If engine 1 is the only one to fail, like I assume how it is in this situation, it is actually very dangerous to abort at this high speed. Of course you have to abort if an engine failure occurs before V1, but I would consider it more dangerous to abort than to just continue flying the pattern for a normal landing, because of the immense risk of brake fires and fire in general. Well, on the other hand the trucks are rolling to your position, but just looking at one of the fire tests on an A340, the competence to get the fire out becomes clear. :) Sorry for bad english and greetings from Germany!
If just one out of four engines fail, I would hope that happens after V1, so I can climb and back with more moderate brake force and hopefully the tires wouldn't be blown. In the case of this video, I am afraid that passengers will stay at the airport for a very long time until the company to bring another plane.
It depends: *An* engine failure? Near V1. V1 is the decision speed where you "pull the thrust levers back, apply brakes and extend speedbrakes" or "commit and take your mitts off of the thrust levers". If an engine completely fails just after V1 but the other(s) is (or "are", in the case of 3+ engined aircraft) fine, you've (already) committed to drag the failed engine into the air with you. Continue your acceleration to V2, rotate, get the aircraft clean as required, declare an emergency, get 'er under the maximum landing weight, bring it back around and land. A failure very near V1 means you, as a crew, need to know whether or not to drop the anchors. Miscommunication or failures in flight planning result in a runway excursion or other nastiness. There's a reason why the AFMs for modern jet aircraft have "accelerate-stop distance" tables. And the distance required to take off with a single engine failure after V1 at various takeoff weights is something tested as part of the type certification process and conditions at the field are factored in to what your V2 point is. V2 is the point where you, as a "complex multi-engined aircraft" pilot can safely climb *with one engine out*. *Multiple* engine failures? After V1: Prepare to suffer a runway excursion. *Hope* that you don't exceed the runway and stopway both. Near/at/just before V1? That's obvious: pull the thrust levers, drop anchor, and be ready to coordinate with ops and rescue because of the brake heat. V1 is established by takeoff weight, runway condition, air density, etc.
ATC: Uh, we're just doing the paperwork here. Do you know how many tires blew? Pilot: Thur. ATC: Uh.... Sorry, didn't quite catch that. Say again? Pilot: Thur. One, two, thur.
at 8:25 the pilot says the crew is disembarking on the last bus, not the last slide. If the emergency were severe enough to deploy the slides they wouldn't ask atc for permission.
Would it be too much trouble to add the description you put at the beginning of the video to the video description? Sometimes there are details I want to refer to while I'm watching the video.
And it would stop the endless debate of make the intro longer/don't - just put basic title/very general description in the intro - and the details in the description. +1
I was thinking the same thing. They just seem so professional. All experienced South African pilots have it, I was speaking to a black air force pilot the other day and he has that accent too. I love it.
nice video, thanks! I think crew should had directly informed ground for fire assistence for the first minutes after rejected take-off. Take-off rejection @high energy is always a high risk for hot brakes and then deflating or even exploding tires @7:57 - one, two. thii :)
Lets see, hot brakes, he's gonna need new disc rotors and pads as well as a new head gasket for the engine. Your videos are absolutely the best using all the graphics and visuals that you do. No one can come close to what you do. Thank you so much, and yes I subscribed a long time ago.
@@wingnutzster I'm 99% sure it's a joke, as he added a freaking head gasket to it, something only relevant on piston engines and similar ones, not jets.
Surely the pilots reacted correctly for aborting the takeoff. Situation could be worse and more complicated if they continue the takeoff as they would be faced to more variables and need to spend much more time to fly to a high altitude to dump fuel, wasting money, causing harm to the environment and probably making passengers even more impatient and annoyed. Salute to the pilots for making professional and accurate decision!
True. I investigated them thoroughlly for a friend who was considering using them and they were very transparent about everything and their safety record over time was superb. They also installed cockpit door mods BEFORE it was mandatory.
'What was de nature of the emergency?' Springbok gives answer. 2 seconds later: 'What was the nature of the emergency?' Springbok confused as fuck lol.
