steffenbn From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 23136 times:
Just saw This on the local news channel!
"A China Airways 777 freighter had a tailstrike upon landing in CPH, it had 5 persons onboard, according to the CPH Airport police the big Boeing 777 hit the ground with the tail upon touchdown, the pilot made a go-around and landed safely on second try"
"The plane stayed in the air for 13 min. And is Now on stand G-130"
"there is No visibly damage to the tail, And the crew is okay but chocked"
AirPacific747 From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2895 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 23148 times:
I just saw it too!
Last week, when there was a strong wind and a lot of gust, I saw another Air China 777F coming in to land at CPH, and it looked like the pilots were really struggling to land the aircraft safely because of the gusts. Amazing to watch so closely.
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 11443 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 23132 times:
Quoting steffenbn (Thread starter): How can a 777 make a tail-strike? I remember that I have read somewhere that it had some systems to prevent this, or am I wrong?
I think only the 773/77W has such system, because its more vulnerable due to its excessive length. Btw, this is not the first 777 tail strike, I remember a very serious one a few years back when a MAS 772 was severely damaged.
steffenbn From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 23038 times:
Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 1): Last week, when there was a strong wind and a lot of gust, I saw another Air China 777F coming in to land at CPH, and it looked like the pilots were really struggling to land the aircraft safely because of the gusts. Amazing to watch so closely.
And why do I live in Aarhus? Hmmm...
But why only put the systems on the 773/77W? I know they are longer but if you have the systems for one/2 variants why not on the rest?
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13736 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 22855 times:
Several years ago, a CO 777 on takeoff from EWR to NRT had a major tailstirke. The a/c was repaired at EWR involving Boeing people and was out of service for something like a month or more.
Assuming this was a non-stop from China, one has to consider if the crew was tired and as a result just misjudged their landing. One has to wonder, with a number of tailstrikes involving 777's if there needs to be some changes in takeoff/landing procedures, assuring proper balance of weight, or others that need to be done to reduce this potentially devastating and expensive risk.
dfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1117 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 22756 times:
Quoting na (Reply 2): Btw, this is not the first 777 tail strike, I remember a very serious one a few years back when a MAS 772 was severely damaged.
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 7): Several years ago, a CO 777 on takeoff from EWR to NRT had a major tailstirke. The a/c was repaired at EWR involving Boeing people and was out of service for something like a month or more.
Keep in mind that the tail-strike protection is a feature on the 777LR. Those aircraft were not equipped with the system.
Quoting initious (Reply 3): How does the system actually prevent a tailstrike from happening?
Quoting steffenbn (Thread starter): How can a 777 make a tail-strike? I remember that I have read somewhere that it had some systems to prevent this, or am I wrong?
The 777LR models (-200LR, -300ER, -F) feature an electronic tailskid protection. It's largely a software algorithm in the FBW system. It is basic trigonometry to calculate the tail clearance if the aircraft's angle of attack is known. When the tail clearance reaches a certain critical value, the FBW will not allow the aircraft to increase pitch.
This will reduce the likelihood of tailstrikes, but it does not eliminate the risk. There are external factors that the system cannot control that could result in additional pitch and a tailstrike. For example, a wind gust or load shift inside the aircraft.
zainmax From Pakistan, joined Jul 2009, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 22581 times:
Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 9): Quoting initious (Reply 3):
How does the system actually prevent a tailstrike from happening?
Quoting steffenbn (Thread starter):
How can a 777 make a tail-strike? I remember that I have read somewhere that it had some systems to prevent this, or am I wrong?
The 777LR models (-200LR, -300ER, -F) feature an electronic tailskid protection. It's largely a software algorithm in the FBW system. It is basic trigonometry to calculate the tail clearance if the aircraft's angle of attack is known. When the tail clearance reaches a certain critical value, the FBW will not allow the aircraft to increase pitch.
This will reduce the likelihood of tailstrikes, but it does not eliminate the risk. There are external factors that the system cannot control that could result in additional pitch and a tailstrike. For example, a wind gust or load shift inside the aircraft.
In B77W additional semi levered gear is installed in the landing gear to prevent the tail strike.
FBW prevents the tail skid in all variants of B777.
phileet92 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 21135 times:
Woah! Thats an extreme angle for landing. Could the pilots even see the ground from that high up?
dfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1117 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 20219 times:
Quoting zainmax (Reply 10): FBW prevents the tail skid in all variants of B777.
It is not a standard feature on non-777LR variants.
OK, I'm a little confused. If this is a landing pic, I see no tire smoke. Yet the tail strike is occurring. What is the explanation of the lack of reaction time to lower the nose? I know it's a big aircraft, but they still have somewhat quicker reactions than what is perceived in this photo.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
CX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6767 posts, RR: 55
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 19445 times:
Quoting na (Reply 2): I think only the 773/77W has such system, because its more vulnerable due to its excessive length. Btw, this is not the first 777 tail strike, I remember a very serious one a few years back when a MAS 772 was severely damaged.
This is featured on the 77W, not the 773, and tailstrikes are still possible with this system. It reduces the possibility of a tailstrike on takeoff by reducing the rate of rotation when the tail is close to the ground. However in gusty conditions or particularly fast movements by the pilot a strike is still possible.
Aesma From Reunion, joined Nov 2009, 8400 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 18982 times:
Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 18): OK, I'm a little confused. If this is a landing pic, I see no tire smoke. Yet the tail strike is occurring. What is the explanation of the lack of reaction time to lower the nose? I know it's a big aircraft, but they still have somewhat quicker reactions than what is perceived in this photo.
The plane made a go around so it's both a landing and a take-off.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
Newark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 17232 times:
How much will this effect CK's scheduling? They don't have a huge number of planes from what I recall.
cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4956 posts, RR: 35
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 16782 times:
Quoting AYT (Reply 21): Is this tailstrike happened because of the wrong load of the cargo ?
Could it have been wrong landing speed for the weight of the plane (ie, too slow)? That seems a bit too basic though....
25 AirPacific747
: Yes it is! Sorry I can't take credits for the photo. It is from a danish tv-channel, and it was sent to them by another guy. I guess an aviation spot
26 Cricket
: All I can say is 'Lucky Guy' Hope he puts it up on this site
27 johnkrist
: Well, that's what happens when you load fake dog poo in the rear and fortune cookies in the front I was planning for a CPH trip saturday, but the miss
28 clydenairways
: What a great photo! Absolute perfect timing....
29 Numero4
: Your whole post was just completely hilarious but that just takes the cake
30 Colombian907
: Does anyone know about how this will affect the merge with Shanghai, and Great Wall? I work at the airport and have asked about this and heard rumors
31 earlyNFF
: What a comment! When you notice your engine is running out of oil, you will shut it down. That doesn´t really stop your engine from turning (windmil
Sponsor Message: 
From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 11443 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Dec 2008, 1077 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2002, 514 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13736 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Mar 2008, 127 posts, 
From Pakistan, joined Jul 2009, 109 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 12072 posts, 
From Reunion, joined Nov 2009, 8400 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 28490 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6767 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 260 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4956 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
