|Quoting CRFLY (Reply 17):|
looked like a mechanical failure on landing
Given that I neither have the appropriate background (my field of expertise is real estate and law)
nor all the facts, it could be overly audacious to argue with two pilots (not that your relationship to the cockpit crew necessarily disqualifies your arguments)
but I have to agree with the following statement..
|Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 15):|
Strange things can happen on a wet runway if the anti-skid fails or strong control inputs are made
Apparently there was some serious hydroplaning going on yesterday.. La Nación quoted
an Air Surveillance Service (the Ministry of Public Security operates a permanent facility on airport grounds)
pilot as saying that al parecer, la nave realizó un hidroplaneo. “Como la pista está mojada, el contacto de las llantas con el pavimento se hace más difícil”, explicó
— fact is, hydroplaning can delay wheel spin–up, and the anti–skid system needs wheel speed to be activated.
Per the A318/A319/A320/A321 FCTM (NO-160. P 6/12) the A/BRAKE provides a symmetrical brake pressure application which ensures an equal braking effect on both main landing gear wheels on wet or evenly contaminated runway. More particularly, the A/BRAKE is recommended on short, wet, contaminated runway, in poor visibility conditions
— however, my understanding is that releasing the brakes (taking over from the autobrake)
actually helps regain traction (and reduces slip)
by allowing the wheels to spin freely, thus making it easier to stay *on* the runway.
On a side note, it would be reassuring to have a third party —other than AERIS— evaluate the runway surface (macrotexture)
condition to see whether it still meets the required friction levels.. we cannot rule out MOPT has somehow overlooked or neglected this important operational safety aspect, considering their nightmarish track record of incompetence.
Entre el fuerte y el débil, la libertad oprime. Sólo la ley libera.