Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SAS, Airbus "A320" Tailstrike In Shanghai!  
User currently offlineJMJAirways From Sweden, joined Apr 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15314 times:

Hey!

http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/nyheter/story/0,2789,700527,00.html
article in Swedish

apparently a SAS A320 made a tailstrike on take off in Shanghai and damaged the aircraft. It is now in Toulouse for repair. According to the article there was 200pax on board.

My question is since when did SAS start flying Copenhagen - Shanghai with A320 and at the same time manage to carry 200pax. Must be a super version of the A320 or something...  rotfl 

Best regards


I am willing to pay extra for a A346 flight !
44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19097 posts, RR: 53
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15277 times:

When I was in SIN, I saw a Swiss 320. Swiss does not, of course, fly this machine to SIN or anywhere in the Far East, but for a special occasion or charter. Indeed, in this instance a musical group were being flown. I suspect it was a similar thing re. the SAS machine.


"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineJMJAirways From Sweden, joined Apr 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15236 times:

Hey!

I know this can happen BUT, Is the A320 able to carry 200pax and fly that distance at all ? Seams unrealistic to me !?

Pozdrav



I am willing to pay extra for a A346 flight !
User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4975 posts, RR: 44
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15217 times:

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 1):
Indeed, in this instance a musical group were being flown. I suspect it was a similar thing re. the SAS machine.

What, and they crammed people into the toilets, aisles, cockpit and cargo hold to get 200 in? Not to mention SAS doesn't have A320s...  Wink


User currently offlineA319114 From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 541 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15200 times:

Obviously, they meant an A340...


Destruction leads to a very rough road but it also breeds creation
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1892 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15193 times:

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 1):
When I was in SIN, I saw a Swiss 320. Swiss does not, of course, fly this machine to SIN or anywhere in the Far East, but for a special occasion or charter. Indeed, in this instance a musical group were being flown. I suspect it was a similar thing re. the SAS machine.

Apart from the fact that SAS does not operate any A320.
That may be at best an A321 if it is not really an A330 or A340.


User currently offlineLazyshaun From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 545 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15165 times:

Methinks theres something wrong with this article...


I came. I saw. I conquered
User currently offlineJMJAirways From Sweden, joined Apr 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15122 times:

Hey!

Most likely a A340... That Swedish newspaper is not famous of telling the truth always.

But still it is not possible for a A320 to make that journey with 200pax !?

Best regards

[Edited 2005-09-18 12:38:28]


I am willing to pay extra for a A346 flight !
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1892 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15077 times:

Quoting JMJAirways (Thread starter):
apparently a SAS A320 made a tailstrike on take off in Shanghai and damaged the aircraft

According to a question asked (and not answered) on SAS Flight Operations website early September, the incident occured in August at Shanghai, and it was an A340 (which sounds very logical), but which one ?


User currently offlineScanorama From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 14657 times:

It was indeedly an A340. I remember reading a post somewhere (probably on a.net forum) or a newspaper article that an SK 343 had a tailstrike in Shanghai.

User currently offlineLN-MOW From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1907 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 14508 times:

SAS A340 LN-RKF did indeed have a tailstrike in Shanghai on August 24. They had 243 pax on board and returned to Shanghai after being airborne for about two hours.
The aircraft was ferried to TLS on Sept. 5 and is expected to be back in traffic around Sept 27-28 ...
The lack of an aircraft has caused numerous cancellations on SAS' long haul network.



- I am LN-MOW, and I approve this message.
User currently offlineA360 From Portugal, joined Jun 2005, 434 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 14496 times:

Quoting JMJAirways (Reply 7):
But still it is not possible for a A320 to make that journey with 200pax !?

No! Lol! Not even with 100 pax!


User currently offlineWrighbrothers From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 1875 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14170 times:

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 3):
What, and they crammed people into the toilets, aisles, cockpit and cargo hold to get 200 in?

Yes , it's called Ryan Air  rotfl   rotfl 

Quoting Lazyshaun (Reply 6):
Methinks theres something wrong with this article...

Just a wee bit inaccurate , It always makes me laugh how stupid and/ or inaccurate the press can be.

