http://www.daytondailynews.com/lifestyl ... 75796.htmlQatar Airways pilot dies aboard Philippines flight
The Associated Press Updated 11:37 AM Wednesday, October 13, 2010
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Qatar Airways says the captain of one of its planes has died onboard a flight from the Philippines.
The carrier says the death occurred Wednesday on the Qatar Airways flight 645 from Manila to the Qatari capital, Doha.
The flight was diverted to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, where it landed around 11:35 a.m. local time. A new crew boarded the plane and it left Malaysia for Doha less than two hours later.
Qatar Airways didn't say what caused the pilot's death or if the flight was ever at risk.
It says its priority "remains the comfort and safety of its passengers and staff."
October 13, 2010 03:32 PM EDT
Did pilot died?
Moderators: FrankM, el, Dmmoore
Did pilot died?
"I'm putting an end to this f*ckery." - Rayna Boyanov
-
PurduePilot
- Posts: 2130
- Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 2:02 am
Re: Did pilot died?
Then how are we to know if the people were at risk? Oh the humanity1Qatar Airways didn't say what caused the pilot's death or if the flight was ever at risk.
-
OldSowBreath
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:16 pm
Re: Did pilot died?
Fixed.Then how are we to know if the people were at risk? Oh the humidity!Qatar Airways didn't say what caused the pilot's death or if the flight was ever at risk.
Re: Did pilot died?
Qatar Airways 777 sees ‘substantial’ damage after takeoff incident
Excerpt:
A Qatar Airways Boeing 777-300 bound for Doha struck a runway’s lighting system in Miami during takeoff earlier this week, causing “substantial” damage to the aircraft, a US government report has said.
Records show that the plane, whose registration number is A7-BAC, continued its 13.5 hour flight to Doha on Sept. 15 “without incident,” despite significant damage to its underside.
* * *
A notice to airmen (NOTAM) published by the airport states that the approach lighting system on that runway is now out of action, and won’t be back in service for a month, suggesting that it is seriously damaged.
* * *
It is understood that the Qatar Airways 777 entered the runway at intersection T1, which is located approximately a third of the way down the runway.
This reduced the available distance for take off to 2,600m, 1,368m less than the full runway length of 3,968m.
Each flight, pilots calculate the minimum runway length required for takeoff, which is influenced by a number of factors, including temperature, wind, air pressure and the airplane’s load.
On a Qatar Airways 777, the electronic flight bag (EFB) system generates the precise data required for takeoff with any given length of runway.
* * *
The FAA report notes that the Qatar Airways flight continued “without incident” to Doha, and the Aviation Herald reports that communication between the flight crew and air traffic control in Miami was “routine.”
It is not yet clear whether the flight crew were aware that their aircraft had hit the approach lights, or whether they knew that the aircraft had sustained damage in the incident.
* * *
Data from plane tracking app Flightradar suggests that the aircraft has been out of service since returning from Miami on Wednesday afternoon.
Weather data for Miami at the time of the departure – about an hour after sunset – states that visibility was good, with light winds and some rain in the surrounding area.
Qatar Airways has not yet responded to a request for comment.
http://dohanews.co/qatar-airways-777-se ... -incident/
Excerpt:
A Qatar Airways Boeing 777-300 bound for Doha struck a runway’s lighting system in Miami during takeoff earlier this week, causing “substantial” damage to the aircraft, a US government report has said.
Records show that the plane, whose registration number is A7-BAC, continued its 13.5 hour flight to Doha on Sept. 15 “without incident,” despite significant damage to its underside.
* * *
A notice to airmen (NOTAM) published by the airport states that the approach lighting system on that runway is now out of action, and won’t be back in service for a month, suggesting that it is seriously damaged.
* * *
It is understood that the Qatar Airways 777 entered the runway at intersection T1, which is located approximately a third of the way down the runway.
This reduced the available distance for take off to 2,600m, 1,368m less than the full runway length of 3,968m.
Each flight, pilots calculate the minimum runway length required for takeoff, which is influenced by a number of factors, including temperature, wind, air pressure and the airplane’s load.
On a Qatar Airways 777, the electronic flight bag (EFB) system generates the precise data required for takeoff with any given length of runway.
* * *
The FAA report notes that the Qatar Airways flight continued “without incident” to Doha, and the Aviation Herald reports that communication between the flight crew and air traffic control in Miami was “routine.”
It is not yet clear whether the flight crew were aware that their aircraft had hit the approach lights, or whether they knew that the aircraft had sustained damage in the incident.
* * *
Data from plane tracking app Flightradar suggests that the aircraft has been out of service since returning from Miami on Wednesday afternoon.
Weather data for Miami at the time of the departure – about an hour after sunset – states that visibility was good, with light winds and some rain in the surrounding area.
Qatar Airways has not yet responded to a request for comment.
http://dohanews.co/qatar-airways-777-se ... -incident/
Re: Did pilot died?
Let's see here...
There is some ironing that no one has called for corporal punishment for all the parties involved.
...and the Gabriel Takeoff Performance Monitoring System...it's at least worth talking about on discussion forums and maybe we should be working to enact some such thing...it might help keep airlines off of no-fly lists.
(That's just an ass-hat review, what have I missed?).It's incomprehensible and gross negligence that they would continue, not ask the tower to check the approach lights, that the tower not notice themselves and check the approach lights, that no one ELSE would notice the broken approach lights, that there's no electronic system monitoring the function of the approach lights, there's no official video records of every takeoff and landing operation, and procedures for all of this are lacking...