Good thing, ATC insisted on airport policy and sent the trucks out despite the pilot repeatedly rejecting assistance. Sure, it probably wouldn't be catastrophic if the tires were to slowly deflate during taxi, but it's not ideal either...
Angel33Demon666 are you really that bothered by it though? If it's enough for you to turn your nose up at a video/channel, go and watch another one. The guy works super hard to bring you these videos, hell he did the Flybe landing gear collapse complete with transcript, radar info and two separate camera angles within a day of the incident. Personally I think this is unfair criticism
***** That's simple solution, but you maybe don't realise some effects it can have on the websites, that rely on revenue from ads. Even if you have ad blocker, I think it's good to turn it off at least on some channels/websites to pay back at least something for the free content, they are giving us.
V1 is the fasted speed where the plane can barely stop before the end of the runway, right? How come they were able to stop so much earlier, so that they could even take an earlier ramp to the taxiway? And as they apparently wouldn't have needed to brake as hard as possible, why did they do it anyways?
V1 has a degree of error added to make sure that the plane will stop before the runway over run area with brakes only. Add thrust reverse and a plane at V1 can stop well before the over run area.
@@DERP_Squad Also, they were only "near" V1. Once the Aircraft picks up speed, reaction time matters down to the seconds. Aborting takeoff even 1-2 seconds earlier can result in a massive different in how much braking-distance you need.
My dad was a fire fighter with South african air force he said that typically south african runways are shorter so when our guys fly internationally they have much more maneuverability than your typical pilot.
MrRubenjwz It seems they did. They mention slides at 8:25. You don't deploy slides unless you are evacuating. Even if he misspoke, they mentioned that the passengers did disembark, because again, he said they can't taxi.
aah yeah youre right, missed that... in that case in my oppinion its a weird dissicion. i would wait until there are stairs and busses to pick up the passengers.
MrRubenjwz I agree, it seems weird. Maybe he misspoke and they just disembarked over stairs. Evacuation carries significant risks of injury, so captains are reluctant to order it unless it's absolutely necessary.
I think it's an error from VASA. I believe he says "on the last bus" or something like that. His accent is very thick. Also there was definitely no evacuation otherwise it would have been on the news and on avherald.
Ground means the Air Traffic Controller on the Tower's Ground frequency and Ops means the Airport Operations Crew in charge of the general workings of an airport.
I feel sorry for the SSA pilot... He had to repeat himself so many times. I usually have trouble understanding the pilots and sometimes the ATC. But not this guy. Understood h just fine
SAA flies over my home on approach to KIAD at around 6am. Does anyone have intimate knowledge of the SAA flights to KIAD? I ask because it's flight path is irregular from any other approach to KIAD than any other, domestic or international. All approaches are done via HYPER5 one town over but SAA is the only one that cuts short over my home at a low altitude on final. I assumed it was due to low fuel but would like more information is possible as to why they cut across shorter than anyone else. Their A346, a343 and a330 all do it.
It may be due to the completely different route, probably one of the few flights from down deep South. Pretty long flight as well, so fuel may be a consideration as you mentioned.
+Jock Noel thanks for the reply, yeah fuel seems to be the only logical reason. Even the one from Dakar does the same thing. I filmed the one time the SAA a340 was directly overhead and extremely low.
It doesn't really matter because the tires are gonna deflate anyway. It will only cooldown quicker, also we don't know if there was any traffic nearby. Overall the pilots did a good job reacting quick to the engine failure.
+VASAviation (goddamn broken youtube).. I was just asking and wondering. The communication just seemed off even though everybody seemed to be a native english speaker.
Because in 83 years of operations they've had 13 crashes with the last crash in 1987? SAA have one of the best flying records in the business. Think about that, how many airlines can claim their last major incident was 30 years ago?
Seems like it would have more to do with the engines than the airframe... do they all use the same CFM engines, or can they be outfitted with various engines?