Quoting LN-MOW (Reply 10):
They had 243 pax on board and returned to Shanghai after being airborne for about two hours.
The aircraft was ferried to TLS on Sept. 5 and is expected to be back in traffic around Sept 27-28 ...

Why was it airborne for 2 hours before it landed , didn't they know , or was it because the pilots thought that they could make it back but there was a problem in-flight ?
And also , why was the aircraft only put into maintinece on Sep 5th when it was struck on Aug 24th ?
Any info is much apprechiated

Happy flying !!



Always stand up for what is right, even if it means standing alone..
User currently offlineUSADreamliner From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14139 times:

320,330 or 340 is the same for some newspapers, it's all about "Another airline accident  scared   scared  !!! They don't give a sh...

Anyway, I think it was a A340 in this case.


Cheers.
USADreamliner  airplane 


User currently offlineBar032 From Nauru, joined Jul 2004, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14088 times:

Swedish media, especially Aftonblandet often don't have a clue about details within the aviation sector. Therefore I am not att all surprised!

Cheers/BAR032



Aviate, Navigate, Communicate
User currently offlineScandinavian From Sweden, joined Sep 2000, 267 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 13912 times:

Stupid newspapers! Why do they write about this today and not in August?

Here is a link to the "incident": (sorry only in Norwegian, written August 24)

http://www.boarding.no/art.asp?id=17814

Quoting Wrighbrothers (Reply 12):
Why was it airborne for 2 hours before it landed

Because of the fuel on board.

Regards



"He was a wise man who invented beer"-Platon
User currently offlineJMJAirways From Sweden, joined Apr 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 13339 times:

Quoting Bar032 (Reply 14):
Swedish media, especially Aftonblandet often don't have a clue about details within the aviation sector

I am glad that somebody else also notice this.

What caused the tailstrike may think ?

Best regards.



I am willing to pay extra for a A346 flight !
User currently offline3204ever From Denmark, joined Mar 2004, 21 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 12955 times:

Funny acc to Airbus an A340 can´t do a tailstrike.....?


Ping


User currently offlineB727230 From Sweden, joined Aug 2005, 62 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 12793 times:

Quoting JMJAirways (Reply 16):
What caused the tailstrike may think ?

Wrong data inserted in the FMGC.

Quoting 3204ever (Reply 17):
Funny acc to Airbus an A340 can´t do a tailstrike.....?

The pilots are of another opinion...  Smile it's even trained in the simulator.



Wieder in die Sonne fliegen
User currently offlineTAP340 From Portugal, joined Oct 2004, 102 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 12718 times:

Quoting A360 (Reply 11):
No! Lol! Not even with 100 pax!

It is possible with eight though (And some extra fuel tanks)


User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 12604 times:

LN-RKF it did strike, then circled for 2½ hours before landing with full emergency services. A friend was on board - not very funny. 264 pax on board

User currently offlineAirPacific747 From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2314 posts, RR: 21
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 12257 times:

Quoting 747400F (Reply 20):
LN-RKF it did strike, then circled for 2� hours before landing with full emergency services. A friend was on board - not very funny. 264 pax on board

2� hours?! why so long? was there that much traffic? or couldn't they dump the fuel?


User currently offlineComorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4868 posts, RR: 16
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 12113 times:

What causes a modern airliner with well-trained pilots to tailstrike? Did they rotate too soon?

I thought take-offs in a 340 were so simple a Caveman could do it...  cheeky 


User currently offlineBEG2IAH From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 892 posts, RR: 15
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11546 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Maybe those pilots were pissed from all the comments about A340's bad take off performance, so they wanted to show the world that it can actually take off like a rocket. It seems that they got carried away.
 Big grin  stirthepot 

BEG2IAH



FAA killed the purpose of my old signature: Use of approved electronic devices is now permitted.
User currently offlineFlySSC From France, joined Aug 2003, 7379 posts, RR: 57
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11423 times:

Quoting JMJAirways (Reply 7):
But still it is not possible for a A320 to make that journey with 200pax !?



Quoting A360 (Reply 11):
No! Lol! Not even with 100 pax!

