Emirates 777 Destroyed

I lived in Dubai for three years and flew Emirates frequently. They are still my favorite airline. A friend of mine is a 777 captain for them, knows the captain, and suggested that this might be a botched go-around. I'd still fly Emirates of course.

arnoha said:
Huh. I've flown that flight before (as a passenger, of course). I think I may have flown that exact aircraft, but I can't find the tail to verify. Weird.
Click to expand...

A6-EMW
 
DesertNomad said:
I lived in Dubai for three years and flew Emirates frequently. They are still my favorite airline. A friend of mine is a 777 captain for them, knows the captain, and suggested that this might be a botched go-around. I'd still fly Emirates of course.
Click to expand...

It's insane how much nicer their cabins are than US carriers.
 
:yeahthat:


You have to recognise who actually is "the government" in these Persian Gulf states. The Ruling Families own the majority of the economies in each of these Kingdoms or Emirates. Everything from the petroleum companies to refining, petrochemicals, aluminum smelters, shipyards, container terminals, airports, airlines and much of the shiny glass skylines are owned by The Families. (their favored crony merchant family friends own pretty well the rest of the economy such as the auto dealer franchises and parts of the construction and building materials sectors).

The King (or the Emir) and the most senior princes have their own jets (up to and including an A380 in at least one instance), but the majority of the Ruling Family sheikhs and their families travel on the national carriers. And that is one of the reasons the First Class accommodations, service levels and lounges of these carriers are so over the top.
 
Last edited:
ktup-flyer said:
It's insane how much nicer their cabins are than US carriers.
Click to expand...
It's pretty easy to be better when you're subsidized by your government in one form or another. There's absolutely no way we (North American carriers) can compete with that. So if you want to make the Arabs richer - knock yourself out.
 
Art VanDelay said:
It's pretty easy to be better when you're subsidized by your government in one form or another. There's absolutely no way we (North American carriers) can compete with that. So if you want to make the Arabs richer - knock yourself out.
Click to expand...
@Art VanDelay, I'm actually on your (our) side on this issue, but in my opinion, and others I've talked to, it's not the nicer cabin that makes flying on some of the ME3 or Asian carriers a better experience. It's the service, which costs nothing. I deadhead a lot for work. A bunch. I'm a United 1K and have been for years. In addition to my Star Alliance flying, I do a lot of flying on other carriers, whether it be Emirates, Cathay, Singapore, China Southern, Air France, etc. You name it, if it's a major national airline, I've probably flown on them multiple times over the past few years. The thing that stands out to me is how professional all the international inflight crews are to the customers. This is in stark contrast to what I've seen US FAs do while on our own airlines. I've overheard conversations in the galleys (loud enough to be heard in the seating area) that shocked me (and I don't shock easily). Whether it's catty FA in-fighting, or whatever, it's unprofessional. On top of that just the service and attention that you receive from most of the international in-flight crews is head and shoulders above what I get from our domestic carriers. Water glass empty, boom... do you want me to refill that for you? Would you like another glass of wine, Mr. Sluggo? Can I get you another pillow, another snack, whatever. On the US carriers after the service, you're lucky if you see that flight attendant again for hours. It that attention to the customer that attracts people to some of the foreign airlines over ours. And that service comes at zero cost and has nothing to do with subsidies. Just retraining an emphasis on the customer and not crushing candy in the galley with the curtain drawn. And I don't want to paint with too broad a brush, either. I've had some outstanding service on United. Some flight attendants "get it" and truly a pleasure to be in their care. Unfortunately, those times seem to be the exception rather than the rule on our US flag carriers.

But I am pulling for you guys. I really am. I'd love to see the day when United, Delta and American are thought to be the same calibre as Emirates, Cathay, and Singapore Airlines. You guys can do it... I know you can.
 
I know this is America and people are free to exercise their vocational choices as they wish, but wouldn't this whole FA crappy attitude be a function of yet another case of "sorry Robert, $5 doesn't buy my unidivided attention"? There's a lot of disheartened laborers in America on the basis of salary/wage. A lot of people out there who feel undercompensated. I think most would certainly agree that the customer shouldn't feel the brunt of you feeling you're undercompensated, but perhaps that's just the way it is. It certainly seems to be the case the low hourly wage service economy jobs.

