A Routine Emirates Takeoff Quickly Turns into Every Pilot's Nightmare | Terror in Johannesburg 

My first thought, exactly! Everything else might not have happened if there was just an experienced pilot on this plane sitting in the cockpit!

I would certainly hope that this near catastrophe prompted a change in policy to ALWAYS have an experienced pilot on board whether they are flying or observing. Seems like a no-brainer.

Definitely seems weird to have 2 newbies!

Yes, but that can be difficult if the aircraft type is new to the entire airline, meaning that the airline has NO pilots experienced with the new aircraft.

That is standard practice with airlines.

Yeegads, what ever happened to 'fly the airplane'...Rotate on gyro, get nose to where ya want it, keep it there, and lift off. yikes.

@@OldGlaseye-gf7si They did "fly the airplane" - and jargon aside, your list o' stuff to do wasn't what they (apparently) were taught/trained to do. And since they were current and qualified on that type I don't doubt their choices were based on what the understood were the right decisions. They just learned bad techniques and applied those poor techniques at the worst possible time. Like I said, I'm glad the lessons learned in this instance didn't come at the cost of anyone's life

The first indication should have been when they both said hello to the cabin crew, turned right and walked the length of the cabin to look for the cockpit door.

@@a24396 Too many airline guys show an amazing lack of air sense and basic flying skills. And yes, I am a pilot...20 years flying fighters in the USN...Before you say it, I took off from a concrete runway more than from an aircraft carrier.

@@pomerau 🤣🤣🤣

@RobloxianSora Nice!

a very scary thought

@RobloxianSora wtf? When?

Or landing i was on a plane that keep going on a winter, i should say i dint fly when is cold. Not anymore

We are going farming. 🥹

Our runways are 11155 and 14495ft respectively in length, flights operating in hot & high conditions (widebodies and narrowbodies) typically do not have an issue as the runway is long enough for rotation. This would be an isolated case as we haven't had any similar incidents in Joburg since the EK near disaster

I agree the dipshit pilot should have been looking out the window and not at the instruments and he would have known he wasnt lifting off quick enough, i was a pilot on the space shuttle so i know my stuff@@flywithAC2312

Indeed. Add to this, too much trust in technology. Pilots become systems managers rather than pilots.

Things have changed a lot since this, and similar incidents. Hand flying is encouraged and the notion that pilots can’t fly is, generally, wrong.

the passengers went through the runway beacons

Sit back and enjoy the movie!

Prob a little poo in the shorts :)

That really Depends.

@@georgeedward1226 Good pun, lol! I'm glad they could land on whatever remaining tires they had or they might have skidded off the other end of the runway.

You are very right. They hate bad publicity. A similar one like this was EK407 from Melbourne involving an A340-500 where Pilot entered wrong takeoff data. He entered 262,000 instead of 362,000. Wrong takeoff calculation by FMS, little power on takeoff

Exciting 😂😂😂😂. More like a horror ride!

yes thats because they only fly boeing planes now

Apart from the largest fleet of A380s of any carrier ​@@petercarter2925

I presume you're an American without a passport. Just joking.

No joke it's true. If I had want or reason to travel outside of here, I'd see you on the next flight. Come stay with you for a bit? Peace.@@Tafa-Mapa

stop flying 15 years ago and let my son fly while i hang in the back with the grand kids--never have loved flying so much since i do that.....had as many as 3 of em sleeping on me on the couch...heaven

Facts

Agreed, but wow is a stupid comment!

They had plenty of experience with other types of Airbus with the same type rating requirement. It’s no different to current EK pilots flipping between the 77L and 77W.

@@rossbrown6641Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Unless it is something that is actually required for the runway, like the actual surface itself, almost everything else can be listed as being failed. They took out some of the localiser antenna. The airport just lists (NOTAM) the LOC, and therefore ILS, as being unserviceable. Aircraft can still land on the runway, they just need to fly a different approach.

@@EdOeuna Yeah, reminds me of Air Canada 769 at San Fran.

