What did I just watch?

[overspeed3 410]

Perhaps the pilot remembered the Black Hawk downed in Mogadishu, and was a little wary of the small plane just sitting on the runway... 

[Jethro 65]

Acadacka ACDC Thunderstruck got me in the right frame, had me in the turn all the way, just waiting for a wingtip strike. He certainly raised off the seat an inch or two kahonies of steel.

Edited March 24, 2020 by Jethro

[fluffyflops 1,856]

10 hours ago, Mace said:

It is cargo ops -- that's Astral Aviation out of Kenya.  I didn't realize they still had a 727 in service.

Anyone see an FMC?

I don't see an INS either, but it's kind of hard to tell, the vid is blurry and choppy on the edge.

i bet thats not the only MEL that A/C was got.  I dont think they worry about MELS in that part of the world "eh boss ive signed the book, yah"

[threexgreen 3,138]

17 hours ago, Chock said:

When you see the chart for that runway, you can see that what the pilot did is not only the sensible choice, it's about the only option. Taking a Strela up the tailpipe at 150 feet with terrain in front of you is not going to end well for sure. And if you think that's not a risk, note the advisory at the bottom of the plate; I don't think it's referring to whether the coffee shop is open in the arrivals lounge.

I don't see why there would be no better option than a 360° at 200 ft. There is obviously an arrival path you came from and a departure path for both runways which should be safe. I don't have the full picture, but why not create a go around procedure based on the departure path of the same runway where you basically follow the departure procedure out over the water and then have a holding fix somewhere along the departure procedure. After that you would re-join the arrival that you originally came from and you would stay on the published flight paths and away from dangerous zones.

Suppose there is a situation on the runway and the runway is closed. There must still be a way for incoming aircraft to get out of there other than flying into risk zones or doing 360°s until the pilots get dizzy 😆. Of course I don't know much about this myself, but I'm still wondering.

[Alan_A 1,650]

39 minutes ago, threegreen said:

why not create a go around procedure based on the departure path of the same runway

Judging by the chart in Chock's post, it looks like that's what he's doing.  The departure calls for a 90-degree right turn at the runway midpoint.  The far end of the runway extends into the "high risk" zone.

Basically, it's boxed in.

[SAS443 1,721]

25 minutes ago, Alan_A said:

Judging by the chart in Chock's post, it looks like that's what he's doing.  The departure calls for a 90-degree right turn at the runway midpoint.  The far end of the runway extends into the "high risk" zone.

Basically, it's boxed in.

That chart was from 2009.

Current charts have no departures from runway 05 published, and just two approaches  where both are satellite based (I guess it's a high risk to maintain and secure groundstations in Somalia 😄).

However the published missed approach procedure (RNAV GNSS Y Rwy 05) calls for a right turn at 600ft with a nice 5,9% gradient. (Maximum at Innsbruck is 5,0% for example)

Edited March 24, 2020 by SAS443

[Alan_A 1,650]

3 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

That chart was from 2009

Ah, I stand corrected - thanks!

I wonder when the video dates from.  It was posted last December, so it could be current, but given the low resolution, it might be older.  Does anybody have a handle on the date?

[threexgreen 3,138]

21 hours ago, SAS443 said:

Current charts have no departures from runway 05 published, and just two approaches  where both are satellite based (I guess it's a high risk to maintain and secure groundstations in Somalia 😄).

Where did you find the current charts?

[threexgreen 3,138]

21 hours ago, Alan_A said:

Judging by the chart in Chock's post, it looks like that's what he's doing.  The departure calls for a 90-degree right turn at the runway midpoint.  The far end of the runway extends into the "high risk" zone.

Basically, it's boxed in.

I meant a missed approach procedure that incorporates the 90° turn, like the flight crew in the video were doing, but then heading out south and rejoin the approach rather than having the 90° turn directly followed by a re-alignment with the runway like in the video.

If this is the actual go-around procedure I would assume you would have to have a special certification to be allowed to operate in and out of the airport like at Kai Tak back in the day or that the approach would only be flown by seasoned Captains, because, as someone already pointed out, today's average 100h F/O relying on automation for the most part probably wouldn't even be able to fly that 360° so close to the water if they had to go around.

[tutmeister 695]

1 hour ago, threegreen said:

Where did you find the current charts?

I'm not the poster in question but I looked at the navigraph ones.

[Alan_A 1,650]

3 hours ago, threegreen said:

I meant a missed approach procedure that incorporates the 90° turn, like the flight crew in the video were doing, but then heading out south and rejoin the approach

Ah, got it.  That would make sense - unless there are other factors.  Or in the absence of factors, maybe just a strong preference to get it on the ground as fast as possible.

Or maybe it's a style thing...

[cowpatz 243]

Or maybe just because in Mogadishu you can........😎

[BrianW 124]

Flying in much of Africa is very different than the rest of the world. The captain in this video has has been flying 727s there for 20+ years and has a pretty interesting resume.  Regardless of whether this was legal or safe he seems very comfortable and proficient at the controls of a 727 and certainly has some stories to tell.

[Mace 1,904]

He'd fit right in at Toncontin.

[threexgreen 3,138]

The published missed approach procedure for that runway shows a climb to FL60 with a holding fix that then rejoins the approach just after the IAF. So it seems the situation in the video was either influenced by other factors at the time or they were just in the mood 🙂.