777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4396 times:
If you hunt around at http://www.aviation-safety.net you'll find the official report on the crash. Basically, it landed in dodgy weather, and the on-ground sensors didn't trigger, meaning the Bus didn't have wheel brakes or reverse thrust for about 8 seconds after touch down leading to the A320 running off the end.
YKA From Netherlands, joined Sep 2001, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (13 years 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4359 times:
The reason the ground sensors didn't trigger was because the aircraft landed so softly that the computer didn't recognize the landing. I'm guessing the pilots realized what happened and manualy enguaged the brakes and thrust reverse by which time it was too late.
The747Man From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4342 times:
DLH 2904 flight from Frankfurt to Warsaw progressed normally until Warsaw Okecie TWR warned the crew that windshear exists on approach to RWY 11, as reported by DLH 5764, that had just landed. According to Flight Manual instructions PF used increased approach speed and with this speed touched down on RWY 11 in Okecie aerodrome. Very light touch of the runway surface with the landing gear and lack of compression of the left landing gear leg to the extent understood by the aircraft computer as the actual landing resulted in delayed deployment of spoilers and thrust reversers. Delay was about 9 seconds. Thus the braking commenced with delay and in condition of heavy rain and strong tailwind (storm front passed through aerodrome area at that time) aircraft did not stop on runway.
In effect of the crash one crew member and one of the passengers lost their lives. The aircraft sustained damage caused by fire.
Does anyone know if Boeing or MDC Aircraft have computers like these? I think as soon as any touch on the ground occurs on any part of the landing gear no matter how light, the spoilers should be deplyed automatically. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Johnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4206 times:
afaik, there are additional points which led to this crash.
the above mentioned facts are totally correct, however, i believe that the runway did not have sufficient grooves for the water to come off the runway which also increased braking distance, and 2nd, the aircraft touched down beyond the landing threshold...
If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
Sharpnfuzzy From Canada, joined Jun 2001, 570 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (13 years 21 hours ago) and read 4138 times:
Like I said in my other post, this is what happened!
Also you guys almost have it. The crash was caused by the late deployment of reversers by the computer, but it wasn't only due to hydroplanning. The crash occured during heavy rain and substantial windshear, so they were fast because they compensated for the windshear, which is one of the faults attributed to the crew. Also when the plane touched down, the right gear actually touched down first, then 9 seconds later, the left. Then only after the left touched down, the computer deployed the reversers. Then for four seconds the plane hydroplanned and both wheels slowly got to a speed of 72kts that's when the wheel braking was activated. But by then the pilot already knew he couldn't stop, so he turn the aircraft off of the runway.... the plane then skidded for 90 meters and hit the embankment
Here's the CVR transcript.
Also they touched down 770 meters from the runway threshold