Virgin B737 aborted landing Hobart (twice)

[Marty_d]

I was out at Cambridge today waiting for my sister-in-law's flight VA1328 from Melbourne, originally due 17:35. Got an update that new arrival time would be 18:31. Sure enough, at 18:30 it's on approach, goes in over the highway then... goes up again. Wasn't just up to 1 or 2 thousand and circle around, he went up to at least 5000 and it was 10 minutes before he appeared again. This time I drove out to the end of the airfield to get a better view... but again he poured on the power before getting under 200 ft and was off again. The wind was straight across the strip and he was crabbing about 20 degrees as he passed over.

 

After waiting another half hour I went into the terminal just in time to hear the announcement that the flight had cancelled and gone back to Melbourne.

 

While it was a pain for the passengers and those of us waiting for them, I'm glad they had the good sense to give up and go back when the crosswind was marginal. Interestingly, just after he aborted the second time, a Tiger Airways A320 actually landed.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

I was out at Cambridge today waiting for my sister-in-law's flight VA1328 from Melbourne, originally due 17:35. Got an update that new arrival time would be 18:31. Sure enough, at 18:30 it's on approach, goes in over the highway then... goes up again. Wasn't just up to 1 or 2 thousand and circle around, he went up to at least 5000 and it was 10 minutes before he appeared again. This time I drove out to the end of the airfield to get a better view... but again he poured on the power before getting under 200 ft and was off again. The wind was straight across the strip and he was crabbing about 20 degrees as he passed over.After waiting another half hour I went into the terminal just in time to hear the announcement that the flight had cancelled and gone back to Melbourne.

While it was a pain for the passengers and those of us waiting for them, I'm glad they had the good sense to give up and go back when the crosswind was marginal. Interestingly, just after he aborted the second time, a Tiger Airways A320 actually landed.

Reported crosswind was up to 35 knots in gusts. The pilot stated both go arounds were as a result of wind shear.

 

 

[sain]

sucks for the passengers, but that is a great call on the part of the pilot (and presumably co-pilot)

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Support it.

 

Life is too fragile to whine about a half day or whatever delay.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

No alternates in Tas?

 

 

[facthunter]

Launceston may have had forecast winds not much better.. Pilots are in the best position to judge these limits. Your aircrafts crosswind limit specified allows for reductions for gusts and wet runways etc. Nev

 

 

[Marty_d]

No alternates in Tas?

Only Launceston, which is about a half hour flight (but 2.5 hours drive) away.

 

 

[Bennyboy320]

No alternates in Tas?

It's not that simple, there are operational alternates & commercial alternates, in this case getting the a/c & pax to MEL would of been a more sensible option & I'm sure its the commercial alternate, also we don't know but the crew may have been out of duty hours & unable to operate once at Launceston, no engineering support etc, lots of variables.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Yeah Launceston is not an ideal choice especially in crappy weather. Melbourne is not that much further, but way more options with relief crew, ground handling, instrument approaches, passenger handling, alternate flights, etc.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...so any commercial flight to Hobart must carry enough fuel to return to the big island?

 

 

[facthunter]

Not unless the forecast or some Notam indicates a condition that requires an alternate. That's the legal situation. A company's policy may be anything extra, as long as it covers the legal requirement. Single runway destinations deserve some extra consideration, in my view, even though the law doesn't require any special treatment. Nev

 

 

[Kiwi303]

I'd guess Hobart being smaller and not so busy as a big mainland centre would have more expensive gas, so the airlines may just find carrying their return flight fuel along with them is just as cost effective. Economies of scale et al.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

I would think the cost of carrying the extra load (fuel) would out way any price difference.

 

 

[flying dog]

Ok, maybe a bit too far off, but gee, it is better than that crash over in..........

 

Where a commercial jet crashed after a couple of aborted landings killing all on board.

 

 

[Bennyboy320]

Ok, maybe a bit too far off, but gee, it is better than that crash over in..........Where a commercial jet crashed after a couple of aborted landings killing all on board.

100% correct, read the latest info from the FlyDubai crash in Russia.

 

 

[facthunter]

If the fuel price differential is enough fuel is tankered often. When there has been industrial action with fueling, often enough fuel is carried to do many sectors. It's a big planning effort on some types where landing weight limits are involved, or weight limited take offs due runway length obstacles etc and you want max pax uploads too, at all the locations involved. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Sounds like the captain has to be a quite competent mathematician/business manager as well as a pilot.

 

 

[facthunter]

Muck it up and you get the DCM.( Don't come Monday) They don't like errors when it costs money.. Nev

 

 

[Kiwi303]

I'm sure there's an App for that. It probably runs on Win 2000 or some legacy server system tho.

 

 

[facthunter]

Mission control would probably do some figures for you today. The PIC still has to be right. (The Loneliness of Command). Nev

 

 

[Captaincoop]

I would think the cost of carrying the extra load (fuel) would out way any price difference.

That is all considered in the calculation of whether to tanker fuel or not. Hobart and Launceston are tankering ports, as is Canberra and many others.