Just like people suggest one shouldn't expect to make an adult career out of fast food hourly work (though we know there are institutional reasons why that working poverty exists aside from the simpleton lazyness canard), would it be then fair to suggest FAs shouldn't attempt to make a career out of that line of work? Perhaps more reserved for young and attentive workers with a desire to have their travel subsidized in young, dependent-less age (never mind the ones who go into it pointedly to snag a six figure earner spouse) , but with otherwise no expectation to raise a family or retire from said job?

I truly hope that's the genesis for the attitude, because if it's the stereotypical "Westerners feel servitude/manual labor is beneath them" well, we got some waking up to do as a Country in the post-globalism dystopia of present times....
 
Well I appreciate your good words but the flight attendant issue is just as equally tough to crack. Their girls (and I do mean girls) are usually on a two or three year contract. After the contract is up - boom that's it - they're done being flight attendants. A very few may be kept on in management or training Dept.

If we tried that here we'd get sued for age discrimination. I think we should put our flight attendants on a pay scale that pays less and less with each passing year !
 
Ok, in that case I'll raise British Airways as a counter example. Same labor restrictions - much better service than any of the US carriers.
 
GRG55 said:
LOL. You should see the young female expatriate flight attendants try to get the Arab men to turn their damn cell phones off before pushback.
Click to expand...
Or trying to get pax to stay in their seats during taxi.

Airlines in that part of the works are a very different experience.
 
Like Sluggo, I'm always very unimpressed by the courtesy and service provided flight attendants on international flights, for US carriers.

Example recent experience, on Art's carrier: when asked which dinner do I want, I am scolded for not listening to her as she served others in the rows ahead of me, causing her the displeasure of repeating her 6-second spiel regarding the three unappetizing offerings.

Hopefully FAs of US carriers will get the job done in an evacuation. Their performance otherwise is lackluster.
 
Saw this on another site.

Emirates B777 crash was accident waiting to happen
  1. BYRON BAILEY The 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 auto throttle.

    It is the result of the imperfect interaction of the pilots with supposedly fail safe 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 wide body 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 meters) 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 practiced 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-around after a bounce; we practice go-rounds from a low approach attitude.

    Modern jets have auto throttles as part of the auto flight system. They have small TOGA (take off/go-around) switches on the throttle levers they click to command auto throttles to control the engines, to deliver the required thrust. Pilots do not physically push up the levers by themselves but trust the auto throttles 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 auto flight system computers that the aircraft was landed. So when the pilot clicked TOGA, the computers — without him initially realizing 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 realizing 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 realize the engines are still at idle, as they had been since the auto throttles retarded them at approximately 30 feet during the landing flare. There is a shock of realization and frantic manual pushing of levers to override the auto throttle 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 auto flight 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 auto throttle 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.
 
Interesting. Would the bounce also have deployed the flight spoilers? And activated the autobrake?
 
Art VanDelay said:
It's pretty easy to be better when you're subsidized by your government in one form or another. There's absolutely no way we (North American carriers) can compete with that. So if you want to make the Arabs richer - knock yourself out.
Click to expand...

Chapter 11 is just another form of government subsidy - something that every major international US carrier has experience with. US based carriers have quite a bit of experience on unfair business practices (just check out Smisek and the Governor's flight...).
 
mtuomi said:
Chapter 11 is just another form of government subsidy - something that every major international US carrier has experience with. US based carriers have quite a bit of experience on unfair business practices (just check out Smisek and the Governor's flight...).
Click to expand...
The benefits of Chapter 11 aren't even close to the level of money that the governments of Middle East carriers POUR into their respective airlines. Educate yourself ;
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8294892
 
So that's what I've been doing wrong with Powerball. I need to go crash an airplane!

Only two questions.

How much is Powerball this week?

Where can I rent an airplane with airbags?


:eek:o_O
 
mtuomi said:
So you're allowed a bit, but not too much? Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...
Well for starters let's look at the government freebies Etihad gets ;
501 million in Airport fee exemptions, 751 million in government "grants", 6.6 Billion in loans and shareholder advances with NO repayment obligations !

How about Emirates - 2.4 Billion in debt assumed by The Dubai government on behalf of Emirates for fuel hedging losses as well as 2.3 Billion in government subsidized airport infrastructure.

How about Qatar - 452 million in FREE land, 616 million in airport fee exemptions and 6.8 Billion with a B in reduced interest payments from government loan guarantees !

So yeah we do get some help from bankruptcy but it ain't even close to what they get - do the math. That's not competition between companies it's like companies competing against national treasuries !
 
