Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AC A330 Tail Strike In Frankfurt  
User currently offlineCanadaEH From Canada, joined Jul 2003, 1341 posts, RR: 4
Posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 6643 times:

I never heard about this until today..

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/2002/A02F0069/A02F0069.asp

If you're interested in more reports, click on air reports on the left side. There's some pretty interesting stuff there.


EH.
15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFly-K From Germany, joined May 2000, 3149 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6359 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yep, the aircraft was under repair at LH Technik afterwards. I have a photo of it somewhere in the database, but didn't write the cause in the remarks. However, I never saw the actual damage.

Konstantin



Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
User currently offlineRyanair!!! From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 4753 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5980 times:

I have always wondered about tail strikes on take off (remember the SIA 744 in Auckland?). After u hit Vee 1, doesn't the plane rotate and fly away due to the law of aerodynamics?

Correct me if I am wrong...



Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12428 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5824 times:

They must have had one hell of a nose up angle; I remember seeing an Air Jamaica A340 at Heathrow pitch pretty significantly on finals and although it came close to a tailscrape it didn't quite do so. I wonder what body angle would be required to do this?

User currently offlineBoeing764 From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 297 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5711 times:

Here is your photo Konstantin.
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Konstantin von Wedelstaedt




From Dr. King's America to Nelson Mandela's Africa, the journey of equality moves on.
User currently offlineStarFlyer From Germany, joined Sep 2002, 987 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5441 times:

Ryanair!!!
Your correct - but what if your V1 is too low due to the fact that the plane is heavier than you think? She wont lift off!



Yours truly - StarFlyer
User currently offlineBarney captain From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 935 posts, RR: 13
Reply 6, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5395 times:

"After u hit Vee 1, doesn't the plane rotate and fly away due to the law of aerodynamics?"

Not really. V1 is simply the speed based on A/C weight and runway length that the go/no go decision must be made by in order to allow sufficient runway remains to abort on. Vr (rotate) is closer to the speed where the A/C is "ready" to fly however, this doesn't mean she just lifts off. Tail strikes are not uncommon, especially in heavy A/C, if you rotate too fast and don't allow time for all that mass to get moving up. Rotate beyond 13 degrees with the mains still on the ground in the 737, and you're draggin' a@@.



...from the Banana Republic....
User currently offlineAS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6123 posts, RR: 23
Reply 7, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5287 times:

The toughest part for Alaska pilots is getting a feel for the increased speeds on the 737-900. We have a few close calls and one strike with this bird. The new planes getting longer, and longer I think will make this stuff more common.
ASSFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12428 posts, RR: 37
Reply 8, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5110 times:

A bit confused here - are we talking about a tailstrike (which occurs on landing) or a tailscrape, which occurs on takeoff. What I'm reading suggests the latter.

Mind you, it all boils down to a good clip around the ear when the crew gets back to Toronto!


User currently offlineAF002 From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 74 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 4826 times:

For those who didn't bother reading the linked article, the summary is:

Findings as to Causes and Contributing Factors

1. The pilot not flying (PNF) inadvertently entered an erroneous V1 speed into the MCDU. The error was not detected by either flight crew, despite numerous opportunities.


2. The PNF called "rotate" about 25 knots below the calculated and posted rotation speed.


3. The pilot flying (PF) initiated rotation 24 knots below the calculated and posted rotation speed and the tail of the aircraft struck the runway surface.


4. A glide path signal was most probably distorted by a taxiing aircraft and provided erroneous information to the autopilot, resulting in a pitch-up event. The pitch-up could have been minimized if the autopilot had been disconnected earlier by the PF.

Findings as to Risk

1. Other than proper cross-checking, as per SOP, and the speeds displayed on the PFD, the flight crew had no other means to know that an incorrect speed was inserted in the MCDU. A lack of situational awareness and airmanship contributed to not detecting the incorrectly set speed.


2. No warnings in the cockpit were provided to the flight crew indicating that the on-board equipment was receiving a false glide path signal. Had the flight crew noted the information depicted on the approach plate, it is likely that the PF would have been better prepared and reacted accordingly.


3. The flight crew was not directly informed of the possibility of glide path interference caused by a taxiing aircraft because the aircraft was not within 12 nm from the threshold, in compliance with ATS procedure.


4. The PF allowed the aircraft to climb 1000 feet during the pitch-up, which could have caused a conflict with other aircraft.

Other Findings

1. While the atmosphere in the cockpit was professional, it is possible that the flat authority gradient contributed to a more relaxed attitude toward cross-checking each other's actions or confirming other information.


Amazing!! Over self-confidence IS dangerous, I guess those 2 will remember for a long time...


User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10677 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4579 times:

I would think a looooong 773 is a hot candidate for tailstrikes. Any reports?

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 11, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4374 times:

Mind you, it all boils down to a good clip around the ear when the crew gets back to Toronto!

Do pilots get disciplined or fired for incidents such as this?




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineCanadaEH From Canada, joined Jul 2003, 1341 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4151 times:

I read through another message board that the pilots were "motivated" to retire early...  Smile


EH.
User currently offlineCanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3389 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4125 times:

Sounds like someone is gunna get the sac in the end after all this...

CanadianNorth



What could possibly go wrong?
User currently offlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2389 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4090 times:

"I would think a looooong 773 is a hot candidate for tailstrikes. Any reports?"

The fly-by-wire system on the B777-300ER is being programmed to prevent overrotation.

Singapore Airlines dragged the tail of a 777-300 here in Sydney, so it does happen! Boeing put the tail skid on the 777-300 for a reason.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4057 times:

The 777-300ER also uses semilevered gear to provide additional takeoff angle while minimizing the possibility of tailstrike.

There ARE software tailskids on the existing 777-300, but obviously its not 100% effective.

N


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AC A330 In CDG This Afternoon? posted Sun Jan 18 2004 20:57:26 by Myk
Air Greenland A330 Hit Car In SFJ posted Mon Dec 4 2006 23:47:11 by AbleToFly
Who Do You Think Will Take AC A330-300s? posted Fri Nov 3 2006 02:36:44 by AirCanada014
Union Has Called For Strike In Ryanair posted Wed Oct 11 2006 19:33:18 by Bullpitt
5th KLM Airbus A330 Touched-down In Amsterdam posted Mon Aug 28 2006 16:19:48 by EHAM
AC 767 At YHZ In 1987. posted Wed Aug 2 2006 16:26:01 by Bmacleod
Unofficial Strike In BCN posted Fri Jul 28 2006 10:51:41 by RAFVC10
Help With AC 727 Tail 405 Reg. From 1980's posted Fri Jun 23 2006 02:27:40 by Rampkontroler
Lufthansa Business Lounges In Frankfurt posted Sun Apr 30 2006 02:35:54 by Ansett767
LH A330-200's - PTV's In Economy? posted Fri Mar 24 2006 16:35:05 by CV990