Emirates Flight EK521 777 Crash Landing

[ipilot54]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/dubai-runw ... -1.3705272

[Rudy]

Burned pretty good. I wonder if they foamed the runway first. Or how long the foam lasts with the temperature being 48°C there today.

[Rudy]

http://avherald.com/h?article=49c12302

OMDB 030900Z 11021KT 3000 BLDU NSC 49/07 Q0993 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 1500
OMDB 030800Z 14012KT 100V180 6000 NSC 48/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000 DU
OMDB 030749Z 14012KT 110V180 6000 NSC 47/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000DU
OMDB 030700Z 06007KT 360V100 8000 NSC 44/10 Q0995 NOSIG
OMDB 030600Z 06005KT 350V100 8000 NSC 42/12 Q0995 NOSIG

Accident at 0841Z with blowing dust and wind shear reported. This site reporting a go around was initiated. Perhaps they settled back on the runway after retracting the gear. 49 degrees.

[Heliian]

Reports are saying the gear wouldn't come down and they had declared emergency prior to attempting to land. Since all survived the landing and evacuation, I would say they did a fine job with a disabled aircraft.

[Donald]

http://avherald.com/h?article=49c12302&opt=0

An Emirates Airlines Boeing 777-300, registration A6-EMW performing flight EK-521 from Thiruvananthapuram (India) to Dubai (United Arab Emirates) with 282 passengers and 18 crew, was on final approach to Dubai's runway 12L at 12:41L (08:41Z) but attempted to go around from low height. The aircraft however did not climb, but after retracting the gear touched down on the runway and burst into flames. All occupants evacuated safely, no injuries are being reported. The aircraft burned down completely.

The airline reported: "Emirates can confirm that an incident happened at Dubai International Airport on 3rd August 2016 at about 12.45pm local time."

United Arab Emirates Government confirmed an Emirates aircraft arriving from India suffered a crash landing at Dubai Airport, all passengers have been evacuated, there are no reports of injuries.

According to ATC recordings the aircraft performed a normal approach and landing, there was no priority or emergency declared. Upon contacting tower tower reminded the crew of lowering the gear and cleared the aircraft to land. Another approach reported on tower frequency. About 2 minutes after EK-521 reported on tower, the crew reported going around, tower instructed the aircraft to climb to 4000 feet, the crew acknowledged climbing to 4000 feet, a few seconds later tower instructs the next arrival to go around and alerts emergency services. The position of the aircraft is described near the end of the runway.

Related NOTAM:
A1156/16 - AD CLSD. 03 AUG 11:20 2016 UNTIL 03 AUG 14:00 2016. CREATED: 03 AUG 11:18 2016

A1155/16 - AD CLSD. 03 AUG 10:00 2016 UNTIL 03 AUG 12:00 2016. CREATED: 03 AUG 10:07 2016

Metars:
OMDB 030900Z 11021KT 3000 BLDU NSC 49/07 Q0993 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 1500
OMDB 030800Z 14012KT 100V180 6000 NSC 48/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000 DU
OMDB 030749Z 14012KT 110V180 6000 NSC 47/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000DU
OMDB 030700Z 06007KT 360V100 8000 NSC 44/10 Q0995 NOSIG
OMDB 030600Z 06005KT 350V100 8000 NSC 42/12 Q0995 NOSIG

[GRK2]

Foam?....that would take time...and in this case it's not even relevant. This was a low energy, low altitude go around during a wind shear warning during a hot and low pressure day here in the UAE. Typical summer weather in a -300 which is difficult enough to handle when it's this hot. And someone didn't follow the recovery procedure and they settled back on the runway with the gear either in transit or retracted. BIG no no...There should be NO config changes while following the recovery actions, to prevent exactly what happened. I have had direct contact with several EK Captains I know well, and one who is connected and this is his early thinking. Both crew members well rested, (24 hour layover in TRV) Captain very senior with a sharp young FO, so a bit of a surprise. The evac went like the book says it should and that's due to the really great training received by all CC. There was NO fire on approach, as suggested by the media, no emergency declared, no engine failures...just a possibly poorly handled escape maneuver. Lucky no one was killed...hull is a write off...Certainly more to come on this one.

