Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
ALK A340 Very Low Departure Photos - LHR  
User currently offlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 883 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 10 months 5 days ago) and read 25659 times:

Taken at Heathrow recently. Looks like the photographer was in the right place at the right time, although it must have been a bit cold!

http://www.demotix.com/news/1040035/...-a340-causes-concern-take-heathrow

[Edited 2012-02-17 11:50:12]

[Edited 2012-02-17 12:02:24]

59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineIndependence76 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 5 days ago) and read 25639 times:

Wow.....I would be somewhat shaken seeing that bird rotate so late and climb so slowly.

Does anyone have the registration? Is it a "pre-X" model with the older CFM engines?



"In general, pride is at the bottom of all great mistakes." - John Ruskin
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 5 days ago) and read 25480 times:

Looks like an intersection departure, I was shocked to see a BMI A319 in a similar position not too long ago, I actually ducked.

User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12593 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 5 days ago) and read 25335 times:

I don't know, of course, but I'd be quite surprised if they performed a takeoff from an intersection; in icy conditions and with a high weight (for nonstop to CMB), you'd want every last inch, in case you need to abort (and it looks like they needed it!); I always thought that full takeoff power was a requirement during icy conditions?

User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 5 days ago) and read 25267 times:

At Heathrow it's quite common to get an intersection departure, remember snow on the ground does not always equal ice on the runway. You can have one without the other.

User currently offlineDBQ From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 25103 times:

Can we actually tell that this plane is low or is just a matter of giant airplane plus tricky perspective?

User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2468 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 25095 times:

Remember that the A340 does not really climb, it relies on the curvature of the earth to gain altitude.  


Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineDBQ From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 24998 times:

Quoting DBQ (Reply 5):
Remember that the A340 does not really climb, it relies on the curvature of the earth to gain altitude.

I heard someone at work say that our flight from SFO to ORD would take longer going east because we were going the same direction as the earth.


User currently offlineGSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3104 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 24802 times:

I remember being on one of KL's old 743 combi a/c out of ORD on a night departure once, and wondering during the takeoff roll if we were going to go off the runway.... Then it climbed shockingly slowly, to the point that I wondered if there was a problem. I have no idea why that particular a/c took off that way. I understand the earlier A340 family a/c regularly perform this way, but it was a shock on a 747!

[Edited 2012-02-17 13:09:35]


Finally made it to an airline mecca!
User currently offlinebabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 24707 times:

I've seen that loads of times at LHR. The last one being a BA 744 that looked like it was expecting to park at Hatton Cross tube station.

Not sure how these planes cannot gain height but they make scary viewing.


User currently offlineBA777ER236 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 24588 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 2):
I was shocked to see a BMI A319 in a similar position not too long ago, I actually ducked.

In that case, you have NO idea of modern aircraft performance. There is NO way that a BMI captain would have taken an intersection departure without knowing and using the performance figures from that intersection! In any event, the performance would have allowed for an engine failure at V1 and clearing an altitude of 35 feet at the end of the TODA(take off distance available) which would be at the end of the 'clearway'. There is no way that you could be standing in the 'clearway', so the A319 - even on one engine would have been at least 28ft above your head (unless you are over 7ft tall!), so to 'duck' would be somewhat over cautious! None of the 09 departures would have been CLOSE to the scenario I have just described anyway!

Quoting kaitak (Reply 3):
I don't know, of course, but I'd be quite surprised if they performed a takeoff from an intersection; in icy conditions and with a high weight (for nonstop to CMB), you'd want every last inch

lee

How icy was it? How could you possibly know? Just because the weather was cold has NO bearing on the runway braking action. The runways at LHR are high friction surfaces and are treated for ice as necessary, but it is VERY rare to have breaking action assessments and reports that are less than medium. If so, then such doubts as to the runway state would have been communicated to the crew and they would have planned accordingly.

