Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 26, 2016, 02:31:51 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: Check out: FlightSimCon 2016 June 11-12, 2016


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  British Airways "Speedbird 287 Heavy" Second Go-Around for the evening.
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: British Airways "Speedbird 287 Heavy" Second Go-Around for the evening.  (Read 34044 times)
Squawk 7700
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



WWW
« on: November 22, 2007, 02:26:23 PM »

British Airways flight 287 from London Heathrow to San Francisco "go around". Declares a minimum fuel advisory and diverts to Oakland. Flight 287 refuels and departs Oakland back to San Francisco, yet to have another "go around".

Recorded in two parts:

Part 1: Inbound from Heathrow to San Francisco. (retrieved from archives)
Part 2: Push back from Oakland to "taxi to the ramp at San Francisco". (personal recording)

San Francisco switched landing configurations due to weather that evening (Saturday November 10, 2007). Arrivals were on 19 instead of 28. Same with Oakland with arrivals on 11 instead of 29.

View flight pattern in the attached photo, and hear "Speedbird 287 Heavy" in part 2 of the recording and watch them fly around San Francisco Bay.

Using a Uniden 785D with an Austin Spectra antenna. Recordings made using line encoding input on a Creative ZEN MP3 player. Audacity was the audio editing program.

* Speedbird 287_EGLL_(KSFO)_KOAK_Part 1.mp3 (1016.06 KB - downloaded 4200 times.)
* Speedbird 287_KOAK_KSFO_Part 2.mp3 (3600.04 KB - downloaded 3360 times.)

* BAW287_Pattern.jpg (343.99 KB, 800x600 - viewed 1454 times.)
« Last Edit: November 23, 2007, 11:44:14 AM by Squawk 7700 » Logged

Feeder:
KHWD Ground/Tower
KOAK Del/Gnd/Twr
KSFO NORCAL App Rwy 28L/R
KSFO Tower/Ground
NORCAL Approach (KOAK)
NORCAL Departure (KSFO/KOAK)
KSJC NORCAL Approach #2
ZOA Oakland Center (35/40/41)


RJTT App/Dep
RJTT Tokyo Control
RJTT Twr/TCA
Amante de Aviones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2007, 05:36:14 PM »

were you in oakland when this happened because there is no KOAK freq on the site if you have one you should put it on the site
Logged
tyketto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 967


« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2007, 06:08:16 PM »

were you in oakland when this happened because there is no KOAK freq on the site if you have one you should put it on the site

But NorCal approach which covers both SFO and OAK are available, so it might have been covered there..

BL.
Logged
Amante de Aviones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2007, 08:02:00 PM »

yea but norcal does not cover OAK tower does it.  The freq is 127.2
Logged
tyketto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 967


« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2007, 08:33:31 PM »

I never said that it did.. But if it was in the archive, and was mentioned in the clips, one of the feeds in that area does cover it. I don't run that particular Norcal feed, so I don't know.

BL.
Logged
moto400ex
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 227


« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2007, 09:28:47 PM »

Well at least they were living up to the "speedbird" callsign
Logged
Squawk 7700
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2007, 11:39:01 AM »

Hi Air Canada AJ,

Yes, you're right. This site does not have Oakland tower 127.200 Mhz. I initially caught Speedbird on Oakland's clearance delivery and thought it was unusual hearing a British Airways making a short hop across the bay to San Francisco. That's when I started recording using my setup. I went back into the archives to get "Part 1" which I didn't hear live.

Just a note on the archives. It seems the recordings are shifted 24HRS behind actual time?

KN
« Last Edit: November 23, 2007, 11:46:43 AM by Squawk 7700 » Logged

Feeder:
KHWD Ground/Tower
KOAK Del/Gnd/Twr
KSFO NORCAL App Rwy 28L/R
KSFO Tower/Ground
NORCAL Approach (KOAK)
NORCAL Departure (KSFO/KOAK)
KSJC NORCAL Approach #2
ZOA Oakland Center (35/40/41)


RJTT App/Dep
RJTT Tokyo Control
RJTT Twr/TCA
Amante de Aviones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2007, 04:06:30 PM »

Hi Air Canada AJ,

Yes, you're right. This site does not have Oakland tower 127.200 Mhz. I initially caught Speedbird on Oakland's clearance delivery and thought it was unusual hearing a British Airways making a short hop across the bay to San Francisco. That's when I started recording using my setup. I went back into the archives to get "Part 1" which I didn't hear live.

Just a note on the archives. It seems the recordings are shifted 24HRS behind actual time?