A320 Air France crash was not beacause of the A/P but because the pilot relied too much on the flight envelope protection keeping the aircraft flying on the edge of stall and descended so low that recovery was not possible because initiated too late. A320 Air Inter crashed because of pilots being unfamiliar with the FPA mode and the display window, allowing the plane to descent at a -3300ft/min descent rate and failing to monitor and detect it, and because Air Inter didn't have GPWS installed (it was not yet mandatory). A330 test flight crashed in part because the crew was too slow to react to an aircraft low-energy state that developed because of a poor briefing, inappropriate rotation technique and lack of basic parameters monitoring during a challenging test flight at the edge of the flight envelope (CG at aft limit). A340 crashed on the ground against a wall because a technician did a full power test without chocks which exceeded the capability of the brakes, and instead of cutting the trust, he just tried to slam the brakes. A330 Air France stalled because of poor crew training and probably fatigue. This situation was perfectly manageable even though the pitot tubes were prone to icing (they failed for less than a minute). This problem is inherent to all pitot probes and can be found on other aircraft, as these specific probes were not manufactured by Airbus, but by a company that works with several manufacturers. Of course these were not the only factors at play here. But the only thing you're showing off here is your ignorance. PS: I have undergone flight training on both the A320 and the B737. Saying that one is less safe than the other makes no sense.
Allot of the commercial SA pilots are former military pilots and historically SA air bases have had shoter runways than their American counter parts and even if not they are trained to use less of the runway if they can get away with it so that they can use other runways without having difficulty. That experience helped the pilot to keep the bird out of the sky and save time and money by not dumping fuel when returning to have the engine inspected and replaced by maintenance.
![[REAL ATC] United B777 BIRD STRIKE + GRASS FIRE at Denver! | Part 1](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Xd0qjF2zYEM/mqdefault.jpg)
![[REAL ATC] United B777 BIRD STRIKE + GRASS FIRE at Denver! | Part 1](/img/tr.png)
![[REAL ATC] United B739 STRIKES A FLOCK OF GEESE + ENGINE FIRE!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/czWLO_u8NFY/mqdefault.jpg)
**Random Question**
Which do you consider more dangerous; Engine failure near V1 or Engine failure just after V1?
Let me know your opinion and why :D
VASAviation - just after V1, no way to abort and you have to fly with that problem until you have enough space to return
VASAviation - After V1, not possible to stop on the runway, so you have to climb and then turning back to the airport...
If engine 1 is the only one to fail, like I assume how it is in this situation, it is actually very dangerous to abort at this high speed. Of course you have to abort if an engine failure occurs before V1, but I would consider it more dangerous to abort than to just continue flying the pattern for a normal landing, because of the immense risk of brake fires and fire in general. Well, on the other hand the trucks are rolling to your position, but just looking at one of the fire tests on an A340, the competence to get the fire out becomes clear. :)
Sorry for bad english and greetings from Germany!
If just one out of four engines fail, I would hope that happens after V1, so I can climb and back with more moderate brake force and hopefully the tires wouldn't be blown. In the case of this video, I am afraid that passengers will stay at the airport for a very long time until the company to bring another plane.
It depends:
*An* engine failure? Near V1. V1 is the decision speed where you "pull the thrust levers back, apply brakes and extend speedbrakes" or "commit and take your mitts off of the thrust levers". If an engine completely fails just after V1 but the other(s) is (or "are", in the case of 3+ engined aircraft) fine, you've (already) committed to drag the failed engine into the air with you. Continue your acceleration to V2, rotate, get the aircraft clean as required, declare an emergency, get 'er under the maximum landing weight, bring it back around and land. A failure very near V1 means you, as a crew, need to know whether or not to drop the anchors. Miscommunication or failures in flight planning result in a runway excursion or other nastiness. There's a reason why the AFMs for modern jet aircraft have "accelerate-stop distance" tables. And the distance required to take off with a single engine failure after V1 at various takeoff weights is something tested as part of the type certification process and conditions at the field are factored in to what your V2 point is. V2 is the point where you, as a "complex multi-engined aircraft" pilot can safely climb *with one engine out*.
*Multiple* engine failures? After V1: Prepare to suffer a runway excursion. *Hope* that you don't exceed the runway and stopway both. Near/at/just before V1? That's obvious: pull the thrust levers, drop anchor, and be ready to coordinate with ops and rescue because of the brake heat. V1 is established by takeoff weight, runway condition, air density, etc.