Actually the A340 was part of Emirates' initial fleet..they retired most aircraft in their fleet and only kept Boeing 777s and A380s in service..they even once had A330s, A310s and other similar aircraft

Doing takeoffs constantly at TOGA thrust also has its risks. You could end up with more engines blowing up in flight like that Southwest airlines one. And having an engine failure during takeoff at TOGA means more thrust to push you off the runway if you don’t counter it in time

@@tomstravels520 Takeoff/go around thrust isn't necessary, but much more than minimum thrust is appropriate. According to your logic, takeoff/go around thrust is never a good idea.

@@perniciouspete4986 I said using TOGA thrust CONSTANTLY. I never said using it is bad. It just comes with its own risks and if you don’t need to use it then reduce the risks by not using it. Do you red line your cars engine all the time when you accelerate?

@@perniciouspete4986airlines don’t calculate minimum thrust. The aircraft has to be able to more than cope with an engine failure at v1, taking into consideration pressure altitude on the day and all obstacles in the area.

They did. Both were experienced on A340’s and A330’s. It’s a common rating.

Re: The Air France Airbus crash at the European Air Show several years ago.

Increase engine life and reduce maintenance costs

@@tomstravels520 money over safety then....figures

@@michaeldowd8422 who says it’s over safety? Did you pay attention to the video? The computer calculated they had enough room to takeoff with reduced thrust and they did. It was the pilot who made a mistake by messing up the rotation. Full thrust was not required to get the plane airborne. Using full thrust at takeoff can come with its own potential safety issues including increased likelihood of another SWA1380 incident. If they used TOGA all the time…..guess who is paying for the maintenance…..yeah…you as the paying customer

@@tomstravels520 at full power, the pilots error would not have led to the aircraft being damaged, did you study physics at school??

@@michaeldowd8422 if the pilot had done the rotation correctly it also would not have led to damage. Did you go to flight school? There is absolutely nothing wrong with using reduced power takeoff if your performance calculator says you can do it. It’s done all the time on probably 80-90% of takeoffs

theres not enough info on the damage to the flaps etc

Likely the pressure hull was compromised by tire debris and flaps would not stow properly. So, no. They would have to fly low and slow and run out of fuel.

They couldnt know the extend of the damage. They did the safe thing and returned to the airport. If they would have made it to their destination or not is something that has to be tried out, with possible catastrophe as an answer.

It was enough to take off. The pilot didn’t rotate correctly. Did you actually pay attention to the video?

they only had 28% throttle he pushed the toga button too slowly

@@petercarter2925 you don’t push a TOGA button on Airbus. You just push the levers to the FLX or TOGA detent

OMG. Well OK. LOL.

Someone sitting behind a desk who hasn't flown an airplane ever 😮😮😮

It’s a common rating, so no different to Emirates pilots swapping between the 77L and 77W.

I’m not a pilot, but I took that to mean he should’ve increased it instead of keeping in at 9°, as he was too scared about a tail strike

@@hachimaru295no, he should have pulled back to the 9 degree mark then held the sidestick. What he did was hold it a 9 degrees then as the nose lifted up he slowly lowered the sidestick so the mark stayed at 9 degrees causing the nose to drop

@@tomstravels520 Exactly. I still can’t wrap my head around how an Airbus pilot in the left seat could just let the stick go back to neutral on rotation.

@@tomstravels520 thanks for the update !

@@tomstravels520 the narrative failed me regarding stick order vs pitch command. 9° of back stick obviously didn't give 9° of rotation, but I watched that part 3 times and it never got clearer.

What if the aircraft type is new to the entire airline, meaning that the airline has NO pilots experienced with the new aircraft?

Then you have familiarisation flights without passengers and cabin crew, Not exactly rocket science. The error was doing familiarisation solely on sims.@@timonsolus

Emirates are about to receive A350’s and 777X’s. None of their pilots will have experience with these aircraft types beyond the type rating which will be from the sim. Clearly EK can employ pilots from other airlines, for their experience, but there will be a steep learning curve for all those pilots.

ive always found 30 mins max in the simulator is enough for me to get the hang of it, i have buried any in the ground yet@@EdOeuna

$$$$$ - identify cost savings. Money is the root cause of many issues in the world. In this instance it backfired because of the expense to repair the airplane and damage to the runway.

