 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
martinm, There a couple around the Focker 614 (?) , modern design rules seems to be to keep the engines as high as possible to keep ingestion to a minimum. Hence wing underslung for bigger jets and tail mounted for exec jets (which are closer to the ground).
They look ugly when o top of the wing when you are a passenger, you cant see a thing!! Gravity also helps fuel supply ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
"Ok for the last time.
This can happen at any airline, the reason they got in the press is that they set off tHe ground proximity warning system GPWS. This was set off because the aircraft was not in the full landing configuration, yes they had gear down but not landing flaps, if they had landing config set no GPWS alarm would of gone off !
The crew came in too high and fast, a strong wind blowing them through base leg did not help and was compounded by the 10 knot tailwind on final approach, the 737 can land with a 15 kt tailwind though. "
Wrong. The GPWS warning was not " too low flaps" it was "terrain terrain." It would certainly have gone off in the landing config as the aircraft was four miles from the runway at 450 feet above the ground instead of 1500 feet. The sink rate of over 1500 feet per minute and speed of 213 knots didn't help.
You're quite arrogant for someone who got it so wrong 2planks,
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
martinm
The concept is called "over-wing nacelle".
Advantages include reduced noise on the ground, reduced risk of grounding and less chance of picking up foreign bodies - which is why it is used for seaplanes.
Disadvantages include increased torque on the wing. I guess that when mounted underneath, the pull from the engine will oppose the torque produced by its weight whereas, in an over-wing placement, the two will combine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
He's probably just refilling the Pringles supply 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stoat of the dead, from that link I see that
| Quote: |
| During the very short base leg the aircraft experienced a tail wind of about 20-30 knots |
So on the leg at 90° prior to the approach - so he didn't have that as a tailwind on finals. Quite a crosswind component for the landing, though. IIRC normal operation max corsswind compnent for a Vulcan was 20kts. Ryanair were operating a much more modern aircraft, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Sure do! Who do you fly for? (pm if you want)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Fattes13 wrote: |
| Lenny Law, He is one of the nicest individuals you will ever meet in the flesh. I taught both his boys to ski last year and Mr o’Leary was a gentleman . Don’t let the persona fool you! He was helpful, pleasant and despite taking a lot of abuse from other Parents he just smiled and sucked it up. [snip] |
I have never met the man, but this doesn't surprise me. He strikes me as someone having a bit of a giggle at all the press he generates, and he is very clear on what he is selling [and what is he not selling]. I have lots of respect for that.
But the reason I rarely fly Ryanair is because I get very frustrated starting out with a £20 ticket and finding that with all the 'options' I have spent £150 [ah, sir, you wanted to bring both of your legs with you.. well, tick this box. And was sir planning on breathing our air during the flight... well, there is a box to tick for that, too]. With BA, etc, the whole price is up front and there is nothing more to think about.
greg
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| altis wrote: |
martinm
The concept is called "over-wing nacelle".
Advantages include reduced noise on the ground, reduced risk of grounding ... |
I haven't seen the documentary but Antonov has a sort of "over the wing engine" aircraft. The engine is slightly above and forward of the wing. This a "blown wing" design that increases lift for STOL operations (short take off & landing) which would makes sense for airstrips in remote areas...
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
' The engine is slightly above and forward of the wing.'
Sounds like it - plus it was a Russian organised setup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
That's it or very similar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
I do hope Fattes13 advertised his services very cheaply and then billed Mr O'Leary €5 each time he helped his kids onto a lift. Plus another €7 to get them off again. And finished the lesson four miles from the hotel just as the lifts closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
2planks
| Quote: |
500' agl is the minimum for abandoning a visual approach, the 737's lowest height was 450' agl, hardly 'nearly crashing'. The height loss between 500' and 450' was prob down to spool up of the engines, it doesn't react immediately you know
|
I've just completed a training session on how the latest you can abandon an approach/landing is actually after the wheels touch down, as long as you haven't selected reverse thrust. If things go completely tits up, up don't want to be sitting there thinking 'Poo, something unexpected has happened and I really ought to be going around, but I'm below 500' now!' Otoh, we are also taught that you should be completely stable, with flaps, gear, profile, etc all ticked off by 1000', otherwise you go around. I'm reasonably sure my employer knows what they are on about - they are the largest employer of commercial pilots in the UK.
