Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Near Miss of Singapore Airline A350XWB at Mumbai

  1. #1
    Junior Member janamparikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    CSIA, Mumbai
    Posts
    38

    Post Near Miss of Singapore Airline A350XWB at Mumbai

    Singapore Airlines SQ422 on the way frm Singapore to Mumbai mistakenly made approach to land at Juhu Aerodrome (a small training and helicopter airport) at Mumbai while ATC cleared him for ILS approach on RW09 at Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai.

    The 2 runways are separated about 0.8nm which is published as caution internationally to all pilots. The aircraft made a Go around and a serious incident was averted. Mumbai has a history of similar mistake by Japan Airlines (JAL) Boeing 707 in 70s era.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2017-12-04-PHOTO-00005094.jpg 
Views:	1974 
Size:	318.1 KB 
ID:	11754Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2017-12-04-PHOTO-00005095.jpg 
Views:	2017 
Size:	201.2 KB 
ID:	11755

  2. #2
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Thought y’all just passed a big safety audit?
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  3. #3
    Member ATLcrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    609

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janamparikh View Post
    Mumbai has a history of similar mistake by Japan Airlines (JAL) Boeing 707 in 70s era.

    So, two incidents in 40+ years? That's quite a history...

  4. #4
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janamparikh View Post
    ATC cleared him for ILS approach on RW09
    That is a serious deviation from the ILS.

  5. #5
    Junior Member janamparikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    CSIA, Mumbai
    Posts
    38

    Default

    The airline statement read: "Singapore Airlines SQ422, an Airbus A350, operating from Singapore to Mumbai on 04 December, was scheduled to land on Runway 09 at Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport at 1035hrs (local time). Due to poor visibility conditions, the crew discontinued the approach to Runway 09 at approximately 1000 feet, in accordance with standard operating procedures. Air Traffic Control Mumbai then vectored the flight for a subsequent approach onto Runway 09 and the flight landed uneventfully at 1048hrs (local time). At no time did the pilots of SQ 422 mistake Juhu airport as Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport."

  6. #6
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janamparikh View Post
    The airline statement read: "Due to poor visibility conditions, the crew discontinued the approach to Runway 09 at approximately 1000 feet, in accordance with standard operating procedures."
    That's a strange standard operating procedure. If I am in IFR (and if I was rated for IFR), I am not discontinuing a hand-flown NDB approach at 1000 ft do to poor visibility in the Piper Tomahawk. Let alone a precision approach being flown by the arguably best autopilot ever, capable of landing in zero-zero conditions. Unstable approach perhaps?

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  7. #7
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    That's a strange standard operating procedure. If I am in IFR (and if I was rated for IFR), I am not discontinuing a hand-flown NDB approach at 1000 ft do to poor visibility in the Piper Tomahawk. Let alone a precision approach being flown by the arguably best autopilot ever, capable of landing in zero-zero conditions. Unstable approach perhaps?
    DH is going to be around 200' there. That's nonsense.

  8. #8
    Super Moderator brianw999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
    Posts
    11,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    DH is going to be around 200' there. That's nonsense.
    Don’t you mean Minimum decision height ? You don’t have to wait until 200 feet to instigate a go around.
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !


  9. #9
    Super Moderator brianw999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
    Posts
    11,472

    Default

    View of the area concerned..... Click image for larger version. 

Name:	0B5C2836-44E4-468D-845A-579B719E2343.jpg 
Views:	48 
Size:	31.6 KB 
ID:	11806
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !


  10. #10
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brianw999 View Post
    Don’t you mean Minimum decision height ? You don’t have to wait until 200 feet to instigate a go around.
    No, but you need to have a reason to. When approaching a modern aerodrome with high-intensity approach lighting and ILS, in an A350, not having the runway in sight at 1000' doesn't seem like much of a reason.

    Having buggered the thing by ignoring the instruments and establishing yourself visually on the wrong airport seems like a very good reason though.

  11. #11
    Super Moderator brianw999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
    Posts
    11,472

    Default

    For interest, here’s a google earth view of the area.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	83D53B13-2071-4C70-BF88-24D6B925EF5B.jpg 
Views:	36 
Size:	31.6 KB 
ID:	11813Click image for larger version. 

Name:	83D53B13-2071-4C70-BF88-24D6B925EF5B.jpg 
Views:	36 
Size:	31.6 KB 
ID:	11813
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !


  12. #12
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,040

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Thought y’all just passed a big safety audit?
    Hm. I had a similar discussion with Gabriel. I don't think that India has a safety problem. But, ... as in this case, the "problem" approached on board an international flight, the domestic ATC can't do much more than.. clearing the correct VABB rwy for such a SQ-A359.

    I always try to compare it to the EDDL winter schedule 17/18. Here we also are the host for a SQ-A359, at least three times a week.

    So what's the problem. Is EDDL better when it comes to communication of airfields that mustn't be confused with EDDL?
    The A359 is brandnew, not only for SQ... But Chhatrapati Shivaji is a VERY classic airport. VABB is an airport that imho is on board in every cockpit, worldwide, isnt't it?
    A new year, for all of us. But (not only) for me, it'll be a special year. Four decades in life, still this winter. And almost ten years here on this brilliant platform.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years. Almost a decade here on this platform.