[Diomedea]

AVHerald is now reporting that a firefighter was killed.

[mato]

Firefighter lost his/her life for the moron passengers all grabbing their luggage before they exit. That shit drives me crazy to see. Why is the general public so dumb? How can we stop this madness in evacuations... Maybe it should be part of the mandatory briefing.

[Diomedea]

Firefighter lost his/her life for the moron passengers all grabbing their luggage before they exit. That shit drives me crazy to see. Why is the general public so dumb? How can we stop this madness in evacuations... Maybe it should be part of the mandatory briefing.

The general public doesn't have any emergency training. They likely panic and lose the ability to think rationally.

I've heard people suggest that the overhead bins automatically lock during takeoff and landing...

[GRK2]

Maybe if they took their damn faces out of their phones and actually listened to the safety briefing, after all it's given in at least two or even three languages at that airline, and I know from experience what languages they understand...seriously...these people are lucky to be alive... No excuse for that brand of idiocy!

[NAT2]

Maybe if they took their damn faces out of their phones and actually listened to the safety briefing, after all it's given in at least two or even three languages at that airline, and I know from experience what languages they understand...seriously...these people are lucky to be alive... No excuse for that brand of idiocy!

Exactly, and they all lived plus there is video of their behaviour, so expect the exact same thing the next time an aircraft needs to be evacuated. Not good.

[Teamflyer]

RIP firefighter

[co-joe]

http://avherald.com/h?article=49c12302

OMDB 030900Z 11021KT 3000 BLDU NSC 49/07 Q0993 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 1500
OMDB 030800Z 14012KT 100V180 6000 NSC 48/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000 DU
OMDB 030749Z 14012KT 110V180 6000 NSC 47/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000DU
OMDB 030700Z 06007KT 360V100 8000 NSC 44/10 Q0995 NOSIG
OMDB 030600Z 06005KT 350V100 8000 NSC 42/12 Q0995 NOSIG

Accident at 0841Z with blowing dust and wind shear reported. This site reporting a go around was initiated. Perhaps they settled back on the runway after retracting the gear. 49 degrees.

For those of us who've never flown in Europe a question if I may;

Issued on the 3rd at 9 Zulu, 110 degrees true at 21 kt, vis 3000 metres? in blowing dust, NSC = no significant cloud, so similar to cavok? altimeter 993.0 mB? Windshear all runways, tempo 350 degrees true at 15 kt and then is that another visibility modifier of 1500 metres and on the 8 zulu metar 4000 metres in dust?

[digits_]

Issued on the 3rd at 9 Zulu, 110 degrees true at 21 kt, vis 3000 metres? in blowing dust, NSC = no significant cloud, so similar to cavok? altimeter 993.0 mB? Windshear all runways, tempo 350 degrees true at 15 kt and then is that another visibility modifier of 1500 metres and on the 8 zulu metar 4000 metres in dust?

CAVOK requires visibility of 10km and no clouds below 5000 ft.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

In light of the way passengers grabbed their carry on bags in overhead compartments before evacuating this and other recent aircraft evacuations, especially from burning aircraft, Transport Canada, ICAO, IATA and all other World Wide Civil Aviation authorities and organisations, should push for new legislation, in Canada and elsewhere, that makes it a criminal offence to evacuate an aircraft through the slides while carrying any type of carry-on luggage.

This same nonsense happens every time and will invariably cause the death of innocent passengers who will be unable to exit a burning aircraft on time because of the irresponsible actions others.

If such legislation were to be passed, pictures such as this one could be used to press criminal charges against non compliant passengers.

https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/20 ... 556&crop=1

[crazyaviator]

Maybe the fanny bag will come back in vogue ! The Beast in us is just under the surface when the shit hits the fan

[longjon]

Flight was from India with domestic workers, perhaps for many this was their first flight in their lives the bags held their Id and other valuables. Having no idea of flight regulations and not listening to pre take off briefing as most were to busy doing something else its small wonder most tried to grab the bags.

[FICU]

I'm still waiting for the wind analysis from pdw.

