Jimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (7 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 11704 times:
A China Airlines with nearly 400 on board landed in Taipei on 24FEB07 performed touch and go with wheels touching the ground first.
China Airlines admit such incident occurred on rare basis.
According to the passengers, the main landing gear touched the runway during landing but suddenly the pilot pulled the nose up sharply for go-around.
Co-pilot, with flying experience of 72hours, was operating the plane during landing.
The co-pilot in the PA says due to traffic control issues, the plane had to go around. The plane was about 20-30ft altitude when the nose of the plane sharply turned upward position, wheels bumped to the land, but the rear fuselage didn't touch the runway.
Skibum9 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1229 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 11678 times:
Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter): According to the passengers, the main landing gear touched the runway during landing but suddenly the pilot pulled the nose up sharply for go-around.
I am not getting the point here. Planes do go-arounds all the time and is something the is very routine. So what is the big deal. Would you rather have the plane continue the landing and crash into whatever may be on the runway?
Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter): Co-pilot, with flying experience of 72hours, was operating the plane during landing.
There is no way that this is correct. A co-pilot of a 744 with only 72 hours total flying time. He wouldn't even have completed his instrument rating at this point. This has to be a misprint! Maybe is should be 72 hours on type.
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12284 posts, RR: 35
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11162 times:
I think this would be investigated by the Taiwan CAA; the NTSB would only become involved if there were an actual accident. I think this is just bad terminology; they wrote "touch and go" when they actually meant go-around.
When I first looked at the title, I wondered if they had tried a touch and go with the gear up, but this situation - touching down during a go around does not seem to be a major problem; it can happen and it's not necessarily wrong when it does, as long as they reconfigure the aircraft (spoilers cancelled, flaps to 20) before takeoff.
What do you think the "touch" part of "touch and go" is supposed to mean? Sounds like a normal go-around.
Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter): According to the passengers, the main landing gear touched the runway during landing
Are the wheels inside the plane? Or are the passengers dangling outside to be able to see the wheels? Trust nothing other than the FDR.
Quoting SEAdomer787 (Reply 1): is there something i'm missing here that warrants the severity of that graphic? how much force did the 747 hit the ground with? or is it just media hype at it again?
Apple Daily is like News of the World or worse. It's a unique breed of broadsheet tabloids we have in the Chinese world. Half fact and half fiction all the time. I don't trust any damn thing they report.
Andrewtang From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 461 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (7 years 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10803 times:
A normal go-around WILL not involve any gears touching contact with the ground. Unless it's crew training whereby a touch and go was conducted. Then it's different.
Either way they should have decided whether to land or go around by decision height. If traffic has not cleared by then they should have gone-around before that. Not waiting till really finals at 20-30ft before they execute the Go around. It may also be ATC's fault there but then the pilots have their discretion whether it is deemed safe to continue the app or not.
Few years ago, a China airlines A300 did the same thing in Japan but crashed.
AirTran717 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 746 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (7 years 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 10277 times:
Quoting Sanjet (Reply 13): I hope the NTSB was notified. Another case of media hype.
This happened in Taipei. The NTSB won't be notified unless it happened on US soil. Thus the NATIONAL Transportation Safety Board... Not ITSB for INTERNATIONAL... Not trying to be a smartass here. But you should have thought about that comment first.
AirTran717 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 746 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (7 years 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 10187 times:
And for the record... someone needs to clarify the terminology. If the wheels touch the ground and they immediately use TOGA for the go around... is it not a touch and go AND a go around? LOL I suspect that even though the passengers were not hanging outside the airplane, even the dimmest of people can feel it in the seat of their pants when an aircraft's wheels touch the ground.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3737 posts, RR: 29
Reply 24, posted (7 years 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 9677 times:
It sounds like what happened, was not a go around, but a balked landing. Depending on when the action to reject the landing took place has a lot to do with it. Due to the spool up time on a jet engine and the momentum from the approach to landing, it is not uncommon for the wheels to touch on a balked landing.
More media hype over something that isn't worthy of media hype. Slow news day in Taipei I guess. Don't they have government officials slapping each other to cover instead?
: In my experience the gear horn would sream long before you hit gear up, I know I tried it, not a 744 though just a PA23 Apache with a broken lever.
: the Nagoya accident occurred because they had unknowingly selected TOGA and didn't know it and the pilots were essentially fighting the flight contro
: Directly from the B744 FCTM (Flight Crew Training Manual) concerning Go-Arounds: ---------------------------------------------------------------------
: The NTSB often also lends their help in investigating other accidents that occur outside of the US for multiple reasons a)US airline involved b)US Bu
: I've made hundreds of "touch-and-go" landings. Sometimes two or three on any one approach (before I finally got the darn plane on the ground!)...
: Wouldn't this not realy be a "Touch and Go" but simply a "Go around where the mains touched down after TOGA was initiated" For the terminology of "Tou
: Yeah, and...what's so new about this concept, because this is what is suppose to happen. I sure hope they mean 72hrs in type or I'm running for a job
: Without knowing the weather, my guess is that he was doing an instrument approach, perhaps CATII or III, hit minimums, no runway in sight and went aro
: I suggest you review your statement. A go around from a CATII/CATIII approach will certainly result in main wheel contact with the runway. Your comme
: No probable, but certainly possible. I saw above someone else replied that it was in fact 72 hours in type. However, this could become reallity in th
: GROUND ..... PEOPLE, NOT RUNWAY, BUT THE EARTH! SHORT FIELD LANDING GOING BAD.
: For so much shouting you're certainly quite wrong. The main landing gears touched the RUNWAY, which is perfectly normal for go-arounds in big jets. A
: I can't help but to offer my little three cents thoughts. I read through the original report and believe there are some questions that the newspaper r
: On a heavy jet, and most definitely on the 747, it will involve the gear touching the runway if the G/A is commenced from lower than about 150ft. I h
: I especially love the picture insert on the graphic of the people in their seats screaming.
: Just for the record, I love CI. They bring me my computer parts here everyday but Tuesdays. Now, carry on. LOL!!!! The people screaming insert is almo