There is some ironing that no one has called for corporal punishment for all the parties involved.
...and the Gabriel Takeoff Performance Monitoring System...it's at least worth talking about on discussion forums and maybe we should be working to enact some such thing...it might help keep airlines off of no-fly lists.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.
Re: Did pilot died?
NEW:
The inquiry into the accident has disclosed that the captain chose to depart from the T1 intersection of runway 09 despite carrying out the calculations for a full-length runway departure, and despite a prohibition on intersection take-offs from this runway.
It indicates that the root of the event lay partly in the terminology displayed by the take-off calculation tool within the aircraft’s electronic flightbag.
This tool offered the pilots only a single take-off option, displayed to the crew as ‘09#T1’. The Qatari civil aviation authority, which has released a series of preliminary findings, says the pilots “understood” that this referred to a full-length take-off, adding that the tool "displayed" the information that intersection departures for this runway were not permissible.
But Miami’s runway 09 coincidentally has an intersection designated ‘T1’. As the 777 taxied parallel to the runway, in darkness, the captain “decided” that the aircraft could depart from this intersection.
* **
Although the captain – who had nearly 1,000h on type – had been tracking the 777’s taxi route on a cockpit display, the short-range view selected disguised the position of T1 relative to the rest of the runway. None of the four crew members realised that the T1 intersection was some 1,000m from the beginning of runway 09, leaving the 342t aircraft with only 2,610m available for the departure.
The false perception was further reinforced by an aircraft which, as a result of a displaced touchdown, landed close to the 777’s position.
As the aircraft rolled for take-off the crew started to become concerned as it approached the V1 decision speed.
“The [captain] assessed the speed of the aircraft, the rate of acceleration and the runway remaining and concluded the safest course of action was to continue,” says the inquiry. It states that the captain recalled initiating rotation with only 300m of runway remaining.
Flight-data recorder information shows the ground roll was 2,866m and that the 777 was “still on the ground” as it left the runway area. The subsequent collision with approach lights for runway 27 was captured on airport surveillance cameras.
None of the crew was aware of the impact and the aircraft – operating flight QR778 to Doha on 16 September – landed at its destination without further incident.
But inspection of the aircraft showed it had suffered a 46cm tear in its fuselage, which breached the pressure vessel, behind the rear cargo door. The inquiry says the aircraft sustained damage across some 18m² of aircraft skin, as well as parts of its main landing-gear, with 90 individual areas needing assessment.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ri-419788/
The inquiry into the accident has disclosed that the captain chose to depart from the T1 intersection of runway 09 despite carrying out the calculations for a full-length runway departure, and despite a prohibition on intersection take-offs from this runway.
It indicates that the root of the event lay partly in the terminology displayed by the take-off calculation tool within the aircraft’s electronic flightbag.
This tool offered the pilots only a single take-off option, displayed to the crew as ‘09#T1’. The Qatari civil aviation authority, which has released a series of preliminary findings, says the pilots “understood” that this referred to a full-length take-off, adding that the tool "displayed" the information that intersection departures for this runway were not permissible.
But Miami’s runway 09 coincidentally has an intersection designated ‘T1’. As the 777 taxied parallel to the runway, in darkness, the captain “decided” that the aircraft could depart from this intersection.
* **
Although the captain – who had nearly 1,000h on type – had been tracking the 777’s taxi route on a cockpit display, the short-range view selected disguised the position of T1 relative to the rest of the runway. None of the four crew members realised that the T1 intersection was some 1,000m from the beginning of runway 09, leaving the 342t aircraft with only 2,610m available for the departure.
The false perception was further reinforced by an aircraft which, as a result of a displaced touchdown, landed close to the 777’s position.
As the aircraft rolled for take-off the crew started to become concerned as it approached the V1 decision speed.
“The [captain] assessed the speed of the aircraft, the rate of acceleration and the runway remaining and concluded the safest course of action was to continue,” says the inquiry. It states that the captain recalled initiating rotation with only 300m of runway remaining.
Flight-data recorder information shows the ground roll was 2,866m and that the 777 was “still on the ground” as it left the runway area. The subsequent collision with approach lights for runway 27 was captured on airport surveillance cameras.
None of the crew was aware of the impact and the aircraft – operating flight QR778 to Doha on 16 September – landed at its destination without further incident.
But inspection of the aircraft showed it had suffered a 46cm tear in its fuselage, which breached the pressure vessel, behind the rear cargo door. The inquiry says the aircraft sustained damage across some 18m² of aircraft skin, as well as parts of its main landing-gear, with 90 individual areas needing assessment.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ri-419788/
Re: Did pilot died?
As I said over there?
Seems like it might be nice to know THE NUMBER of feet or metres and then look at the little numbers in the boxes off to the side of the runway that count down and see if the two numbers compare in a manner that is in the best interest of the approach lights...
And my Buddy Tee Vee is piling on with me on the excessive cryptic acronym deal.
ergo no sequture post propter hoc semper ubi sub ubi tota Gallia in tres partes est.
However, please, Flyboy...we're all over due for, "Why don't you outsiders just STFU?"
Seems like it might be nice to know THE NUMBER of feet or metres and then look at the little numbers in the boxes off to the side of the runway that count down and see if the two numbers compare in a manner that is in the best interest of the approach lights...
And my Buddy Tee Vee is piling on with me on the excessive cryptic acronym deal.
ergo no sequture post propter hoc semper ubi sub ubi tota Gallia in tres partes est.
However, please, Flyboy...we're all over due for, "Why don't you outsiders just STFU?"
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 8 guests
