Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Emirates A388 at JFK Dec 4th 2017 at about 200 feet in turn to runway 13L
There is some question on the actual altitude. ATC alerted flightcrew which initiated go around. How low would that put the lower wingtip? (avherald.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
It all comes down to AIRMANSHIP, no matter the size of the plane. And that approach requires just that.
Not familiar with JFK, however, this sort of approach as it is described by a plane which in my view needs to set up a long approach for more reaction time should not be flown like a mid size jet. AS for ATC, I would suggest they review their procedures for super heavies in such busy airspace and in an area of potential heavy loss of life should an accident occur. Their is no excuse for treating this plane like a sports car. 200ft AGL, wow
It is not Air Traffic Control's responsibility to decide if a given aircraft is capable of flying a given approach. Aircraft are cleared to the current approach in use. If the pilot in command can't execute that approach, he's expected to say as much and another approach will be given.
Emirates may want to consider rejecting the Canarsie approach, or may want to provide additional training to their aircrews. But ATC doesn't need to "review their procedures" on this matter. Canarsie is not a new approach, and thousands of aircraft of all sizes have flown it successfully.
Don't drag ATC into this. The pilots screwed up.
Emirates may want to consider rejecting the Canarsie approach, or may want to provide additional training to their aircrews. But ATC doesn't need to "review their procedures" on this matter. Canarsie is not a new approach, and thousands of aircraft of all sizes have flown it successfully.
Don't drag ATC into this. The pilots screwed up.
To put this into perspective, 200 feet is a lot less than the wingspan on an A380.
Strange that the TWR needed to alert the crew, as if they would not have been acutely aware of all the parameters. Who do people think monitors at an airfield where there is no local ATC?? or there is a Tower, but ATC have gone home for the day...
Strange that the TWR needed to alert the crew, as if they would not have been acutely aware of all the parameters. Who do people think monitors at an airfield where there is no local ATC?? or there is a Tower, but ATC have gone home for the day...
Interesting that FlightAware has "Lost" all of the flight data for the flight. The arc traveled along with altitude and speed is not available. This is for all instances of this flight.
May be a matter of policy to pull radar data etc. for any incident or accident? I don't know if this meets the criteria for an incident (a MAP).I think that ATC requires crew explanation of the MAP which probably requires a report.
Try tail number A6-EEU or UAE5KP.
Hmmmmm