ATC: Uh, we're just doing the paperwork here. Do you know how many tires blew?
Pilot: Thur.
ATC: Uh.... Sorry, didn't quite catch that. Say again?
Pilot: Thur. One, two, thur.
Love SAA pilots, always professional and courteous on the freq.
We (South Africans) are usually quite polite in general, it's pretty much how we are brought up. Very Afrikaans and English style
Ah we just leave the aircraft on the taxiway and go back to the hotel haha xD
Great video!
at 8:25 the pilot says the crew is disembarking on the last bus, not the last slide. If the emergency were severe enough to deploy the slides they wouldn't ask atc for permission.
Would it be too much trouble to add the description you put at the beginning of the video to the video description? Sometimes there are details I want to refer to while I'm watching the video.
And it would stop the endless debate of make the intro longer/don't - just put basic title/very general description in the intro - and the details in the description. +1
Ari Feinberg it cuts down on his views
Just use your cell phone to take screen shot pictures and refer to them while you roll through the video!
I just love the pilot's accent, always have. Thanks for the video.
Katongo Nkamba South African!
Jock Nel yes, the accent of the Afrikaans speaking South Africans.
I was thinking the same thing. They just seem so professional. All experienced South African pilots have it, I was speaking to a black air force pilot the other day and he has that accent too. I love it.
nice video, thanks!
I think crew should had directly informed ground for fire assistence for the first minutes after rejected take-off. Take-off rejection @high energy is always a high risk for hot brakes and then deflating or even exploding tires
@7:57 - one, two. thii :)
Lets see, hot brakes, he's gonna need new disc rotors and pads as well as a new head gasket for the engine. Your videos are absolutely the best using all the graphics and visuals that you do. No one can come close to what you do. Thank you so much, and yes I subscribed a long time ago.
Unless you were on the ground I don’t see how you can diagnose the issue and prescribe the replacement parts necessary with respect.
@@wingnutzster I'm 99% sure it's a joke, as he added a freaking head gasket to it, something only relevant on piston engines and similar ones, not jets.
Had this happen to me as a passenger aboard a 747 out of Honolulu bound for Fiji. It was most exciting - ended safely but 1/10 would not do it again!
South African accents are awesome
, it's quite funny what SIRI does with my South African twang , it can't quite get it sometimes ,
commodore665 Can't you talk to Siri in afrikaans? haha
I may have to go into the settings to try and change the language .
commodore665 So gaan jy dit probeer? haha
요하너ᅵ스ᄋ
Ek sal probeer
Surely the pilots reacted correctly for aborting the takeoff. Situation could be worse and more complicated if they continue the takeoff as they would be faced to more variables and need to spend much more time to fly to a high altitude to dump fuel, wasting money, causing harm to the environment and probably making passengers even more impatient and annoyed. Salute to the pilots for making professional and accurate decision!
AlvinTED SAA pilots are some of the best trained airline pilots. South Africa has an incredibly safe flying record.
AlvinTED I think he did the right thing to in aborting
True. I investigated them thoroughlly for a friend who was considering using them and they were very transparent about everything and their safety record over time was superb. They also installed cockpit door mods BEFORE it was mandatory.
Can't get enough of these! Keep it up man!
Thanks! :)
Good call by ground control.
'What was de nature of the emergency?' Springbok gives answer. 2 seconds later: 'What was the nature of the emergency?' Springbok confused as fuck lol.
5:32 - Should be "due to the high speed rejected takeoff".
Good thing, ATC insisted on airport policy and sent the trucks out despite the pilot repeatedly rejecting assistance. Sure, it probably wouldn't be catastrophic if the tires were to slowly deflate during taxi, but it's not ideal either...
Did they leave the plane by emergency slide? Why wouldn't they bring some stairs? The captain says something about a slide at 8:20.
jospi2 He says on the last bus but the captions are wrong
tyguyrocks captions are wrong all over the place
Jock Nel remember English isn't this guy's first language.
Not to sound like an ass, but English not being a first language is never an excuse for poor quality content.