[digits_]

Firefighter lost his/her life for the moron passengers all grabbing their luggage before they exit. That shit drives me crazy to see. Why is the general public so dumb? How can we stop this madness in evacuations... Maybe it should be part of the mandatory briefing.

I think there are multiple reasons for this:

- Underestimating the danger
If they would clearly see the fire, understand how fast it could spread, way more people would get off the plane asap. People don't believe that something would really happen to them.

- Honestly no remembering what to do
If you remember the pictures of that airliner in the Hudson, there were lots of people who weren't even holding a flotation device. When you get stressed out, you can very easily forget the most basic things and fall back to an incorrect routine.

- Herd mentality
Everybody is doing it, why shouldn't I ?

- Getting used to (unnecessary?) safety warnings
There are safety warnings everywhere, lots of them don't affect you at all and are pretty useless most of the time. Directly related to the airplane you have the seatbelt lights warnings which often stay on all the time even during the smoothest flights you can imagine. That makes people think "they" are just trying to cover their ass legally speaking and there is nothing serious going on.

- Bad experiences with airline customer service
If they believed/trust they would get their bags back as soon as the plane was secure, there wouldn't be such a hassle. I'm pretty sure there is a big logistic nightmare in getting the plane out of there and that getting their bags back would be the lowest priority. Possibly mixed up with time consuming unnecessary safety and security checks and investigations. It doesn't matter if this is true or not, it is the idea lots of people have from airlines.
Throw in a bad experience with overbooking / getting stuck in an airport without your bags / ... and priorities change.

-Egoism
People are selfish in nature. Especially towards strangers.

[cncpc]

I'm still waiting for the wind analysis from pdw.

Sadly, me too. It seems so inevitable.

[North Shore]

I think that the carry-on baggage issue is more a function of habit than malice to others. Every single time you take a plane, it lands, taxis in, comes to a stop, goes 'bing' and the seatbelt light turns off, and you stand and get your carry-on out of the overhead. Every. Single. Time. Until, this one time, that doesn't happen. But, by then you are so programmed to grab your bag when you've come to a complete stop, that it's almost impossible not to, even if there's smoke in the air.

Locking bins might be a good idea (how much extra weight to that arrangement, though?) but I'd be willing to bet that you'd still be held up in an emergency evac by people struggling to open the 'jammed' bins..

[Rookie50]

Maybe if they took their damn faces out of their phones and actually listened to the safety briefing, after all it's given in at least two or even three languages at that airline, and I know from experience what languages they understand...seriously...these people are lucky to be alive... No excuse for that brand of idiocy!

Maybe the airlines could also shut up with the loud, unmutable advertising on the screens during taxi, too, so those pax that are aware can focus on reviewing emergency procedures and exits without distraction.

Curious how credit card ads contribute to safety, pre takeoff.

[JMACK]

From "The Australian" news paper

Emirates B777 crash was accident waiting to happen
BYRON BAILEYThe Australian12:00AM August 9, 2016

The crash of an Emirates B777 during an attempted go-around in Dubai last Wednesday was always an accident waiting to happen.

It was not the fault of the pilots, the airline or Boeing, because this accident could have happened to any pilot in any airline flying any modern glass cockpit airliner — Airbus, Boeing or Bombardier — or a large corporate jet with autothrottle.

It is the result of the imperfect interaction of the pilots with supposedly failsafe automatics, which pilots are rigorously trained to trust, which in this case failed them.

First, let us be clear about the effect of hot weather on the day. All twin-engine jet aircraft are certified at maximum takeoff weight to climb away on one engine after engine failure on takeoff at the maximum flight envelope operating temperature — 50 degrees C in the case of a B777 — to reach a regulatory climb gradient minimum of 2.4 per cent.

The Emirates B777-300 was operating on two engines and at a lower landing weight, so climb performance should not have been a problem. I have operated for years out of Dubai in summer, where the temperature is often in the high 40s, in both widebody Airbus and Boeing B777 aircraft.

Secondly, a pilot colleague observed exactly what happened as he was there, waiting in his aircraft to cross runway 12L. The B777 bounced and began a go-around. The aircraft reached about 150 feet (45 metres) with its landing gear retracting, then began to sink to the runway.