KN

So tell me if i have this right, your the person who supplies the KSFO feeds?   So all you did was change freqs?  I was just wondering because when im in the states I fly into OAK all the time.
Logged
Squawk 7700
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2007, 04:46:39 PM »

Sorry, I'm not the guy who supplies the KSFO feed.
Logged

Feeder:
KHWD Ground/Tower
KOAK Del/Gnd/Twr
KSFO NORCAL App Rwy 28L/R
KSFO Tower/Ground
NORCAL Approach (KOAK)
NORCAL Departure (KSFO/KOAK)
KSJC NORCAL Approach #2
ZOA Oakland Center (35/40/41)


RJTT App/Dep
RJTT Tokyo Control
RJTT Twr/TCA
Fryy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2007, 05:33:45 PM »

If you can pick up Oakland, you should consider a feed. I'd listen to that alot.  grin
Logged

Squawk 7700
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 501



WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2007, 05:38:57 PM »

Hi Fryy,
I may just do that once I get my setup in order. Thanks for suggesting it. wink
Ken
Logged

Feeder:
KHWD Ground/Tower
KOAK Del/Gnd/Twr
KSFO NORCAL App Rwy 28L/R
KSFO Tower/Ground
NORCAL Approach (KOAK)
NORCAL Departure (KSFO/KOAK)
KSJC NORCAL Approach #2
ZOA Oakland Center (35/40/41)


RJTT App/Dep
RJTT Tokyo Control
RJTT Twr/TCA
Amante de Aviones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2007, 05:59:36 PM »

if you could set that up that would be awsome grin
Logged
aviator_06
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2007, 12:01:56 AM »

The women NorCal approach controller sounds like an auctioneer.
Logged

The Hoffspatcher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« Reply #13 on: November 29, 2007, 07:10:02 AM »

Seems interesting he would accept an approach he was uinable to do, two missed approaches use a hell of a lot more fuel than holding for a little bit to get an approach onto 10 or 28.  Interesting listening nonetheless.
Logged

Ben Hoffman; BAv, ADX
Trust your Dispatcher!
iskyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179


« Reply #14 on: November 29, 2007, 12:41:09 PM »

It seems that in the second recording @ 7:12 the crew of 287 missed the speed restriction of 160 knots issued by ATC because it was stepped on. I think had the crew slowed down as requested they would not have had to go around the second time. To me the controller isnt at fault here. He knew 287 was faster and asked them to slow down...

Logged
doriangray001
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #15 on: December 05, 2007, 01:17:35 AM »

the controller should always make sure his instructions are read back
Logged
aviator_06
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 07, 2007, 11:09:55 PM »

I'd be ticked.
Logged

oneup1982
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #17 on: December 08, 2007, 08:39:11 AM »

Seems to me if the instructions weren't read back he shoulda been spun.
Logged
theginge
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #18 on: December 08, 2007, 04:45:02 PM »

Think European heavy operators into the USA frequently have problems with the tight vectoring and speed controls at some airports.

Always hearing of problems into SFO as they try to get 747-400's to slow down unrealistically. Can't quite tell if that was a problem in this instance.  Also hear that MIA is a problem as well as US operators don't operate the 744 in there so again European operators sometimes have problems with the vectoring and speed control.

Seems like the pilots weren't too happy with the controller here.
Logged
BK88
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18


« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2007, 04:08:07 PM »

Not required, and would take too much time holding every pilot's hand, especially during a busy time.  If the transmission is blocked, then it is the pilot's responsibility to request a repeat of the instruction.


the controller should always make sure his instructions are read back
Logged
mk882004
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #20 on: January 16, 2008, 01:56:27 PM »

This is true Pilots do not have to ready back any instructions EXCEPT hold short instructions. a ROGER will always be enough for a pilot to say, HOWEVER if a pilot reads back an instruction now it is a controllers responsibility to ensure the readback was correct, if no read back is recieve the controller has no obligation
Logged
Domobaby
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2008, 08:47:17 PM »

After 7:12m they get given speed 150knots anyway it doesnt matter and then slowest practical speed! They are just getting them too tight idiots.
Logged
keith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 286


WWW
« Reply #22 on: April 03, 2008, 03:19:38 PM »

I realize this is an old thread, but it made for fascinating listening.

Quote
Think European heavy operators into the USA frequently have problems with the tight vectoring and speed controls at some airports.

The pilot flew the headings and the assigned speeds, unless I'm missing something.  The problem, I'm guessing is that the controllers were running planes with dissimilar final approach speeds a little too close on the localizer. Giving them 150, 160, or 180kts to a certain point is fine, but once the speed restriction is toast and the plane ahead (such as the A320 on the first go around) slows to 130, it can be a problem if the #2 guy is faster.

The solution is to run with more spacing on the localizer to begin with when you have a #1 plane with a final approach speed slower than the #2 guy. It's easy to say that now, of course, but it sure didn't sound like it was an issue with the pilot not being used to 'tight' vectoring or speed controls.
Logged

KS Flight Log - pics, videos, ATC/intercom audio and in depth flight reviews
PilotEdge - add ATC to your simulation experience
hapysed
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #23 on: April 03, 2008, 08:44:21 PM »

I've always admired the professionalism of BAW pilots.  This is yet another example.  Calm, measured, and keeping a lid on some very justifable frustration. 
Logged
coz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2008, 03:55:24 PM »



The pilot flew the headings and the assigned speeds, unless I'm missing something. 

True for the first approach.

The second time, he was assigned a speed which he did not read back.

The pilot should have gotten the assignment, and the controller should have made sure the pilot got the speed change.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!