WestJet almost puts one in the drink

[Eric Janson]

Here's a link to the vertical profile of both approaches made from the FR24 data.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5920 ... ost9702666

[valleyboy]

Maybe they didn't set their altimeters on the transition... and were a little late getting the picture.

There is the misconception of north american pilots, altimeters should be set as soon as you are cleared below transition no matter what FL you are at(outside north america). Low transition altitudes in the Caribbean can be as low at FL20 -- it could be the very thing they fell into.

[justwork]

Does Westjet do Constant Descent Angle (CDA) Non-Precision Approaches, or the "Dive & Drive" steps?

They don't "dive & drive"

[Jean-Luc Monette]

altimeters should be set as soon as you are cleared below transition no matter what FL you are at(outside north america).

True for the UK, but not Europe as a whole...

[Jet Jockey]

Why in this day and age we still have low Transition Levels and Transition Altitudes is beyond me but that's another subject all together...

When on an approach professional pilots should also cross check their altitudes with fixes on the approach and the DMEs from the field and always back it up with the radio altimeter.

In this case when flying over a body of water, which is the sea, you can't get any more precise of the height above MSL when using the radio altimeter as a back up.

I don't known how WestJet's EGWPS system is set up and what call they get from it using the RA but I'd be surprise if there isn't a 500 foot call and then perhaps a 100 foot call, 50 foot call and lesser ones too like 40, 30, 20, 10...

[crazyaviator]

The runway is over 7100 feet long,, no need to drag it in, One photographer has rain on their lens, so a storm was coming in .It looks like they had flown through an area of low visibility and possibly rain, making the visual appear higher or lower than actual and finally, there was a big high truck about to cross their path just before the runway,,, STILL, a go-around was not necessary but wise due to a now unstable approach ( power added and approach profile abruptly changed) !!

[twinpratts]

50 feet or not that deck angle is a bit alarming. That airplane looks almost out of energy.

Unless (of course) the pilots had just applied go around thrust just before the shutter was released... that would explain the body angle, as well as the disturbance on the surface of the water.

[FL410]

Two videos to corroborate the photos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=0uPTdKwWo78

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNhAYKM-7LQ

[jjj]

50 feet or not that deck angle is a bit alarming. That airplane looks almost out of energy. This plus Montego Bay makes me wonder if Canadian pilots struggle in warmer climates due the substantial decrease in performance from what they are used to.

That is a dumb AF comment.

JJJ

[P-40]

The tower closed the airport apparently for 45 minutes after the near accident. Not sure why.

Because the visibility was poor, not because of the low approach/GA. Another 737 that landed just prior to the WJ approach commented to the tower on only picking up the runway 1 mile out. Another carrier (A320) chose to go to their alternate (Guadeloupe) instead of waiting it out. A KLM A330 was also asked to hold until visibility improved but chose to execute an approach due to fuel restrictions. The KLM crew commented on picking up the runway between 1.5-2miles.

[Old fella]

Whatever..... the crew realized the situation probably wasn't stable and did a go around to a successful approach and landing. Isn't that what they are trained to do with WJ established company SOPs and they(crew) did just that. This crew did their jobs IMHO. Nuff Said.

[GyvAir]

If quoted correctly in the article, the ones that didn't do their jobs well are the Westjet spokesperson and the people providing her with her information.

“According to the information I have been given there was nothing unusual about the first approach,” said Lauren Stewart, a spokeswoman for the Calgary-based carrier. Citing FlightAware logs, Stewart said the plane was never lower than 500 feet before the go-around.

[Qdrivermann]

Well at least WJ didn't get all wet!!
There is something to be learned from each occurence, incident and accident. Shit happens and we should all be happy that they didn't land short - their training and high standards came together and a go-around was executed and a normal landing resulted. I just hope a transparent report will be published so we can all learn from this. What disturbs me the most is the initial reluctance of certain individuals to admit or accept that Team Teal had a close call... Team Teal are not immune to error nor should they be shielded from public scrutiny. We all screw up at some point and regardless of what company we work for we are all on the same team at the end of the day. Hell, most of us probably know at least one of the pilots on this flight... thank goodness nothing worse happened. Good job to the two drivers for recognizing in time their predicament and going-around for another approach. To those who feel the need to continually shield WJ's screwups and negative press that end up in the public eye - you actually do our profession a disfavor, and tarnish the safety culture of the organization. In this particular instance we can clearly see that the safety culture at WJ is intact, well established and functioning.

[FishermanIvan]

There's an RNAV into 10 there.... So low vis isn't really an excuse.

[shamrock104]

Why 45 minutes on the go around?

[Bacunayagua]

Gotta love pilots.....

Asiana 777 - "Why in the world didn't these pilots go around when they got too low, incompetence at its best"

Westjet 737- "These guys got too low and went around? Must have been monkeys in that cockpit"

[Ancient]

Uh nobody is questioning why they did a go around. Why were they that low is the issue.

[Jet Jockey]

@ Old Fella...

When they decided to "Go Around" they were already too low and too far back from the runway to be at that altitude/position which means they were below minimums and in an unstable approach. They were certainly not doing a CDA approach. Furthermore it seems from what is now coming out that the weather prior and during their approach was bad, possibly lower than the minimums and that perhaps they were "pushing it" with the results we now have come to see on pictures and the videos... Maybe they were lucky and turned a bad situation into a good one with a positive outcome.

Trevor from the comment section in Christine N.'s blog adds this:

Trevor says:

"March 11, 2017 at 6:42 am

Let me clear up a few things – I was in SXM listening to ATC all afternoon. American Flight 2219, a Boeing 737 from Miami had just landed before Westjet and reported to the Tower that they only picked up the field at the last minute (I presume that meant before they decided to go around). The Westjet approach was next and lets be clear, ATC did not advise them to go around, it was the pilots decision. ATC did comment that the decision to go around was very late – Westjet did not respond – ATC advised them to climb to 4000 feet and hold at Ivaci – the airport was then closed to arrivals and departures. About 20 minutes into the hold, Westjet was informed that the visibility on approach had improved from 11/2 miles to 2 miles and asked if he wanted the approach. He declined, indicated he had plenty of fuel to hold and would wait for further improvement. KLM Flight 729 then arrived, an Airbus A330 and was told to enter the hold. He indicated he did not have sufficient fuel to hold and wanted to try the approach – ATC complied with his wish and he landed safely – he reported that he picked up the field at 3 miles. Westjet then decided to make the second approach and it was flawless. As an aside, Insel Air was also in the hold, a Dominican Wings A320, and he decided to divert to Guadeloupe."

[Jet Jockey]

@ Ancient...

Exactly!

[Bacunayagua]

I agree, lets hang them! We all know pilots shouldn't make mistakes. When they do, even if they properly correct for them, to the hangman I say!