AC A320 slides off runway at YYZ

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Post Reply
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: AC A320 slides off runway at YYZ

Post by altiplano »

Maybe I didn't make my point that well with the raw data analogy, I thought it was clear enough what I was trying to get at... tools available to us... sure, some we use all the time, some we don't...

FD's off is violating company policy? Is that how you read it?

Violating company policy/aom is NOT what I said.

Sure I've seen Cat 3 not turn out the way I like it short short final and disconnected. I've seen it do a piss poor job holding centerline on roll out and had to intervene too.

There are limits with autoland, and risks associated with it, I thought it was understood that was an accepted part of our discussion. But the bottom line is, given those limitations and awareness of them, is it approved by the manufacturer, the company, and the regulator, the answer is yes. With the noted cautions...

I have heard that some A380 operators are ONLY auto landing... I can't recall where, or maybe it was just rumour... CI was that the case at Emirates? Or maybe it was an Asian carrier... I wonder if they need CAT 3 protected areas everytime they come in?
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: AC A320 slides off runway at YYZ

Post by pelmet »

complexintentions wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:05 pm A previous employer had a requirement to conduct autolands at set intervals to maintain the a/c Cat 3B certification. This mandated occasional autolands in Cat 1 conditions. On one such occasion I had the autopilot disconnect at 80ft AGL (RWY 25C FRA). I was expecting it due to the close spacing of the departing traffic ahead, and sure enough when it flew over the localiser transmitter the interference dropped the signal. Even completely ready for it, it wasn't much fun to have to make a go/no-go decision at that point at the end of a 14 hour flight. So much for fatigue mitigation.
complexintentions wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:05 pm Rockie is correct. Debating regulations and procedures is fine, you're a whiz at pulling non-contextual snippets of things to try and support your theories. Fine. But there is no debate in the real world as to the increased risks of performing autolands from unprotected ILS signals.
Thanks for your opinion.....

Runway 25C at EDDF is a CAT III runway. It appears that you decided to do an autoland in good weather with no protections provided at all. An aircraft was seen to be rolling down the runway while you were on short final and distortions caused an incident.

Choosing to do a good weather autoland with likely distortions is different than having enhanced protections which are provided when the weather goes below 800-2(in the US) or 1000-2 (in Canada) or as requested. Not sure about Europe. But if it appears that there could be a potential for a beam distprtion, why not disconnect, manually land and let the next crew get the aircraft current for CAT III on the return leg. Our company requires a line report if the autoland couldn't be done within 7 days of its expiry(and the CAT II is valid for 6 months). Concern about a possible beam distortion based on an aircraft rolling down the runway would seem to me to be a valid reason for not performing the desired autoland.

Still, the FAA has published what is quoted below. As you mention, one needs to be ready to disconnect the autopilot at the first sign of an issue on any Autoland.....or perhaps anticipate and do it in advance.

"Use of Autoland at U.S. CAT I Facilities or Equivalent. For CAT I, autoland may be used at runways with facilities other than those with published CAT II or III IAPs if the precautions discussed in subparagraph 4-282C are followed. This is to aid pilots in achieving stabilized approaches and reliable touchdown performance to improve landing safety in adverse weather.....".

"All operators approved to use autoland- or HUD-equipped aircraft should be encouraged to routinely use these systems at suitably equipped runways during operations in VFR and in CAT I IFR conditions."

"Use of this capability may be particularly important for pilot workload relief in stressful conditions of fatigue after long international flights; night approaches; crosswinds or turbulence; when there may be other aircraft non-normal conditions being addressed; or to aid safe landing performance in otherwise adverse weather, restricted visibility, or with cluttered runways. This is true even though reported visibility may be well above minimums (e.g., heavy rain distorting view out the windshield, snow-covered runways where markings are not easily visible)."


http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v04%2 ... 02_005.htm
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by pelmet on Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:58 am, edited 11 times in total.
User avatar
Old fella
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2394
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.

Re: AC A320 slides off runway at YYZ

Post by Old fella »

I thought applicable Canadian standards criteria like TP-308 and TP-312 to single out a few , apply to Canadian certified airports and Canadian air carriers who operate in and out of such. Not sure what the FAA has to do with Canadian standards, perhaps nothing but I am willing to be enlightened.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: AC A320 slides off runway at YYZ

Post by pelmet »

Thanks Old Fella for the comment and thank you Rockie and Complex Intentions for your input. It has all been valuable and appreciated about the concerns of doing autolands on CAT I runways. All three have considerable experience and their line of thinking is something to consider.

Along with their input is FAA documentation about autolands on CAT I runways that is interesting to read.

My company's procedure is written similarly to what the Delta Airlines procedure says with the usual cautions but is not prohibited, which appears to be the same as what Altiplano has mentioned for his company type.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by pelmet on Fri Oct 05, 2018 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: AC A320 slides off runway at YYZ

Post by pelmet »

Old fella wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:21 pm I thought applicable Canadian standards criteria like TP-308 and TP-312 to single out a few , apply to Canadian certified airports and Canadian air carriers who operate in and out of such. Not sure what the FAA has to do with Canadian standards, perhaps nothing but I am willing to be enlightened.
From NavCanada...

"Glide Path Signal Protection Procedures
A controller will protect the glide path signal when:
1. The ceiling is less than 1,000 feet or visibility is less than 3 miles, or both; and
2. The arriving aircraft is inside the final approach fix (FAF) on an ILS approach."

"Auto-Land or Practice Low Visibility Approaches
In situations where protection of the ILS signal is not required and pilots wish to conduct auto-land or practice low visibility approach procedures, advise the controller of your intentions early enough so that they can either protect the ILS critical area or advise you that, due to traffic, ILS critical area protection is not possible. If ILS critical area protection is not possible, the controller will use the phrase “ILS CRITICAL AREA NOT PROTECTED.” It then becomes the pilot’s responsibility to continue or discontinue in the particular approach mode."

http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-and ... 01.pdf#top
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”