All jets taking off at LHR (and other airports with long runways) will use take off performance that will maximise engine life, which means using the lowest amount of thrust (known as 'derated' or 'flex') that will achieve a 'safe' take off. There are several criteria here, but in general terms, the maximum derate permissable is equivalent to 25% of maximum rated thrust. When derating, there must still be sufficient runway remaining to either stop or continue at V1. If the take off is continued, there must be sufficient thrust available from the remaining engine (still at 'derated' thrust) for the aircraft to climb to the 'screen' height of 35ft at the end of the 'clearway' at V2 and then continue the climb to the engine out (EO) accelaration altitude (usually 1000ft above airfield level), accelerate, retract flaps and then climb to the minimum safe altitude (MSA). MSA is usually taken as sector safe altitude (SSA) within 25 nm of the airport. If there is insufficient terrain clearance during this manoeuvre whilst following the Standard Instrument Departure (SID), then there will be a published 'emergency turn' which will ensure terrain clearance and the crew will be obliged to follow it in an engine out scenario.

It is not uncommon for long haul jets to take most of the runway to get airbourne a long way down the runway using the above criteria and a 'derated' take off. For short haul jets it is less common, but not unknown!

Cheers
 



Flying would be easy if it wasn't for the ground
User currently offlinegreenjet From Ireland, joined Aug 2001, 966 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 24555 times:

According to ATI, the UK AAIB may be investigating this take-off.

"A late take-off performed by a SriLankan Airlines Airbus A340-300 from London Heathrow's runway 09R on 5 February, followed by a low climbing trajectory, may be under scrutiny by the UK authorities.

In response to a question from Flightglobal, the UK Air Accident Investigation Branch said only that it is investigating an incident on that date.

SriLankan Airlines was not immediately available to comment."


User currently offlineGSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3104 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 24498 times:

Quoting BA777ER236 (Reply 10):
so the A319 - even on one engine would have been at least 28ft above your head (unless you are over 7ft tall!), so to 'duck' would be somewhat over cautious!

.....Um, I think the poster was just using a bit of exaggeration to make a point. Sense of humor, anyone??



Finally made it to an airline mecca!
User currently offlineBA777ER236 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 24466 times:

Quoting GSPSPOT (Reply 12):
Sense of humor, anyone?

Exactly! That is why I wondered if he was 7ft tall!!!

 



Flying would be easy if it wasn't for the ground
User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6589 posts, RR: 35
Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 24433 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting GSPSPOT (Reply 8):
I understand the earlier A340 family a/c regularly perform this way, but it was a shock on a 747!

You should come down to MEX to do some spotting then. During the summer in particular, a full 744 will perform like you describe.

Before then, when we had the 742s, things were a lot more interesting.


User currently onlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12870 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 24356 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DBQ (Reply 5):
Can we actually tell that this plane is low or is just a matter of giant airplane plus tricky perspective?

Yes it's perspective. In the pictture with the lorry, the A340 is about 200m further away than the lorry.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlineGSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3104 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 24256 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 14):
You should come down to MEX to do some spotting then. During the summer in particular, a full 744 will perform like you describe.

Before then, when we had the 742s, things were a lot more interesting.

I can only imagine - the definition of "hot and high" conditions! The experience I had was in cool to cold weather though...



Finally made it to an airline mecca!
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 24044 times:

Quoting BA777ER236 (Reply 10):
In that case, you have NO idea of modern aircraft performance. There is NO way that a BMI captain would have taken etc etc

I have every idea actually, I was however shocked as it was VERY unusual to see an A319 as low as that A340 in the picture. I didn't consciously think it was a goner but I recall taking a step back as it was unusually low in comparison with all other departing traffic. In seven years of around and about LHR that was a first.

I was also rather happy to depart on a an A380 off 27L (same runway, opposite direction), from S4 ! I am well aware of the performance characteristics involved thanks, however it's rather human on such an occasion to step back and exclaim "Blimey that's a little out of the ordainary guv'nor!"


User currently offlinefiscal From Australia, joined Oct 2009, 337 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 23841 times:

I must admit that I was wondering when we would get off the ground when I flew Air Asia X a340 out of Stanstead. It's funny how that after traveling on many flights, you get a sense for what is normal and what is different.