Angel33Demon666 are you really that bothered by it though? If it's enough for you to turn your nose up at a video/channel, go and watch another one. The guy works super hard to bring you these videos, hell he did the Flybe landing gear collapse complete with transcript, radar info and two separate camera angles within a day of the incident. Personally I think this is unfair criticism
Unskippable ads at the beginning are irritating :/ But worth watching even with the ad on this channel! :) Keep up the great work
just get ad blocker
***** That's simple solution, but you maybe don't realise some effects it can have on the websites, that rely on revenue from ads. Even if you have ad blocker, I think it's good to turn it off at least on some channels/websites to pay back at least something for the free content, they are giving us.
Roman I don't care tbh, most UA-cam channels are not for an actual job so I always keep it on. Ad free world is very nice.
Ad free world is nice indeed, but many websites would be paid if there were no ads.
The closer to V1 the more dangerous the situation is, 'cause that's the speed between overrun and stall.
GREAT video and editing - thanks
Thanks for watching! :)
V1 is the fasted speed where the plane can barely stop before the end of the runway, right? How come they were able to stop so much earlier, so that they could even take an earlier ramp to the taxiway? And as they apparently wouldn't have needed to brake as hard as possible, why did they do it anyways?
V1 has a degree of error added to make sure that the plane will stop before the runway over run area with brakes only. Add thrust reverse and a plane at V1 can stop well before the over run area.
@@DERP_Squad Also, they were only "near" V1. Once the Aircraft picks up speed, reaction time matters down to the seconds. Aborting takeoff even 1-2 seconds earlier can result in a massive different in how much braking-distance you need.
My dad was a fire fighter with South african air force he said that typically south african runways are shorter so when our guys fly internationally they have much more maneuverability than your typical pilot.
Did they evacuate the aircraft because of 3 blown tyres?
no only the pilots left the aircraft to check the tires/brakes
MrRubenjwz It seems they did. They mention slides at 8:25. You don't deploy slides unless you are evacuating. Even if he misspoke, they mentioned that the passengers did disembark, because again, he said they can't taxi.
aah yeah youre right, missed that... in that case in my oppinion its a weird dissicion. i would wait until there are stairs and busses to pick up the passengers.
MrRubenjwz I agree, it seems weird. Maybe he misspoke and they just disembarked over stairs. Evacuation carries significant risks of injury, so captains are reluctant to order it unless it's absolutely necessary.
I think it's an error from VASA. I believe he says "on the last bus" or something like that. His accent is very thick. Also there was definitely no evacuation otherwise it would have been on the news and on avherald.
Do you happen to have recordings from LOT's flaps up landing at ZRH yesterday?
Probably published this Sunday ;)
Nice one :) thanks!
As always, good job 👏🏻
Do you think you could do a video on Air Berlin 7416 which diverted to Daytona Beach Intl (KDAB) because of smoke in the cockpit? It occurred on 2/25.
What happened to your Flybe incident at Schiphol video? :(
do you do a atc video about the Aeroflot last sunday?
I'm surprised to hear that this was an A340-600. I thought the route was flown by an A330-300.
SAA fleet primarily comprises of A340's for long range flights FAOR -> KIAD.
Adam Moreira The A330-300 flies via Dakar to KIAD. A340 via Accra
None an event good jon
On every single time it's engine 1.
Not a dislike
"Were you calling ground or ops" 8:10
What are the meaning of ground and ops?
Thx
Ground means the Air Traffic Controller on the Tower's Ground frequency and Ops means the Airport Operations Crew in charge of the general workings of an airport.
I feel sorry for the SSA pilot... He had to repeat himself so many times. I usually have trouble understanding the pilots and sometimes the ATC. But not this guy. Understood h just fine
SAA flies over my home on approach to KIAD at around 6am. Does anyone have intimate knowledge of the SAA flights to KIAD? I ask because it's flight path is irregular from any other approach to KIAD than any other, domestic or international. All approaches are done via HYPER5 one town over but SAA is the only one that cuts short over my home at a low altitude on final. I assumed it was due to low fuel but would like more information is possible as to why they cut across shorter than anyone else. Their A346, a343 and a330 all do it.
