight if given the chance to use the whole runway. So did ATC tell them to use T1? And if so, why?

Pretty good explanations right there....

Quoting longhauler (Reply 174):

I'll say this again.

It is my guess that they looked at options for Runway 09, and were presented with 09 and 09#T1. They chose 09#T1 thinking it was intersection T1, saw it could be done (or so they thought), then requested T1 from ATC. ATC cleared them to T1 as they requested.

ATC is not aware of aircraft capabilities, and are not supposed to be. If they requested T1, ATC will not likely query that request unless it is blatantly an error. Looking at our performance computer, I see that intersection T1 is an option so I have to imagine it is a common operation.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 155):

The fact that they pulled out numbers for T1 would indicate that they wanted that option. As long as it was possible, and the numbers allowed it ... it would save time. As noted above, this is common practice.

However, they were caught by the "gotcha" in the performance computer .... the very subtle difference between "09/T1" and "09#T1". It looks like they pulled out 09#T1, thinking it was 09/T1 and almost ended up on Miami Beach. They are very very lucky gentlemen!

I am guesing the scenario therefore was that they tried T1, saw that they could do it (or so they thought), then requested it. ATC normally will not query such a request.
 
User avatar
Miami
Posts: 6087
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 8:37 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:35 am

Local news has the story. http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/F...ternational-Airport-329310051.html


Looks like they have a surveillance video.
Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible. - Eddie Rickenbacker
 
GavinSharp
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:23 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:39 am

Quoting UALWN (Reply 182):
Few pilots would choose an intersection take off for a 13-hour flight if given the chance to use the whole runway.

Just to point it out very clearly, the relevant explanation for this is:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 155):

The fact that they pulled out numbers for T1 would indicate that they wanted that option. As long as it was possible, and the numbers allowed it ... it would save time. As noted above, this is common practice.

I.e. "saving taxi time".
 
D L X
Posts: 12607
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:43 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 160):

I agree with your whole post. Thank you!

Quoting Miami (Reply 184):
Looks like they have a surveillance video.

So, what's the flash? Is that lights going out? Is it a tail strike?

(Isn't a tail strike likely when you pull up before vr? Asking for a friend.)
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3519
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:51 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 186):
So, what's the flash? Is that lights going out? Is it a tail strike?

Beacon flashing, maybe?
“They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: QR Serious Incident At MIA On Sept. 15

Fri Sep 25, 2015 3:07 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 186):
So, what's the flash? Is that lights going out? Is it a tail strike?

Beacon on the belly...

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos