Page 13 - Flight International (January 2020)

AIR TRANSPORT

Flight-data recorder analysis
shows the aircraft’s ground roll
was 1,860m and it lifted off about
400m from the runway end, over-
flying the upwind threshold at
about 100ft.

SECOND EVENT
The incident involving aircraft
G-EZTD was followed just 14
days later by an “identical” event
as another EasyJet A320 (OE-IJL)
operating to Paris on 7 May took
off 350m from the runway end. It
crossed the threshold at 75ft.
“Robust adherence to proce-
dures is a key defence against
such incidents occurring,” says
the inquiry, pointing out that
pilots often find reduced acceler-
AirTeamImages ation difficult to recognise.
EasyJet has since taken steps to

issuing a notice to crews clarify-
In both cases, jets became airborne too close to far end of Lisbon runway after intersection departures prevent a recurrence including
ing take-off positions from
INVESTIGATION DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDON Lisbon’s runway 21, and raising
awareness of the two incidents
Portuguese airports warned among pilots.
“We are aware of the report
and fully assisted the AAIB with
over ‘confusing’ terminology its investigation,” says the budget
carrier. “The safety of our passen-
gers and crew is always our high-
AAIB calls for greater clarity after EasyJet has two identical take-off issues in a fortnight est priority.
“We take events of this nature
wo identical serious take-off It states that for “reasons which would have allowed a seriously and will always take
Tincidents within two weeks described as historic”, the lower thrust level. action to ensure we maintain the
involving EasyJet Airbus A320s aeronautical information publi- The crew did not crosscheck highest standards of safety. As
at Lisbon have spurred UK cation for Lisbon refers to runway the take-off distances available highlighted in the report we
investigators to advise Portugal’s take-off points as “positions”, from the two positions and, as a proactively took a number of
airports operator to stop using unlike airports elsewhere. result, failed to detect the error. safety actions.”
confusing terminology for Although the A320 ultimately It has also engaged with Airbus
runway departure positions. MISCALCULATION departed from the nearby U5 with regard to future potential
Both incidents involved the While calculating take-off perfor- intersection, the available take-off protective measures.
aircraft accelerating with mance criteria with the electronic distance was still only 2,410m – Although Airbus is developing
insufficient thrust and becoming flightbag, the pilots both based nearly 1,400m less than the full- a system for the A320 intended to
airborne close to the far end of the calculation on the take-off length runway. offer protection against incorrectly
the runway. position designated “PSNSTMP” The incorrect performance cal- calculated take-off performance, it
The UK Air Accidents Investi- (temporary position S), believing culation meant the A320’s thrust indicated to the inquiry that the
gation Branch (AAIB) says an it to refer to the S1 intersection. was too low for the departure. system in its current state would
A320 bound for London Luton But this designation actually Although the captain mentioned not have warned the crews of ei-
on 24 April 2019 had intended a stood for the S4 intersection, that the take-off roll “felt wrong”, ther EasyJet aircraft because the
departure from the S1 intersec- used for a full-length runway says the inquiry, full take-off runway remaining exceeded the
tion of Lisbon’s runway 21. take-off of 3,800m (12,500ft), thrust was not selected. forecast take-off distance. ■

Honeywell Aerospace is transforming. Discover how
Take your career to new levels
ƃKIJVINQDCN EQO *QPG[YGNNUJCRKPIVJGHWVWTG
Start your journey today Register your CV and start your job search today
Register at ,QDU ƃKIJVINQDCN EQO TGIKUVGT
Start your journey today Register at ,QDU ƃKIJVINQDCN EQO TGIKUVGT
A CONTENT PARTNERSHIP

14 | Flight International | 28 January-3 February 2020 flightglobal.com