Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
Bralo20
Posts: 1448
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 13:48

Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Bralo20 »

And it seems that the 787 issues keep on going. Flight LO42 (Boeing 788, SP-LRA) inbound to WAW from YYZ just made a landing in KEF. At this point it's still uncertain why the plane made a landing in KEF.

Bralo20
Posts: 1448
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 13:48

Re: Boeing 787 news

Post by Bralo20 »

Apparently the plane was denied entry into Norwegian airspace due "Aircraft identification issues". LOT will send a 737 and a E190 to KEF to pick up the passengers.

Bralo20
Posts: 1448
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 13:48

Re: Boeing 787 news

Post by Bralo20 »

Something's strange with the flight, when you look at flightaware you'll notice the flight never got higher then 27.000ft and above the last part of Canada it turned arround to YYZ but then turned arround again on course.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/LOT4 ... /CYYZ/EPWA

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 36545
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Boeing 787 news

Post by sn26567 »

Bralo20 wrote:Apparently the plane was denied entry into Norwegian airspace due "Aircraft identification issues".
Do you mean that now there is a new issue with the 787 transponders?

And it's not the first problem that LOT has with the Dreamliner: earlier this week, they realised that at least five oil filters were missing on various engines. They are negotiating with Boeing about a compensation for this problem as well.
André
ex Sabena #26567

Bralo20
Posts: 1448
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 13:48

Re: Boeing 787 news

Post by Bralo20 »

sn26567 wrote:
Bralo20 wrote:Apparently the plane was denied entry into Norwegian airspace due "Aircraft identification issues".
Do you mean that now there is a new issue with the 787 transponders?
I'm not sure, Flightradar24 gave out the info that the 788 wasn't allowed in Norwegian airspace due aircraft identification issues without specifying what those issues were.

However looking at the fact that LOT is sending 2 planes to pick up the passengers at KEF I doubt it's a simple thing, I think there's more behind it than we know about. If you look at the flight you'll notice the plane never reached a decent altitude, it flew at FL270 or even below, just before leaving the mainland the plane turned back but then it turned again and continued the flight (still below normal flightlevels), at one point it diverted toward KEF but it did a loop once again and before it landed it flew some strange patterns (maybe burning of fuel to avoid an overweight landing?).

Fact is that SP-LRA is on the ground in KEF and apparently going nowhere since replacement planes are en route to KEF.


There was a topic opened about the issue on airliners.net but unsurprisingly it seems to be deleted.

Bralo20
Posts: 1448
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 13:48

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Bralo20 »

According to some info on Twitter it was an "malfunctioning onboard identification system" and it will be repaired in KEF. Still doesn't explain the low altitude and the loop they did in Canada.

Passenger
Posts: 6697
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Passenger »

The report on The Aviation Herald is online:

http://avherald.com/h?article=469305b9&opt=0

Flanker2
Posts: 1640
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Flanker2 »

Still doesn't explain the low altitude and the loop they did in Canada.
It does to me.
When they departed from Canada, at some point the ATC would have noticed that they weren't flying the assigned altitude correctly, or at least that's what their screens would have showed, while the crews selected that altitude on their autopilot. That would explain the loop, wherein the pilots and ATC were trying to figure out whether the deviation was within tolerances for continued flight or not or asking for exceptions and running checklists.
They probably were within tolerances for continued flight as far as the Canadian and other en-route authorities were concerned for non-RVSM flight, but not good enough for the Norwegian CAA or maybe the deviation became out of tolerance during the trip.

The low altitude would be explained by RVSM requirements. If you're not RVSM compliant, you're not allowed to fly within RVSM assigned altitudes between FL290 and FL410.

If your altitude does not match the altitude that your transponder sends out and ATC reads, you have several problems.
First, systems are so complex these days that pilots do not have the time to figure out in-flight, whether it's their altimeter readings or the transponder that is erroneous. So you have to assume that both are not accurate (and their checklists would work in that way).
Second, a transponder that emits the wrong altitude signal could trigger other aircraft's TCAS advisories where there is no conflict, creating dangerous situations. In RVSM airspace this simply is not allowed.
Third, for ATC working at different levels, this could spur a lot of confusion: their systems use filters to segregate the airspaces by altitude, so they don't see aircraft that are not within their altitude tranche. Controllers may then see the aircraft erronously appearing or disappearing.

So I guess that it's a combination of above factors and the probable reason would be the transponder in these cases, that sent out the wrong altitude signal.

It can be a big deal if a transponder starts doing that inthe tracks over the Atlantic Ocean, as it will trigger other aircraft's TCAS systems while there is no ATC to verify your transponder outputs.

Bralo20
Posts: 1448
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 13:48

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Bralo20 »

The point is here that is was an "aircraft identification issue" thus that the transponder wasn't working. Yet when you look at the radar data available you'll notice that it was working correctly sending out the aircraft identification, altitude, etc... It's even in the AVHerald report that the transponder was working.

Anyway, it's another issue with the unfortunate 787, hopefully the 789 will have a better record then the 788...

Flanker2
Posts: 1640
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Flanker2 »

I think that you're taking it too literally.
The altitude is part of the identification that the transponder issues, hence "identification issues".

If they had lost the entire transponder, continuing would be foolish, especially over an area without primary radar coverage... you lose TCAS, which is required for aircraft with more than 19 pax aboard.

User avatar
earthman
Posts: 2221
Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 00:00
Location: AMS

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by earthman »

It would appear the transponder had failed in the worst possible way, by sending out seemingly acceptable yet wrong data.

Also, doesn't the so-called 'radar data' in fact use the transponder-provided altitude?

jan_olieslagers
Posts: 3085
Joined: 24 Jun 2006, 08:34
Location: Vl.Brabant
Contact:

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by jan_olieslagers »

Probably stupid question: if a transponder issue was the root cause of trouble, why didn't the crew switch to the secondary? I do hope these airliners carry more than one transponder, as this is indeed a crucial source of information to the outside world, and increasingly important since the advent of mode S?

Cheese us, even my microlight carries a transponder - though not mode S - surely an airliner should have two if not three?

Passenger
Posts: 6697
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Passenger »

Could it be that there was already a problem before departure? Take a look at the detailled flight path: it seems they never intended to go straight eastbound.

http://nl.flightaware.com/live/flight/L ... /CYYZ/EPWA

fcw
Posts: 610
Joined: 01 Nov 2006, 23:20

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by fcw »

Passenger wrote:Could it be that there was already a problem before departure? Take a look at the detailled flight path: it seems they never intended to go straight eastbound.
Because it would be a detour to go straight eastbound. The shortest way between to cities is following the great cirkel between them

User avatar
fretn
Posts: 321
Joined: 12 Mar 2009, 19:30
Location: EBOS

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by fretn »

Something creeps me out regarding the 787. As soon as one issue seems fixxed, another one pops up. I sincerely hope the 787 doesn't experience a fatal accident, or I guess the backlash could kill the -800. Anyways I'm certain they can manage To fix these issues, but for now I'll try to avoid flying them in the near future.

Flanker2
Posts: 1640
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Flanker2 »

I will add that another explanation could also be that the Mode S was not putting out the correct identification, which could also be sufficient to affect RVSM capability, while also being unacceptable for some countries that require Mode S without exception.

Avherald says that the altitude was displayed correctly on flightaware... however, doesn't flightaware operate on ADS-B instead of transponder data? The coverage they have does seem to suggest so, as SSR's have too short a range to cover Oceanic area's.

To say the truth, this issue is not completely uncommon on light aircraft (especially on a colder day), but there's supposed to be minimum standards of reliability on bigger aircraft, where the significance is much larger.

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 36545
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by sn26567 »

SP-LRA (788) is flying back to Warsaw right now at FL410. Transponder was repaired in KEF: LOT (and not Boeing) has sent parts and personnel to Iceland to fix the problem.
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
earthman
Posts: 2221
Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 00:00
Location: AMS

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by earthman »

I would assume the parts and personnel came with one of the two aircraft sent to pick up the passengers.

Passenger
Posts: 6697
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by Passenger »

problem during LO-41 Warsaw-Toronto:
http://avherald.com/h?article=4694a17f&opt=0
AvHerald: "...SP-LRA was descending through about 9000 feet towards Toronto when approach queried the crew to use another transponder, they had lost their tag on the radar screen and were not receiving any signal from their transponder. Approach queried again a minute later, the crew responded they had tried the other transponder but received a fail indication. Approach continued normal service for flight LO-41 who continued for a safe landing on Toronto's runway 05 about 12 minutes later...."

problem during LO-42 Toronto-Warsaw:
http://avherald.com/h?article=469305b9&opt=0
AvHerald: "...The airline reported that the transponder of the aircraft malfunctioned prompting Norway to not permit overflight of the aircraft..."

tsv
Posts: 220
Joined: 08 Jan 2007, 12:17

Re: Strange KEF landing of a LOT Boeing 787

Post by tsv »

fretn wrote:Something creeps me out regarding the 787. As soon as one issue seems fixxed, another one pops up. I sincerely hope the 787 doesn't experience a fatal accident, or I guess the backlash could kill the -800. Anyways I'm certain they can manage To fix these issues, but for now I'll try to avoid flying them in the near future.
Introduction of the 787 has basically been a disgrace.

But I'm not sure too much can be read into this incident. Any aircraft could suffer a transponder failure and for safety reasons be ordered to land so as not to disrupt other traffic. It happened to a 787, they landed and the Aircraft sat there until repaired. It's one of those stories that only makes headlines when it happens to new/troubled aircraft.

As for the potential of a 787 having a fatal aircraft I would estimate that the chances of any particular 787 crashing at the moment are just slightly higher than the chances of an equivalent 757/767/777/A330/A340 crashing. There continues to be teething issues and it is possible one of these issues could be catastrophic. But remember the Aircraft has multiple safety redundancies built in and the chances of any particular flight ending "in the drink" are miniscule. Eventually it should prove safer than it's predecessors but I wouldn't say it is there yet. But it is still infinitely safer than the Taxi you will catch to the Airport!

Post Reply