Even when written out in black and white, there is still some interpretation and nuance required. They do attempt to precisely follow the exact guidelines written, but in this instance the 'tip' was not from the documentation, but was a 'technique' (those in the know will roll their eyes at this familiar term) given to him - NOT official instructions. BUT, it would have come from experience derived from fellow pilots, although he didn't get the full understanding (keeping the SSI at 9 degress in relation to the horizon as opposed to the aircraft nose I'm guessing). It is impossible to just read the manual and then fly the aircraft perfectly - you HAVE to take instruction from instructors, pick up experience gained by fellow crewmembers etc. What may seem like a glaring error to those not in the industry, is normal practice for pilots around the world. You talk, you share experiences, you share tips. In this case, a combination of environmental factors put an already feeble aircraft into a critical performance zone, and an incorrect understanding of technique pushed the situation over the edge.

Aircraft manufacturers also provide recommendations for how to operate the aircraft, the airlines incorporate their own SOPs with the manufacturers recommendations. All manuals have to be approved by the national regulatory body.

Yes, a favorite saying of mine: pin it, to win it! Works every time!

There has been a long running concern that relying on technology has drawn down basic piloting skills or put another way, what to do when things go wrong. I think that this is less of a problem with former military pilots.

Do you red line your car's engine every time you accelerate even when you don't need to?

@@tomstravels520, Good point but to clarify, this specific flight and the conditions they were facing perhaps wide open throttle would have been tempting. And the engine/redline thing - can’t say because we ditched ICE vehicles for EVs years ago so can’t relate.

There are different levels of thrust reduction available to the crew, but SOP is usually to reduce thrust as much as possible to get the best life out of the engines. When I was checked out on planes and cut loose, I always chose a thrust reduction that was approximately half way between full thrust and full reduced thrust until I felt comfortable with the handling and performance characteristics of the plane. There's no way you can feel that right out of the sim, so I used the word safety when question about it....the conversation was pretty short after that.....33 yrs in and Retired now.

As the plane pitched up he kept the sidestick marker at the 9 degree mark……which means lowering the sidestick and therefore dropping the nose

@@tomstravels520 Oh no.

@@tomstravels520 I am not a pilot but that seems pretty elemental to me.

I'm from Colombia, North of South America 😮

how many cases precisely?????

The co-pilot should have pulled back on his own side stick himself, instead of only warning the captain.

@@timonsolusno, only one person flies the plane at a time. If both sidesticks were moved back that would add the 2 inputs together and likely result in aircraft pitch up hard and tailstrike.

@@tomstravels520 : No, the Airbus computer averages out the inputs from the pilot’s and co-pilot’s sticks.

@@timonsolus it doesn’t average. If that was true then both sidesticks half back would mean a combined half back input…..but it doesn’t. They are summed so both half back means an input of full back. If one is full left and other is fully right this adds to 0 input. “The system adds the signals of both pilots algebraically, the total is limited to the signal that would result from the maximum deflection of a single sidestick”

@@tomstravels520 : Sorry, I don’t believe you.

113

Correct.

Might depend which sim he’s using. This one is P3D and the black box A340-30 which isn’t the best

@@tomstravels520 but p3d used to be so good until Microsoft flight simulator came…

I think the A340s have weaker engines compared to other aircraft, which is part of why they have 4. IDK why Airbus never upgraded them to actually good ones....

@@CMDRFandragon only the A340-200/-300's with the CFM56 engines. The RR Trent engines for the -500/-600 had way more power

They had plenty of experience in A340’s and A330’s.

What about Australia/New Zealand?

Any of the commonwealth is perfectly fine. Although... I don't really have a reason to go to Australia or NZ.@@tomstravels520

They hit the top of trees before crashing...😮😮😮 Bad cargo airline with even worse flying practices in Colombia, South America 👎👎👎

Because it wasn't required. If the pilot had done the rotation correctly the plane would have lifted off no issue.