Pakistan plane crash: Jet carrying 107 people crashes into houses near airport

[Evan]

I don’t give a rats ass how they get down to 1000 feet...AT THAT POINT, get things on target and maybe run a landing checklist...

Maybe...?

Well, fortunately for us, most non-Pakistani airlines do give a rat's ass. So we have managed guidance and a descent mode on the A320 that maintains a speed range around the best fuel-economy speed while taking into account altitude constrictions and brings you down to the glideslope where you can make a nice, passenger-friendly, life-sustaining transistion to final. Why not use this? Why not respect the value of human life over your own ego? Why be a cowboy when cowboys are a thing of the past?

[ATLcrew]

but in the Boeing when you select what I think is called LVL CHG (IAS/MACH altitude mode in the MD-80) the thrust levers just stop being managed and they will stay put wherever you put them.

I'm afraid you're incorrect. For LVL CHG climb thrust will go to CLB, for LVL CHG descend thrust will go to idle. Provided A/T is on, of course.

[Gabriel]

I'm afraid you're incorrect.

Not surprisingly...

For LVL CHG climb thrust will go to CLB, for LVL CHG descend thrust will go to idle. Provided A/T is on, of course.

Thank you.
And if you manually move the levers out of CLB or idle, will they automatically return to CLB and idle? (always with the AT on)

I need to go back to my manuals of the Mad Dog add-on for Flight Simulator (half-joking)... I think it was different in the MD-80. If I remember correctly selecting IAS/MACH in the vertical mode would do nothing with the thrust. And even if you select a descent the plane would climb if you select more thrust that what is required to hold the altitude at the speed selected in the IAS/MACH vertical mode. I think that the AT mode went to CLMP (clamp, the AT will stop moving the levers), and from there you can manually set the levers where you want or you can select an EPR hold AT mode and select CR, CLB, MCT, or TOGA. If you select a speed hold mode in the AT it would disconnect the IAS/MACH vertical mode and change to a vertical speed mode with the current altitude target and current actual vertical speed.

So, for example, if you are crusing at FL330 and want to climb to FL350 at the current Mach, you would select 35000 in the altitude window, select IAS/MACH (the IAS/MACH window, which is the same as the vertical speed window, will show the current Mach), and then select CLB thrust rating computer and EPR hold in the AT.

If you want to descent from cruise, you would select say 10000 ft, IAS/MACH mode, manually idle the throttles, and select the desired IAS/Mach value. In the meantime you would select (but not activate) 250kts in the AT window so when the plane reaches 10000 ft it will level off and slow down to 250 kts and hold it.

But it has been many years since I last used this add-on so my memory may be off.

[Evan]

I'm afraid you're incorrect. For LVL CHG climb thrust will go to CLB, for LVL CHG descend thrust will go to idle. Provided A/T is on, of course.

AFIAK, there are only two ways to get out of OP DES/idle thrust on the A320:

- arrive at the selected altitude entered in the FCU (assuming it's not 0, as sometimes has been the case).
- manually select another vertical mode.

Is this correct?

[ATLcrew]

AFIAK, there are only two ways to get out of OP DES/idle thrust on the A320:

- arrive at the selected altitude entered in the FCU (assuming it's not 0, as sometimes has been the case).
- manually select another vertical mode.

Is this correct?

Or get rid of the automation altogether.

[ATLcrew]

Not surprisingly...


Thank you.
And if you manually move the levers out of CLB or idle, will they automatically return to CLB and idle? (always with the AT on)

Affirmative.

[3WE]

Or get rid of the automation altogether.

What?

[Gabriel]

Actual footage of the plane scraping the engines on the runway

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bxbna7yu_o

[Evan]

Actual footage of the plane scraping the engines on the runway

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bxbna7yu_o

The speed is also startling. I have to wonder how many other high speed landings this pilot pulled off.

[Gabriel]

Karachi Approach asked PIA 8303, “Sir orbit is available if you want”. Captain verbalized, “Say it’s OK”. After 6 s, FO replied to ATC, “Negative Sir we are comfortable, we can make it, Insha-Allah”.

Well, Allah didn't will it.

Final report is out. Not that we are going to learn anything radically new. It was a simple non-sterile cockpit not following standard procedures (or even reasonable cowboy pilot procedures) that came way too high, way too fast, missed / ignored warnings from the airplane and from ATC, landed gear up damaging the engines, and did a go around where the engines didn't last long enough to make it back.

https://avherald.com/h?article=4d7a6e9a/0000&opt=0

[Gabriel]

(Note Karachi's elevation is 1000ft)

a) At 09:32:46, 3,090 ft baro altitude, 5.7 NM from R/W 25L threshold, CAS 242 kts, selected target speed CAS 225 kts and SLATS / FLAPS CONF1 was selected (VFE CONF1=230 kts). Pitch angle was -12.6° and still decreasing.

(b) At 09:32:46, Karachi Approach called, “Sir, you are five Miles from touchdown still passing 3,500”. At 09:32:51, PIA 8303 responded, “Roger”. Karachi Approach again cautioned that aircraft was still too high on the Approach path, however flight crew continued to press on high Approach.

Auto-Pilots (APs) Disengagement

(a) At 09:32:47, 2,730 ft baro altitude, 5.5 NM from R/W 25L threshold, pitch attitude reached -13.7°. This led to both APs disengagement due to excessive pitch down, as it exceeded 13° nose down. Rate of Descent reached 6,800 ft/min.

Totally utterly stoned clowns.

[Evan]

Not that it forgives any of this, but what do you think would have been the outcome if the gear had been extended?

[Gabriel]

Not that it forgives any of this, but what do you think would have been the outcome if the gear had been extended?

They could have stopped with max breaking and max reverse. Not what I think. It's what Airbus engineering study concluded.

As a side (or central?) note, given this, who know how many times this captain did similar things and they managed stop, and he got away with it because nobody cared (the famous and stupid no-harm-no-foul philosophy).

After the accident, flights of Captain for last 12 months were analysed which indicated, numerous triggers during Approach related to High Speed, Path High, High Rate of Descent, Long Flare Distance and GPWS Warnings. There was no Go-Around initiated and several Unstabilized Approaches were continued.

In AvHeralald I posted a comment where I qualified my "stoned clowns" remark with this:

Totally utterly stoned clowns

And yet, it's not their fault:

"After the accident, flights of Captain for last 12 months were analyzed which indicated, numerous triggers during Approach related to High Speed, Path High, High Rate of Descent, Long Flare Distance and GPWS Warnings. There was no Go-Around initiated and several Unstabilized Approaches were continued."

That's a negative corporate safety culture, which is always on the leadership and management. You can see ATC and the FO knew there was something wrong. Possibly the same in the "numerous" previous instances. And this was a top captain with 17000+ hours total, 7000+ of them as captain, and in the A320 he had 4800 hours all of them as captain. So no way that nobody noted. Also no way that he was the only one. Or that all this behavior did not take place with management and leadership knowledge (not to mention approval and encouragement).

In a good-culture environment this captain would have not behaved like that, or he would have not lasted 1 month in the job.

[Evan]

As a side (or central?) note, given this, who know how many times this captain did similar things and they managed stop, and he got away with it because nobody cared (the famous and stupid no-harm-no-foul philosophy).

This is what I was thinking as well. Basic Stuka airmanship. Although you would expect the company to get on him about all the brake pads and tires he's going through. Touching down at 250+ kts must burn a lot of rubber.

[Gabriel]

Touching down at 250+ kts

193 in this case but ok