Of course they could ! (not with 200 PAX) ... with two en route stops !

Nouvelair Tunisie is flying a A320 between TUN and YUL ... (refueling stop at KEF).


25 Post contains images AirPacific747 : but seriously, you don't need to be able to take off like an F-16 when its a commercial airliner.. pax don't care, except a few aviation enthusiasts.
26 N1120A : No, it wasn't one of those either You can't put 200 PAX in an A320, let alone fly it that far with 100 One of the main reasons SQ dumped their A340s
27 JMJAirways : Haha... I like that one... ! Best regards
28 Christiaan : It was an A340 and have had to cancel approx 12 days of ARN-ORD because of the Tailstrike.[Edited 2005-09-19 04:00:56] There were rumours of over-rota
29 Post contains links HS-LTA : http://bbs.feeeco.com/cache/topic-0016-743575.html This is the photo taken by Shanghai Spotter.
30 Post contains images Maersk737 : Minor repairs were made in Shanghai. They had to make sure, it was safe to ferry the aircraft to France Cheers Peter
31 StarFlyer : The media always get this wrong. Seems quite funny. 200 people on a a320, how many does easyjet cram in?
32 JMJAirways : I've heard the same... Maybe that's why they don't want to talk about it... Best regards
33 Intothinair : Yes indeed. That was on the route ZRH-KUL. They dumped fuel over the black forest, obvously it all evaporated before reaching the ground, before turn
34 FBU 4EVER! : Latest reports mention the fact that the pilots may have entered the Zero Fuel Weight instead of the Take Off Weight in the Take Off Data Computer.Thi
35 Pe@rson : Hence me saying "SAS machine."
36 SK973 : FBU 4Ever is correct! ZFW instead of GW was entered in the FMGC and with a difference of about 70 tonnes it gave a Vr that was about 20 kts lower than
37 AirPacific747 : If you read what I wrote, you will find out that I did not talk about that at all. I was talking about that the 340 never crashes due to lack of perf
38 Post contains links CPH757 : The Danish newspaper "Jyllandsposten" today post that the A340-300 had 244 passengers on board and 12 crew members. The aircraft have been out of serv
39 JMJAirways : WoW 100million DKK is a lot ! Best regards
40 JFKviaPHX : Another A320 incident the media is trying to exploit. At least they are incidents and not crashes. Few if any people get hurt as compared to the recen
41 Post contains images AirPacific747 : WOW! how can it be so much?? Not good for SAS they are already in financial trouble
42 Christiaan : Latest report from SAS is that the Crew put the ZIP weight in instead of actual Weight. Caused Over rotation and tail strike.
43 FBU 4EVER! : LN-RKF is now back in service and is flying CPH-PEK-CPH right now.100 million kr is the cost of the repair plus loss of revenue from cancelled flights
44 JMJAirways : Any insurance can help ? How does this works with insurance and Airlines ? Best regards
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...
SAS First Airline With "voice Check-in" posted Tue Dec 16 2003 12:53:38 by Eric
Airbus "may" Build Aircraft In US posted Wed Jun 25 2003 05:05:59 by STT757
Why "No Smoking" Still So Prominent In Airlines? posted Sat Nov 18 2006 22:20:33 by Birdwatching
"Mango" Starts Flying In South Africa On Nov 15 posted Mon Oct 30 2006 15:10:28 by SA7700
Airbus Tests "hijack-proof" Plane posted Sun Sep 10 2006 16:03:17 by BuyantUkhaa
Airbus A319/A320 "Rebooting" Article posted Mon Apr 24 2006 18:14:58 by Mustang304
AF: More Of A "No" To Malaysia In Skyteam? posted Wed Mar 29 2006 17:56:07 by Airpearl
"Using Lavatories In Your Own Cabin" posted Thu Jan 5 2006 23:47:09 by AT
Airbus Reiterates "200 A350 Orders By Year-end" posted Fri Nov 11 2005 16:48:15 by Joni
Sterling "to Double In Size In 3 Years" posted Thu Nov 10 2005 13:22:44 by 7LBAC111