User currently offlineCX Flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6638 posts, RR: 55
Reply 19, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 23523 times:

Seeing how low they are, you really have to wonder whether they could have suffered an engine failure at V1 and still made it. The Air Canada A343 used to depart HKG a bit like this at the peak of summer. Russian cargo flights also seem to depart like this....they must adhere to a completely different set of performance rules as the rest of the world!

User currently offlineandz From South Africa, joined Feb 2004, 8463 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 21602 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Where's that video of the 747 taking off from Bournemouth?

Ah, here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPJiOareZnA

The difference being, when a 747 rotates it climbs!



After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5831 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 21077 times:

Sorry, but I think the Il-86 takes the cake. It's sort of like a fat A340 with 737-200 engines...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui



User currently offlinejbguller From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 164 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 20869 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 21):

Seems anything Ilyushin should take the cake! There's this IL-76 from YSCB we all know about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12593 posts, RR: 34
Reply 23, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 18984 times:

Quoting BA777ER236 (Reply 10):
How icy was it? How could you possibly know?

Look at the hangar and house roofs! (And not to mention an icy sweat running down the pilots' backs!)


User currently offlineSASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 18472 times:

I must admit that the A340-300 usually needs a lot of runway. Then why does AF operate them on the CDG - SXM - CDG line? KLM make a fuel stop at BON because of the lenght of the runway at SXM.

But why is the A340 the only plane 'accused' of its long take off rolls? Back in the late 90s I loved to stand at the end of the runway at Schiphol to watch the 747-200/-300 departing during summer. Those dramatic take-offs were awesome! (Lifting up at the end of the runway and climbing out very slowly). Last summer we only had those Kallita B747-200s, awesome!

We also have those notorious Il 62 departing from Tivat, Montenegro.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSCB8z2_o00