I've not read up on this particular incident, so not going to comment (especially as I know it would be foolish to after a glass of wine!) But Ryanair are not the picture of safety that some posters would like to make them out to be. A lack of major incidents does not mean they are good - it means they have been lucky so far. They nearly lost a hull in 2005, and are renowned in the industry for having enough holes in their operation that one day an accident will happen. I would not fly with them. (Though I would be happy to fly with Easyjet.)
A quick PS about the tailwind, though, since a few of the first posters on this thread picked up on this - it is perfectly acceptable to land with a tailwind (the exact amount depends on the aircraft type - my aircraft can land with a 15kt tailwind.) It is also not at all unusual to have a tailwind on final that may either peter out or change direction completely closer to the ground. This conditions do lead to challenging approaches, but are normal. Whatever was going on in that pilot's mind (and we have all asked for the shorter distance in our careers) it was a bit of idiocy to end up so low so far out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
pandora, nice to see you back! (where have you booked this year's holiday and can we watch?  )
Anyway, a fine post. Would you then agree that the plane in question "nearly crashed"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Bode Swiller wrote: |
| that the plane in question "nearly crashed"? |
Is 'nearly crashed' any different from 'didn't crash'?
Would be a crap headline though 'RyanAir flight didn't crash'
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Thornyhill wrote: |
| Is 'nearly crashed' any different from 'didn't crash' |
Yes, the dry cleaning bill is entirely different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
The autopilot was misprogrammed.
The plane landed fine.
Happens all over the world.
Get over it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Pandora, are you on initial training or recurrent ? if it's initial congratulations !
You are quite correct in your statement, what I was meant to be saying that no 'unstable' approach should be continued past 500' agl. Obviously below 500' agl if something goes wrong or say a car drives across the runway you can still 'go around'
I made that statement thinking that the aircraft was in the correct place on approach, not 4 miles out and 700' too low as had only scan read the report.
As far as the Irish airline being unsafe, either they have been very very very lucky or they have a very good training department. None of the ex Ryanair pilots I've met have said anything about unsafe practices in the airline.
Wind the clock back a few years though and yes the airline used to have a terrible reputation. They are the second largest airline in Europe now so statistically speaking they will have their fair share of incidents. This type of incident, pilot error, could of happened at any airline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| stoat of the dead wrote: |
| How do you go from being hot and high, to hot and low so quickly unless they screwed the pooch? |
I can't help but imagine this being said in a world-weary smoky-voice, set in the sepia toned world of a pulp fiction detective agency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whitegold, err... read the report...
Mr Piehole, down these mean streets....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
2Planks, it was my annual check after 15 years in the industry, 13 years of them on large passenger jets. Et tu?
Having had a little bit more of a poke into the subject there is a good article here, with an interesting reply from Ryanair.
http://avherald.com/h?article=459fa8f6&opt=0
I have no words at the moment to respond to the Ryanair letter! I would say that from the graphic, nearly 3300 fpm rate of descent at just over 1000ft above the ground is a bit eye-watering. It is definitely way, way, way outside anything that would be considered safe in my airline. I think it is reasonable to say that pressure was put on the pilots by Ryanair in this situation.
Bode, I am going to my place, flying there with my company, and driving myself from the airport to the resort. The only probable grumble I will have is that we are taking my mother to look after the kids. Me and her in one house for a week.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| stoat of the dead wrote: |
| Whitegold, err... read the report... |
I have read it, bro.
It is bureaucratic tedium.
They were late.
They programmed the autopilot to accelerate landing.
They set it wrong.
They noticed it was wrong.
They pulled up.
They relanded.
Everything was fine.
Storm in a teacup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| pandora wrote: |
| Bode, I am going to my place, flying there with my company, and driving myself from the airport to the resort. The only probable grumble I will have is that we are taking my mother to look after the kids. Me and her in one house for a week.... |
What could possibly go wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
would love to see Mikey take a seat on Dragon's Den - THAT would be awesome!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a friend who is a BA Trolley Dolly. She says that a good proportion of Captains are arrogant knobheads who think they are ohhh so superior to all the other mortals on the planet!
