steffenbn From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 9 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 23144 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"
1 AirPacific747
: 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 lik
2 na
: 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 reme
3 initious
: There was a KE 773 tailstrike at NRT a year back or so. How does the system actually prevent a tailstrike from happening?
4 steffenbn
: 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 varian
5 AirPacific747
: There is a photo of the incident on DR's website below: http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2011/04/17/152103.htm
6 jonathan-l
: This is China Cargo (China Eastern), not China Airways nor Air China.
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13736 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 22863 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, 1118 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 22764 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 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 22589 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 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 21143 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, 1118 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 20227 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.
PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2566 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 20000 times:
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, 6768 posts, RR: 55
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 19453 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, 8404 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 18990 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 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 17240 times:
How much will this effect CK's scheduling? They don't have a huge number of planes from what I recall.
AirPacific747 From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2898 posts, RR: 26
Reply 25, posted (4 years 9 months 2 days ago) and read 14787 times:
Quoting Numero4 (Reply 22): Fantastic photograph. Did you take that? If so, let me congratulate you on your quick reaction time.
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 spotter, who was lucky to be at the right place and right moment.
Edit: The photographer's name is Jean Pierre Gammelgaard
Cricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2993 posts, RR: 7
Reply 26, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 13725 times:
Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 25): Quoting Numero4 (Reply 22):
Fantastic photograph. Did you take that? If so, let me congratulate you on your quick reaction time.
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 spotter, who was lucky to be at the right place and right moment.
Edit: The photographer's name is Jean Pierre Gammelgaard
All I can say is 'Lucky Guy' Hope he puts it up on this site
johnkrist From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1429 posts, RR: 5
Reply 27, posted (4 years 9 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13813 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SUPPORT
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 missus wanted to go to a flea market in the morning, so I opted for Airport open day at MMX in the afternoon instead. That was nice too with a bus ride on the rwy, but a tail strike 777 kind of takes the cake.
Edit: Since this happened on sunday, my being there on saturday or not is really irrelevant...
[Edited 2011-04-18 05:09:39]
5D Mark III, 7D, 17-40 F4 L, 70-200 F2.8 L IS, EF 1.4x II, EF 2x III, SPEEDLITE 600EX-RT
Colombian907 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 7621 times:
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 that the merge will be delayed now until the end of this year. The merge is/was supposed to happen around May 9th. 2011 or so I believe. Also I don't know too much about CK pilots but I do know they can be scary. A month or two back at ANC the chief pilot flew in a 747F and before making it here the number 4 engine ran out of oil. He flew the plane for another 30-45 minutes with no oil in the engine. Engine change. I do hope the merge does get delayed though (for personal reasons).
earlyNFF From Germany, joined Sep 2007, 234 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7237 times:
Quoting Colombian907 (Reply 30): Also I don't know too much about CK pilots but I do know they can be scary. A month or two back at ANC the chief pilot flew in a 747F and before making it here the number 4 engine ran out of oil. He flew the plane for another 30-45 minutes with no oil in the engine. Engine change.
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 (windmilling) If there was really no more lubrication (last drop of oil gone), you will have an engine change, definitely.
30-45 minutes: thats just a little more than top of descent to touchdown. What do you expect? Ah, loss of engine oil, lets land the next minute? Send your engineer (if you have one on board) with the oil can to refill?
Sponsor Message: 
From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 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, 8404 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 28490 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6768 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 260 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4956 posts, 
From India, joined Aug 2005, 2993 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Jan 2007, 1430 posts, 
From Germany, joined Sep 2007, 234 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