25 Post contains links and images gkirk : There was that infamous pic of a PIA B747-300 taking off at MAN somewhere.... View Large View MediumPhoto © Sam Pollitt
26 ghifty : Probably because the 747-200/-300 aren't as common as the A340...
27 zeke : The 340 does not need a lot of runway, it uses less runway than many twins if operated the same way. The misconception that it uses a lot of runway c
28 Max Q : Very well explained BA 777 but you can't let the facts get in the way of a good story, especially this hysterical post..
29 9w748capt : What the heck does the "ALK" in the thread title mean? some weird 3-letter identifier for UL?
30 lapper : ALK is the ICAO code for UL. Sri Lankan Airlines used to be called Air Lanka.
31 TCASAlert : I have seen this a few times at LHR, most notably with the SA A340 which seems to skim the tops of the lorries driving along the A30! It's UL's ICAO c
32 pumaknight : Moot point I suppose, but having stood for many a happy hour at LHR watching the heavies depart, this A340 would have made me stop and gasp...it is de
33 AirGabon : IB and AF use A340-300 from high airports in South America non-stop to MAD and CDG i.e BOG-CDG or BOG-MAD, MEX-MAD, in the past AF MEX-CDG. And don't
34 scbriml : The houses of Mytrle Avenue are a minimum of 150m south of the centre-line of 09R. 27L landings and 09R departures are not that close to those houses
35 GBLKD : Glad someone said it. No houses at all in it's path but it probrably scared the horses in the field behind Myrtle Ave a bit. The truck looks like it'
36 jwhite9185 : I was in Staines earlier and i saw a ALK A343 fly over. Seemed a LOT lower than the EK 777 that flew over just before it. Might just be the fact the A
37 Post contains links alberchico : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiFIONKDRpg&feature=player_embedded#! it seems that many airlines do these extreme takeoffs
38 Post contains links VV701 : According to this site: http://www.lhr-lgw.co.uk/lhr-movemen.../feb12/feblhrmore12/mlhr050212.mht the UL 343 operating into and out of LHR on 5 Febru
39 nicoeddf : Or maybe, that it isn't at all underpowered but a quad relatively to a twin. And to speak of a 6hours flight to DXB vs. a 10+ hours flight to CMB...
40 Post contains images scbriml : It's amazing it was ever certified. Will this "underpowered" myth never die?
41 airsmiles : Looking at the FR24 replay 4R-ADG passed a point between Hounslow and Richmond at 500ft after take-off, whereas the preceding San Francisco bound Virg
42 SandroZRH : No, it's because the 777 is a twin and the A340 a quad, Zeke explained it very well in his post above.
43 Post contains images PlymSpotter : I once experienced a very low climb out on an A343 after one of the engines lost power just prior to rotation. It did seem that we skipped the fence a
44 SSTeve : That's because the a343 is underpowered... as a tri-jet.
45 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Anything operating at 75% availability is under-powered. However in that situation I'd rather have 75% power than 50% power still available on a twin
46 N405MX : I wonder if in those cases the TCAS starts warning.... "lorry ahead; CLIMB NOW !"......
47 DLdiamondboy : I have heard it said that an A340/200/300 cannot climb out of its own wake turbulence! LOL!
48 boysteve : No plan can! The wake terbulance is always behind it so it never needs to!
49 Delta777Jet : May be just a wrong derated take off performance calculations as it was the case with the A 340 almost crashed in Melbourne some time ago. May be in t
50 Post contains images pumaknight : Re-read my statement and yep, it did sound like I meatn that that the houses were under the flightpath...what I meant is that you held your breath un
51 Eightball : You ain't seen nothing until you've seen this one. EDIT: I just noticed that alberchico posted the same video: [Edited 2012-02-18 15:55:32]
52 fanofjets : I recall watching a DC-9 take off from EWR while driving though a torrential rainstom on the adjacent NJ Turnpike. I suspect some kind of wind shear w
53 AAIL86 : I live on the south end of DFW airport(within 1/2 km/1/4 mile of 36L/R) and during the very hot summers I often see some low climb-outs. As I live on
54 Post contains images AngMoh : The lowest I have seen is a Martinair cargo plane in the early 90's taking of in ADL in the direction of the hills. They just made it over the hills,
55 CX Flyboy : Lots of people here using the word "underpowered" with people arguing both sides. No-one has actually said what their definition of that word is. Does
56 26point2 : Clearly written by a young guy living in a Black and White world...not meant for an aviation career unless a job with the very Black-and White FAA or
57 airportugal310 : Yup. I mean let's face it, they haven't invented a "sarcasm" font yet...but its blatantly obvious thats its all over this entire thread!!!
58 zeke : Depends on what you are talking about, the A340 will out climb the A330 and 777 one engine out, and will climb to a higher altitude than a 777 or 747
59 Flyingfox27 : You know when there is a full Moon and its just rising for example, it looks bigger because its closer to the ground, then when its up high it looks s
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...
Very Low Airbus A380 Noise Levels posted Thu Feb 11 2010 20:12:18 by Reggaebird
AI 747-400 Very Low? posted Sun Aug 5 2007 00:13:52 by Fllcontinental
747 Or Similar Very Low Over Staffs posted Mon Apr 30 2007 19:35:32 by CalAir
L'Avion (ORY-EWR) Very Low Loads... posted Wed Jan 10 2007 13:31:18 by Beaucaire
Very Low Pass Video! posted Wed Jan 11 2006 22:02:38 by KPDX
MCI Very Low Traffic? posted Mon Nov 28 2005 09:47:12 by Speedracer1407
Very Low 747/340 Over Bridgeport Tonite posted Thu Aug 25 2005 04:44:15 by F27XXX
AirPacific Loads: Very Low? posted Thu Apr 28 2005 03:44:56 by Lrgt
QF To Order A340's Very Soon posted Fri May 14 2004 14:13:22 by Aussie747
ERJ Seen Flying Very Low Over City posted Wed Sep 18 2002 15:19:16 by CLEwatcher