This suggests that the pilots had initiated a go-around as they had been trained to do and had practised hundreds of times in simulators, but the engines failed to respond in time to the pilot-commanded thrust. Why?

Bounces are not uncommon. They happen to all pilots occasionally. What was different with the Emirates B777 bounce was that the pilot elected to go around. This should not have been a problem as pilots are trained to apply power, pitch up (raise the nose) and climb away. However pilots are not really trained for go-arounds after a bounce; we practise go-arounds from a low approach attitude.

Modern jets have autothrottles as part of the autoflight system. They have small TOGA (take off/go-around) switches on the throttle levers they click to command autothrottles to control the engines, to deliver the required thrust. Pilots do not physically push up the levers by themselves but trust the autothrottles to do that, although it is common to rest your hand on the top of the levers. So, on a go-around, all the pilot does is click the TOGA switches, pull back on the control column to raise the nose and — when the other pilot, after observing positive climb, announces it — calls “gear up” and away we go!

But in the Dubai case, because the wheels had touched the runway, the landing gear sensors told the autoflight system computers that the aircraft was landed. So when the pilot clicked TOGA, the computers — without him initially realising it — inhibited TOGA as part of their design protocols and refused to spool up the engines as the pilot commanded.

Imagine the situation. One pilot, exactly as he has been trained, clicks TOGA and concentrates momentarily on his pilot’s flying display (PFD) to raise the nose of the aircraft to the required go-around attitude — not realising his command for TOGA thrust has been ignored. The other pilot is concentrating on his PFD altimeter to confirm that the aircraft is climbing due to the aircraft momentum. Both suddenly realise the engines are still at idle, as they had been since the autothrottles retarded them at approximately 30 feet during the landing flare. There is a shock of realisation and frantic manual pushing of levers to override the autothrottle pressure.

But too late. The big engines take seconds to deliver the required thrust before and before that is achieved the aircraft sinks to the runway.

It could have happened to any pilot caught out by an unusual, time-critical event, for which rigorous simulator training had not prepared him.

Automation problems leading to pilot confusion are not uncommon; but the designers of the autoflight system protocols should have anticipated this one. Perhaps an audible warning like “manual override required” to alert the pilots immediately of the “automation disconnect”.

My feeling is the pilots were deceived initially by the autothrottle refusal to spool up the engines, due to the landing inhibits, and a very high standard of simulator training by which pilots are almost brainwashed to totally rely on the automatics as the correct thing.

Byron Bailey is a commercial pilot with more than 45 years’ experience and 26,000 flying hours, and a former RAAF fighter pilot. He was a senior captain with Emirates for 15 years.

[pelmet]

There is much truth to this article. TOGA on many Boeing's is inhibited once on the ground after touchdown(I assume so that if the switch(es) are pressed, thrust will not be added). But, the pilot should always follow through to ensure that the thrust levers are moving forward. Otherwise, you are trying to climb with idle thrust. The pilot not flying's call is possibly among other things, "Go-around thrust set". So the PF is supposed to make sure that thrust is added, and the PNF is supposed to ensure that it has been added.

I seem to remember an MD-80 crashed for this exact reason(not ensuring that thrust was added) a few years back in Phuket.

Bottom line, you have to ensure that the thrust levers/throttle actually move forward. There are other screw-ups that can happen as well in a critical situation such as pushing the autothrottle disconnect switch instead of TOGA.

So what to do. Perhaps, just a quick review in your mind or verbally on what you will do in the event of a go-around. From hand motions to calls. I know I have screwed it up in the sim so I am a perfect candidate to take this advice because there is no time for review once the action is actually required and it is rarely required.

Of course, just pushing the thrust levers forward manually as a normal assistance to the autothrottle works as well, especially if the autothrottle is not doing what you want.

[FICU]

Do we know... Was this a low energy rejected landing or was it a go-around after a bounced landing? A low energy rejected landing can easily result in a bounce but you don't do a thing other than climb until you reach Vref+adjustment. Regardless... If you hit TOGA and the thrust levers don't respond... Move them yourself!