Advanced Technology Aircraft Safety Survey Report - Australian ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL the responses to part B, question 2.4, where pilots indicated that the current level of automation did not cope well with the last-minute changes imposed by ATC. The following boxes contain examples from each category. Change of runway and/or receiving late advice of a change of runway Box B2.7a Examples of written responses relating to a change of runway and/or receiving late advice of a change of runway Arrive into Bangkok, where a request/requirement to change from runwa 2 I R to runway 2 7 C was made. The altitude was 2,000 ft and intercept from the east required a s r ight 'S' turn to capture the ILS. Some difficulty was encountered changing 11s frequency. Four runway changes arrivin into London on a B747-400 (though it would probabl have been difficult in an analogue aircra a ). The last two changes were, with localiser captured an cr the last with both localiser and glide slope captured and auto-pilot engaged. Several occasions with change of runway and hence SID or STAR in either take-off or arrival situations. On arrival to Sydney the assigned runway is given too late, as is speed control. These things need to be known before descent begins. Also I believe once a STAR is cancelled it should not be resumed. Weather at S dney included heavy rain and low cloud. ATC advised chan e of runway from 16R 11s to I6 lOCY/DME with I8 miles to run. Heavy rain and light/moderate tur ulence. Several returns on aircraft radar requiring some manoeuvring. Different runway and approach had to be programmed into FMGC and briefed. Change of runway in poor visibility at SFO from runway 28R to runway 281. I was new on the fleet and took a long time to change the /IS frequency, new route/overshoot etc. The 6747-300 was definitely faster and easier. Speed changes, and/or late speed changes where nominated by 24% of respondents, followed by STARS, and/or changes to STAR procedures ( 17.57%) as the next most difficult events (see box B2.7b). L Speed changes and/or late speed changes Box B2.7b Examples of written responses relating to speed changes and/or late speed changes last minimum speed and height restrictions. FMC can cope aircraft cannot. ATC knowledge not J 00% The B737-300 does not like to go down and slow down. ATC issue too many speed restrictions, too late. Speed reduction on descent being given after descent commenced with a restrictive altitude requirement of 8,000 ft. Some difficulty meeting this requirement as VNAV had been programmed for optimum descent profile. In San Francisco they require us to slow down, descend to a lower altitude and expect an early turn roach. On top of this a chan e in runway occurred while we were intercepting the initial workload had increased a 7 ot and the FMC took a long time to be reprogrammed, ;.e. kept popping up. Being required to maintain 250 kts for separation on descent then required to expedite descent. The two are incompatible. descent to initial approach fix by ATC, input info into FMC, descent commenced. radar instructed us to contact approach. Upon change-over told to reduce airspeed us very high on profile. 13
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AIRCRAFT SAFETY SURVEY REPORT 14 STARs and/or changes to STAR procedures Box B2.7~ Examples of wriiten responses relating to STARs and/or changes to STAR procedures STAR arrival Sydney - three changes to STAR in 70 minutes. Reloading STARs, with last minute changes due poor ATC. last minute chan es, STAR or descent speed changes especially if involving new track and or altitude crossing require 3 as STAR has to be entered into FMC and verified. Arriving into Melbourne on the new STARs [20 June 7 996) the speed control changes made, make the altitude requirement difficult. late chan es to a STAR clearance into Sydney, require a new ent in the FMGS then a confirmation from the 3 eppesen chart that the correct procedure is inserted. Txis takes both pilots to confirm the entry. Meanwhile the new STAR requirements still have to be met and you are not aware of them at this point. Arrival in Tokyo STAR was pre-programmed and we were cleared via a different arrival. This made for some heads down. On an older plane you would just track to the appropriate VOR or WPJ. To a lesser degree pilots nominated the following as also being difficult to comply with: changes to instrument approaches (7%); holding patterns (4%); unanticipated navigational requirements (4%); low altitude level-off (3%); and changes to SIDs (3%). Pilot comments Changes to instrument approaches Box B2.7d Examples of written responses relating to changes to instrument approaches Direct to VOR then told to intercept 9 DME ARC for a VOR approach [Perth). Aircrah not programmed for that approach and too difficult to program at late stage. landing New Delhi, delayed descent way above 11s GS, late clearance into lOC, very late frequency changes with no response on first contact with ATC. An instruction to discontinue an /IS a proach [LOC and GS ca tured) due conflicting traffic and then a parallel runway side step, to anot f: er 11s in marginal [IMCrweuther. Equipment not user-friendly and workload high. Changes of instrument approach of runway at very late notice. When an aircraft on final approach is 'logged on or captured' on runway 20C and glide slope and ATC requires a change of runway or side-step to a parallel runway. When fully established on an ILS approach, asked to change over to another runway at short final. Unanticipated navigational requirements Box B2.7e Examples of writkn responses relating to unanticipated navigational requirements Instruction to intercept a radial which is not expected. The only sure and safe method is to use raw data and once on the radial use the direct intercept to and then engage INAV Intercepting a VOR radial is sometimes a little difficult on the 8767. Inbound to Sydne on lEJJl STAR. At around 40 NM from Sydney, told to track to CAlGA and be at or below 7,OOJh by 20 DME. It took us a while to program CAlGA [which is not a way oint but an NDB). Also descent profile was shot to bits by re-route. [Perha s this is more a case of A P C asking us to do things which exceed quick execution in an FMC aircral)
Page 1 and 2: Department of Transport and Regiona
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A
Page 5 and 6: ATC and situational awareness Terra
Page 7 and 8: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Bureau of Air S
Page 9: asic automate ations, navigation, s
Page 12 and 13: ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AIRCRAFT SAFETY
Page 16 and 17: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL AIR TRAFFIC CON
Page 18 and 19: 70% - 60% - AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FIG
Page 20 and 21: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FIGURE B2.4 The
Page 24 and 25: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL Given direct tr
Page 26 and 27: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL By nominating s
Page 30 and 31: 9 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AIRCRAFT SAFE
Page 40 and 41: GENERAL Introduction This chapter a
Page 42 and 43: FIGURE B9.2 Have you detected any F
Page 44 and 45: accident near Cali, Colombia (12 De
Page 46 and 47: GENERAL It appears that much of the
Page 58 and 59: SITUATIONAL AWARENESS SITUATIONAL A
Page 60 and 61: SITUATIONAL AWARENESS FIGURE B4.1 I
Page 62 and 63: SITUATIONAL. AWARENESS FIGURE B4.4
Page 64 and 65: SYSTEM DESIGN Introduction Research
Page 66 and 67: FIGURE B1.2 It is easy to detect wh
Page 68 and 69: SYSTEMS DESIGN Some reported accide
Page 70 and 71: Table B5.3 'I am sometimes forced t
Page 72 and 73:
TRAINING Introduction The introduct
Page 74 and 75:
TRAINING The majority of respondent
Page 76 and 77:
FIGURE B8.5 My training has prepare
Page 78 and 79:
Provision of a FMGS for hands-on tr
Page 80 and 81:
TRAINING Im roved tech manuals, e l
Page 82 and 83:
TRAINING The depth of training, the
Page 84 and 85:
WORKLOAD WORKLOAD Introduction The
Page 86 and 87:
FIGURE 86.2 In an emergency, automa
Page 88 and 89:
Normal ops automation is very benef
Page 90 and 91:
A COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS STUDIES
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Conclusion Although this comparison
Page 98 and 99:
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AIRCRAFT SAFETY
Page 100 and 101:
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY
Page 102 and 103:
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 6. MODES
Page 104 and 105:
REFERENCES Aeronautica Civil of the
Page 106 and 107:
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE DETAILS e SURV
Page 108 and 109:
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL Questions 2.1 t
Page 110 and 111:
CREW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND SAFETY
show all

Advanced Technology Aircraft Safety Survey Report - Australian ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?