It may be due to the completely different route, probably one of the few flights from down deep South. Pretty long flight as well, so fuel may be a consideration as you mentioned.
+Jock Noel thanks for the reply, yeah fuel seems to be the only logical reason. Even the one from Dakar does the same thing. I filmed the one time the SAA a340 was directly overhead and extremely low.
Its probably due to the fact they accept the visual approach. I do that when traffic permits as well.
DesertR Thanks for the additional insight
So they blew the slides and evacuated?!
Steve A the captain said that they are gonna exit from the last slide but I don't think they did
he's said the last bus, not the last slide. If they deployed slides the pilots would leave the airplane without question
Alex's Bikes and Motors yeah true that's what I was thinking? I didn't listen close enough, you're right he did say bus
Not long enough to read the text
Just click pause ;)
Why no fire trucks after plane stopped? Hot brakes are dangerous, and the engine could be on fire!
Why didn't they keep rolling to keep cooling the brakes? No advised? Pilot seemed awfully unaware of procedures :S Guess they do it differently in SA?
Are you a real A346 pilot?
It doesn't really matter because the tires are gonna deflate anyway. It will only cooldown quicker, also we don't know if there was any traffic nearby. Overall the pilots did a good job reacting quick to the engine failure.
rkan2 SA pilots are well respected and highly trained
+VASAviation (goddamn broken youtube).. I was just asking and wondering. The communication just seemed off even though everybody seemed to be a native english speaker.
rkan2 They are probably not native English speakers, it's probably their first additional language.
See this is the reason why I don’t fly SAA
Because in 83 years of operations they've had 13 crashes with the last crash in 1987? SAA have one of the best flying records in the business. Think about that, how many airlines can claim their last major incident was 30 years ago?
@Soso Mama jassie 😁you have the proper South African insults there bru
More engine failures on Airbus products, tick tock tick tock.
Seems like it would have more to do with the engines than the airframe... do they all use the same CFM engines, or can they be outfitted with various engines?
You know that Airbus doesn't manufacture jet engines, or do you?
Charlie Foxtrot The A340-500/600 series only come with RR Trent 500 option. It's the A340-200/300 range that are on the CFMs.
Butthurt Boeing kid spotted
A320 Air France crash was not beacause of the A/P but because the pilot relied too much on the flight envelope protection keeping the aircraft flying on the edge of stall and descended so low that recovery was not possible because initiated too late.
A320 Air Inter crashed because of pilots being unfamiliar with the FPA mode and the display window, allowing the plane to descent at a -3300ft/min descent rate and failing to monitor and detect it, and because Air Inter didn't have GPWS installed (it was not yet mandatory).
A330 test flight crashed in part because the crew was too slow to react to an aircraft low-energy state that developed because of a poor briefing, inappropriate rotation technique and lack of basic parameters monitoring during a challenging test flight at the edge of the flight envelope (CG at aft limit).
A340 crashed on the ground against a wall because a technician did a full power test without chocks which exceeded the capability of the brakes, and instead of cutting the trust, he just tried to slam the brakes.
A330 Air France stalled because of poor crew training and probably fatigue. This situation was perfectly manageable even though the pitot tubes were prone to icing (they failed for less than a minute). This problem is inherent to all pitot probes and can be found on other aircraft, as these specific probes were not manufactured by Airbus, but by a company that works with several manufacturers.
Of course these were not the only factors at play here.
But the only thing you're showing off here is your ignorance.
PS: I have undergone flight training on both the A320 and the B737. Saying that one is less safe than the other makes no sense.
This is why you do not perform a high speed RTO unless the aircraft is unflyable. An engine failure alone is not a reason to reject the takeoff.
false
Mizzy Roro stick to flight simulator. Those of us who fly for real will continue to follow our SOPs.
Sorry, Mizzy, that is absolutely incorrect.
Allot of the commercial SA pilots are former military pilots and historically SA air bases have had shoter runways than their American counter parts and even if not they are trained to use less of the runway if they can get away with it so that they can use other runways without having difficulty. That experience helped the pilot to keep the bird out of the sky and save time and money by not dumping fuel when returning to have the engine inspected and replaced by maintenance.