Agenterre, Ah the VC10 - I had the privilege to fly on over to NY when I was MUCH younger. It was a much nicer experience than the 707. I enjoyed it so much, and it is such a beautiful plane, that I followed its career quite closely. BOAC shat on the VC10 from a great height - Despite them being the ones that wanted a plane with a much shorter runway requirement than the 707's and DC8's.
For me, it remains, along with Concorde, the most beautiful commercial airliner of all time
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
achilles, cobblers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
VC10, apparently the RAF managed to get one up to Mach 0.99 across the pond (by pulling a few cb's) very fast for its year.
15 years too on medium jets  bucket and spade brigade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
achilles, That would have been even better if it was on the pan at Akrotiri - as you knew it was only 15 mins from the 1st Brandy Sour. And she was (and still is just) the most fleible tanker. After cocordes retirement the VC10 became the fastest airliner in the World again (until the fun police reduced it to extend its life)
Thread drift - sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Bode Swiller wrote: |
| What could possibly go wrong? |
Indeed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
"The BFU stated that according to the commander's testimony the aircraft had been delayed by about 25-30 minutes before departure from Manchester, a landing on Memmingen's runway 06 would require to turn around at the end of the runway and backtrack to the terminal compared to much shorter taxi following a landing on runway 24. The crew therefore requested runway 24 in order to make up for some of the delay, although runway 06 was active at Memmingen. The crew briefed the ILS approach to runway 24 and was subsequently cleared for the procedure approach. Again according to crew testimony the crew wasn't prepared for the procedure approach expecting radar vectors as usual. Following establishing visual contact with the aerodrome the crew therefore requested and was cleared for the visual approach. The aircraft descended to 4000 feet at high rate of descent and 250 KIAS, in the right downwind the speed was reduced to 220 KIAS. During the very short base leg the aircraft experienced a tail wind of about 20-30 knots, the crew continued, and flew through the extended center line, at which point the crew recognized the approach was not normal. The crew attempted to re-align with the extended center line, however the high rate of descent still prevailed.
The BFU have released an English version of their interim report, too."
More can be found here: http://avherald.com/h?article=459fa8f6&opt=0
Personally, I would rather walk than fly with Ryanair. Flying is not meant to be as cheap as Ryanair make it, so makes one wonder where the savings come from. Plus service. I work too hard and value my holiday time highly for this sort of cr@p.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Well, I've had a bit more of a read now, and it seems there are two trains of thought going on out there in armchairland. One being 'they made a bit of a hash of their approach, they went around, no big deal.' The other being 'Holy crap! They were all over the place!' I'm in the latter camp, as were the other 2 pilots on my flight last night (45 years flying experience between them, in various airlines and the RAF.)
It's all well and good saying they didn't actually crash so what's the big deal, but the fact is that it would seem the crew had a serious loss of situational awareness. To have managed to get so close to the ground at such speed and rate of descent takes a fair lack of understanding of what is going on. Controlled flight into terrain was a very real potential outcome here.
But hey - they got away with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2planks, I don't know from the report if we know whether the PNF didn't say anything. We can surmise that what if they did have anything to say then it didn't contribute to improving the situation.
Wrt ski boots in hand luggage: Yes. If they fit in your cabin bag, and the cabin bag is smaller than the published hand baggage dimensions. My airline also offers a decent hold luggage allowance though (all included in the price of your ticket! Fancy that!) so you could easily pop them in your ski/board bag and put them in the hold. (If you manage to get your skis, boots helmet, and all your other stuff in one bag, that's included in the price too - bonus!) Saves you having to lug them round the airport with you. Your choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thx Pandora, I could never afford to travel with your airline being a lowly charter monkey, when I go to ischgl this year I'm going to wear ski boots on board. Sorry thread drift
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Whitegold, at the point where the second, "caution terrain" warning went off they were at 480 feet with a bank angle of 35 degrees having descended 839 feet in the previous 20 seconds...
Seems they responded to alarms to save a rather nasty situation that they got themselves and 139 other people into. But lost over half their their height between the first (sink rate) alarm and disconnecting the autopilot...
Want to defend that you trolling muppet....?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't waste your time stoat, the forum knows that whitegold is a fool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