The airlines in the Middle East are following a similar pattern to what still exists in Europe (although it's starting to break down) - regulated local market, government owned & funded national carriers. Every little nation in Europe had to have flag carrier - Sabena in Belgium, Swissair, TAP Portugal, the list goes on. Some are gone, some still around in various alliance or semi-privatised form.

The Middle East will follow the same evolution. When the financial crisis rolled around to the Middle East, Emirates (the Dubai national carrier) had to be bailed out by the Abu Dhabi Ruling Family (which funds Etihad as its national carrier and used it as the vehicle to funnel money into Emirates).

The subsidies are legendary as the previous post lists. I have flown them all at one time or another while living in the region, but tried not to make a habit of it. Any region where influence and widespread institutionalised corruption are part of the DNA cannot possibly prevent their airlines from associated 'genetic defects'. New equipment, fabulous business and first class lounges, well trained cabin staff. But the qualified expat pilots are guest workers, and are expected to behave accordingly. BA, Lufthansa, KLM and Cathay were my preferred alternatives all 8 years I was there.
 
Art VanDelay said:
How about Emirates - 2.4 Billion in debt assumed by The Dubai government on behalf of Emirates for fuel hedging losses as well as 2.3 Billion in government subsidized airport infrastructure.
Click to expand...

That represents about a month worth of tourism dollars for Dubai.

Dubai has a managed economy, where it's not important that one particular sector makes money as long as the overall economy is prosperous. The obviously put more value in an airline than just the direct revenue and taxes that they can get out of it.

Dubai is very actively promoting tourism, where the U.S has become openly hostile towards it. It's now easier for people to visit Dubai than before 9/11, where it has basically practically impossible to visit the U.S. if you're not from a visa waiver country. Now most of my family and friends I had back home can't visit me here. So what do we do instead? Everybody just flies to Dubai and we visit halfway.

Sorry, but the U.S. made their bed on this one. Now lie in it.
 
Last edited:
SkyDog58 said:
I could not see spending any of my money to visit Dubai or anywhere in the mid east.
Click to expand...

As long as you leave all of your values and morals at home, and go in there having no respect for people with darker skin-tones, it's fantastic!

In all seriousness - a lot of people in the U.S. live in far worse conditions than the pseudo-slave labor in Dubai. It's just not so overtly obvious around gender and racial lines.
 
deonb said:
As long as you leave all of your values and morals at home, and go in there having no respect for people with darker skin-tones, it's fantastic!

In all seriousness - a lot of people in the U.S. live in far worse conditions than the pseudo-slave labor in Dubai. It's just not so overtly obvious around gender and racial lines.
Click to expand...
Yeah and in all seriousness who was the last country in that region to still have legalized slavery - as in you could actually "buy" another human being ? Answer - the United Arab Emirates 1964 !!!! Saudi Arabia 1962 !!!!!

Now keep in mind those dates are the years in which slavery was considered "abolished". Not criminalized just abolished......wow talk about your "modern" countries !
 
Anybody know how that ol' Kenny Tan's 777 type training is going?
 
Art VanDelay said:
Yeah and in all seriousness who was the last country in that region to still have legalized slavery - as in you could actually "buy" another human being ? Answer - the United Arab Emirates 1964 !!!! Saudi Arabia 1962 !!!!!

Now keep in mind those dates are the years in which slavery was considered "abolished". Not criminalized just abolished......wow talk about your "modern" countries !
Click to expand...

Oh, I wouldn't say it was really abolished back then. Maybe employers didn't have the right to sell employees anymore, but employees still weren't allowed to leave their employer.

I dated a Filipino girl in Dubai in the late 90's and she and her coworkers were still getting physically locked up every night by their employer. They had no right to leave their employer, to go look for other work, or to return back home. Also weren't allowed to have social interaction with other people because employers didn't want them to get hooked up and married and then they have to go find a new employee.

And this was completely supported by Dubai labor law. Even if you had the airfare to go home, you still needed an employer sponsored "exit visa" to leave the country, so if you were to run away and show up at the airport to try and return home without it, you wouldn't be able to get on the plane.

I believe they abolished the exit visa process since then, but employers can still hang onto your passport, which serves the same purpose.

On the other hand, your white boy over here could come and go as he pleased. I wasn't even aware this was happening for years and that checks like that got performed. They just waved me through. And at our level, we switched employers all the time, like it was a completely normal thing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top