  13. #13
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Apparently we had a plane mix up right and left runways in New Yark this week.

    As in this case, the go around was accomplished in spite of underslung engines and somatographic illusions.

    And back to an early Gabie post... was this really mistaken identity, or was it maybe just an out of whack approach with a precautionary go around?
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  14. #14
    Junior Member janamparikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    CSIA, Mumbai
    Posts
    38

    Default

    I am wondering from where did the sun come in picture on that day. It was cloudy the whole day and a potential cyclone was going to hit Mumbai within the next 48 hours. Still figuring out what went wrong in the flight deck. The best way to confirm this would be ATC recordings.

  15. #15
    Junior Member janamparikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    CSIA, Mumbai
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    No, but you need to have a reason to. When approaching a modern aerodrome with high-intensity approach lighting and ILS, in an A350, not having the runway in sight at 1000' doesn't seem like much of a reason.

    Having buggered the thing by ignoring the instruments and establishing yourself visually on the wrong airport seems like a very good reason though.
    True!

  16. #16
    Junior Member janamparikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    CSIA, Mumbai
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Thought y’all just passed a big safety audit?
    The airport has nothing to do with the incedent

  17. #17
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janamparikh View Post
    The airport has nothing to do with the incedent
    I thought the incident was because the airport was next to an airport with a very close and aligned runway...so maybe the airport has something to do with the incident?
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  18. #18
    Member BoeingBobby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    MIA
    Posts
    947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    I thought the incident was because the airport was next to an airport with a very close and aligned runway...so maybe the airport has something to do with the incident?

    Oh that has never happened before! Atlas Jabara Colorado a couple of years ago in the Dream Lifter, South West a few weeks later (I don't remember where) and countless others. You are absolutely right 3WE!

  19. #19
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,040

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    I thought the incident was because the airport was next to an airport with a very close and aligned runway...so maybe the airport has something to do with the incident?
    Good afternoon, for all those jp members in Florida (post #18_)!

    And a good Tuesday for men who don't publish which intl airport is next to them... (post #17)..

    I like to second what you say. Juhu airport, that airport name almost sound like a joke, in German (if I had a red nose and a Sinterklaas cap on).

    Afaik, I am not allowed to publish the EDDL IFR sheets. But only so far, these sheets contain at least one (very) small airport

    which definitely must not be confused with EDDL... As I said before, I know almost nothin about the A359. But I hope that, if an A359 is not able to distinguish between Juhu and Sahar by itself (intelligent a/c?!), the PF, or at least the Flight Captain on board has to take care that this distinction is made correctly, inflight.

    Why do I say this. Well, VABB is such a very very very classic airport. It is used by, Canada, France, Japan, Great Britain, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, Thailand, the United States of America, Singapore, Switzerland, Germany, ...

    And I have used it so very often in the simulator. So I almost can't imagine how VABB with its almost unique combination of Terminals and rwys can be confused: the 09/27 intercontinental is crossed by the shorter 14/32, and - now my private simulator handbook is speakin - north of the 09 at the end of the rwy there is the new Terminal 2, the twys are to the left. The Terminal 1 is only domestic.

    Btw, what has just confused me for more than 2 minutes, by far not all aerial images of VABB show the orientation which you ALWAYS find on street maps: North is top!
    This especially is true for the aerial image which is used in en wikipedia:
    In the lower left corner, it is the rwy 09!

    And if you don't know it better, trust handbooks of pilots who've been there (as I do).

    PS: Does Juhu have such an (almost) unique or unique Terminal 2? I don't think so. And what do I get if I ask the B744 fmc for the VABB 09 rwy.. I'd guess that I'll get the VABB 09 rwy and not somethin else, but
    the A359 is brandnew, and I know almost nothin about it... I don't wanna sound arrogant, but.. show me the aerial image of Sahar which is used by en wikipedia, even with this quite strange orientation, and - I am not 100% sure but more than 90 % - I'll give you VABB as the result, even without the four letter code or the airport name.

    Imho, Sahar is so unique that it can be identified even without an on board flight computer, good visibility assumed.

    And who'll tell me how this very short answers are made?
    Last edited by LH-B744; 12-12-2017 at 11:54 PM. Reason: :_) .. as always.
    A new year, for all of us. But (not only) for me, it'll be a special year. Four decades in life, still this winter. And almost ten years here on this brilliant platform.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years. Almost a decade here on this platform.

  20. #20
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,040

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    Oh that has never happened before! Atlas Jabara Colorado a couple of years ago in the Dream Lifter, South West a few weeks later (I don't remember where) and countless others. You are absolutely right 3WE!
    And these are 2 examples for Sahar Intl airport? I only ask, because I don't know. I also assume that something like that has happened before.
    A new year, for all of us. But (not only) for me, it'll be a special year. Four decades in life, still this winter. And almost ten years here on this brilliant platform.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years. Almost a decade here on this platform.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •