Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
bennett123 wrote:According to Wikipedia, runway 32L is almost 11,500 feet long.
How on earth did a B737NG almost run off the end?.
alasizon wrote:bennett123 wrote:According to Wikipedia, runway 32L is almost 11,500 feet long.
How on earth did a B737NG almost run off the end?.
Watching the video, you can see the aircraft is struggling to gain lift. In fact it looks like it was a foot or two in the air when it settled back down into the dirt again and eventually gained enough lift to take-off.
bennett123 wrote:According to Wikipedia, runway 32L is almost 11,500 feet long.
How on earth did a B737NG almost run off the end?.
The cause of this incident is not yet confirmed; some Russian Aviation websites report that the crew computed takeoff performance using a takeoff weight 15 tons below the real weight, another claims the crew inadvertently entered Zero Fuel Weight instead of the Takeoff Weight.
Tommo4828 wrote:Was that a flapless take off?
vatveng wrote:bennett123 wrote:According to Wikipedia, runway 32L is almost 11,500 feet long.
How on earth did a B737NG almost run off the end?.
From the blog post:The cause of this incident is not yet confirmed; some Russian Aviation websites report that the crew computed takeoff performance using a takeoff weight 15 tons below the real weight, another claims the crew inadvertently entered Zero Fuel Weight instead of the Takeoff Weight.
hiflyeras wrote:vatveng wrote:bennett123 wrote:According to Wikipedia, runway 32L is almost 11,500 feet long.
How on earth did a B737NG almost run off the end?.
From the blog post:The cause of this incident is not yet confirmed; some Russian Aviation websites report that the crew computed takeoff performance using a takeoff weight 15 tons below the real weight, another claims the crew inadvertently entered Zero Fuel Weight instead of the Takeoff Weight.
Any experienced 737 pilot would have known that the thrust was inadequate for the load just by the sound of the engines and the speed they were attaining down the runway. They should have shut things down immediately before getting to this point. They should both be fired.
aviationjunky wrote:Why wouldn't they abort take-off if they didn't see the aircraft lifting when it was suppose to??
Pontius wrote:aviationjunky wrote:Why wouldn't they abort take-off if they didn't see the aircraft lifting when it was suppose to??
Takeoff performance is predicated on achieving 3 calculated speeds, most notably V1, "takeoff decision speed." Once the takeoff roll begins, achieving these speeds is the only measurable objective. Runway remaining versus runway required is not known or measured. If acceleration is lower than planned, or if the calculated speeds or thrust setting is incorrect, the scenario in the video happens.
Also, note that in very many takeoffs, V1 occurs mere seconds prior to reaching the end of the runway. In the video scenario, after recognition of a problem there would be an extremely short window in which one had the option of both a successful abort and successfully rotation. Since they lived, it actually looks like they may have made the best of a bad situation.
barney captain wrote:hiflyeras wrote:vatveng wrote:
From the blog post:
Any experienced 737 pilot would have known that the thrust was inadequate for the load just by the sound of the engines and the speed they were attaining down the runway. They should have shut things down immediately before getting to this point. They should both be fired.
Agreed. At some point self-preservation should have taken over and those thrust levers should have meet with the center MFD.
maint123 wrote:No automation system in place to automatically reject obviously wrong weight inputs?
What's the normal weight variation in a similar aircraft?
SierraPacific wrote:maint123 wrote:No automation system in place to automatically reject obviously wrong weight inputs?
What's the normal weight variation in a similar aircraft?
I believe that if it is below the minimum zfw the FMC will not accept the number. The 737 has a pretty large range of different numbers when it comes to weights so it is entirely possible that they punched in the ZFW and did the calculation based on the ZFW rather than the actual take-off weight (could be up to a 45 thousand pound difference). I would hope that they double-check these things but that is what you get with aviation in that part of the world.
The ZFW on one flight could be the take off weight on the next flight so it would be hard to set up an automatic system to do that outside of an acars connection that can automatically fill out the performance page with the pilots reviewing it and comparing it to the flight plan (how a ton of carriers do it)
cpd wrote:How do you not know that something is seriously wrong with the plane not performing as expected? Surely if the engines were not at proper power you'd have put them full throttle immediately.
Pontius wrote:cpd wrote:How do you not know that something is seriously wrong with the plane not performing as expected? Surely if the engines were not at proper power you'd have put them full throttle immediately.
You just calculated, wrote down/typed, briefed, and selected your power setting for this takeoff. It is the “proper power” setting. It just happens to be wrong for the actual conditions. This is exactly how errors in complex systems work.
For context: Nearly every operator uses flex thrust settings, which can be as little as 70% of full rated thrust. Only saves engine wear, not fuel. The felt, perceived acceleration between a light aircraft departing JFK (long sea level runway, low thrust setting) and a heavy aircraft leaving JAC (high elevation short runway with obstacles on departure, high thrust setting) is wildly different. These routine differences make it hard to call exactly how a takeoff is proceeding early on. Every takeoff in MDW (short runway with a blast fence at the end) looks ill-fated from the cockpit, an abort downright impossible, but reliance on accurate numbers make it all work.
DUSdude wrote:alasizon wrote:bennett123 wrote:According to Wikipedia, runway 32L is almost 11,500 feet long.
How on earth did a B737NG almost run off the end?.
Watching the video, you can see the aircraft is struggling to gain lift. In fact it looks like it was a foot or two in the air when it settled back down into the dirt again and eventually gained enough lift to take-off.
I don't see any "settling back down". What you see is the engines kicking up dirt after the aircraft exits the paved area.
Regardless of what the computer tells you, your instincts should be kicking in, hang on a moment something doesn't seem right - what is happening and what do I need to do about it?
SKCPH wrote:Regardless of what the computer tells you, your instincts should be kicking in, hang on a moment something doesn't seem right - what is happening and what do I need to do about it?
cpd.....you cant fly transport category aircraft by the seat of your pants. You must rely on what the aircraft tells you. There is no measure of acceleration in relation to takeoff performance, in any of the aircraft I have flown, F28, MD80/90, Dash 8, CRJ or A320. The bus has an arrow to show you the rate of speed increase, but it is not referenced to performance.
Now, once the realization has come to you that there is something not right, your decision making becomes paramount. I don’t know what the crew did or did not do, so I will sit this one out for now.
Armadillo1 wrote:by russian forum,
TOW input was correct.
tower ask them to take-off from intersection in last minute, and they did not change input data for runway length.
SKCPH wrote:Regardless of what the computer tells you, your instincts should be kicking in, hang on a moment something doesn't seem right - what is happening and what do I need to do about it?
cpd.....you cant fly transport category aircraft by the seat of your pants. You must rely on what the aircraft tells you.
GE90man wrote:Well you know what they say in Russia, pay for the whole runway, use the whole runway
Armadillo1 wrote:by russian forum,
TOW input was correct.
tower ask them to take-off from intersection in last minute, and they did not change input data for runway length.
debonair wrote:GE90man wrote:Well you know what they say in Russia, pay for the whole runway, use the whole runway
Yeap, seems to me like a normal, old school, Russian take off... Who is not remembering the IL86 take-off from Phuket Airport in the '90s well after the piano keys...
GE90man wrote:Well you know what they say in Russia, pay for the whole runway, use the whole runway
debonair wrote:GE90man wrote:Well you know what they say in Russia, pay for the whole runway, use the whole runway
Yeap, seems to me like a normal, old school, Russian take off... Who is not remembering the IL86 take-off from Phuket Airport in the '90s well after the piano keys...
par13del wrote:So the indicators that show V1 do not also show speed, I would assume that any 737 pilot would know the speed the a/c needs to fly, if that is not achieved and the runway is running out.........
Viper911 wrote:GE90man wrote:Well you know what they say in Russia, pay for the whole runway, use the whole runwaydebonair wrote:GE90man wrote:Well you know what they say in Russia, pay for the whole runway, use the whole runway
Yeap, seems to me like a normal, old school, Russian take off... Who is not remembering the IL86 take-off from Phuket Airport in the '90s well after the piano keys...
It has nothing to do with Russia, these type of incidents happen every few years, EK407 in SYD or QR778 in MIA are just to name a few. The difference is that this one was caught on tape. Pilots are human and therefore prone to do mistakes.
Viper911