Hi,

This just hit the news in Brazil. (http://goo.gl/Kkm7M - So far portuguese only)

A Centurion Cargo MD-11, reg N988AR had an accident while landing at SBKP / VCP today around 19:55 LT.

No further information is provided at this time. Lets hope everyone is safe and sound.

Current NOTAM for SBKP:

J1184/12 - RWY 15/33 CLSD DUE TO ACFT ACCIDENT. 14 OCT 00:33 2012 UNTIL 14 OCT 08:00 2012. CREATED: 14 OCT 00:39 2012

SBKP 140100Z 12019KT 9999 FEW018 BKN045 BKN090 16/13 Q1020
SBKP 140000Z 12021KT 9999 FEW018 BKN045 BKN090 17/13 Q1020

[Edited 2012-10-13 20:46:58]

Tire burst on landing:
http://tinyurl.com/8ouddm7

English translation:
http://tinyurl.com/9uoc9lc

Took a picture of one Centurion MD-11 thursday at Schiphol, guess which one..

Any MD11 incident where the aircraft is still right side up is a minor one.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 3): Any MD11 incident where the aircraft is still right side up is a minor one.

  

But to put this in prospective, a burst tire is a minor incident, but it can delay runway traffic.

To me it seems the MD-11 is a plane that doesn't forgive small mistakes. While they are not falling out of the sky it seems to be a picky aircraft on how she is flown. A pilot told me that the 11 was designed with the same wing, slightly better power plants and a bit of fuse stretch for higher MTOW. If that is true a higher landing speed would be needed so 2 questions puzzle me

How does the md11 handle slow and dirty compared to the DC-10 ?

What are the typical things you can do in large aircraft that will get u in trouble on the 11?

http://avherald.com/h?article=457695b2&opt=1

More than a tyre burst - a gear collapse. On rollout though - mx issue? Might not be due to a hard landing.

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 5): How does the md11 handle slow and dirty compared to the DC-10 ?

Well it doesn't do "slow" for one thing... MLW landing speed can easily be 175kt. I often heard that the DC-10 was one of the best handling aircraft ever as far as pilots were concerned, would guess the MD-11 isn't quite up there.

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 5): What are the typical things you can do in large aircraft that will get u in trouble on the 11?

Nothing really... fly it properly and it'll fly properly...

The MD-11 is tougher to control at lower speeds since pilots have a tendency to input to much control. This is directly related to the horizontal stabilizer being 40% smaller than the DC-10
This design has been an obvious flaw to the MD. Initially it was made smaller to hope for faster cruise speeds and a little improvement on fuel burn.

Quoting flyer737sw (Reply 7): The MD-11 is tougher to control at lower speeds since pilots have a tendency to input to much control. This is directly related to the horizontal stabilizer being 40% smaller than the DC-10 This design has been an obvious flaw to the MD. Initially it was made smaller to hope for faster cruise speeds and a little improvement on fuel burn.

I assume you meant to say vertical stabilizer. Even if you did, this doesn't make much sense as below a certain speed (as in this case) lateral control is made by the nosewheel tiller.

Pictures from the accident







Rumors state that the fractured landing gear damaged runway's asphalt creating 80cm deep grooves. This would create even more delays since the runway should receive patches before been reopened.


More to follow,

BR,
744lover

Quoting Reply 8): I assume you meant to say vertical stabilizer. Even if you did, this doesn't make much sense as below a certain speed (as in this case) lateral control is made by the nosewheel tiller.

No he meant horizontal stabilizer and he meant at low airspeeds in flight, not on the ground. The MD-11 issue is pitch control at lower airspeeds, which ends up causing hard landings especially in gusty x-wind conditions. The aircraft has a high wing loading, longer fuselage than the DC-10 it was derived from, and less pitch authority due to the smaller horizontal stabilizer, which makes it a handful in certain conditions.

The accident pics suggest this may be another instance of this. At least they didn't break the airplane and flip it. At least superficially this looks like it could have been FedEx at Narita all over again.

Beech

I don't think that this bird will ever fly again

Quoting beechnut (Reply 10): The MD-11 issue is pitch control at lower airspeeds, which ends up causing hard landings especially in gusty x-wind conditions. The aircraft has a high wing loading, longer fuselage than the DC-10 it was derived from, and less pitch authority due to the smaller horizontal stabilizer, which makes it a handful in certain conditions.

KLM has been flying the MD-11 for almost 20 years in all weather conditions all over the world and I can't recall any incidents. Why haven't they had any problems? Video of landing at YUL in a very strong crosswind. Landing looks fairly smooth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFloyyEBblQ

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12): KLM has been flying the MD-11 for almost 20 years in all weather conditions all over the world and I can't recall any incidents. Why haven't they had any problems?

That's an easy one. Since March 27, 1977 KLM has been among the best of the best. They might have had some good luck along the way, but good results are not possilbe on good luck alone.

Quoting fleabyte (Reply 11): I don't think that this bird will ever fly again

I think it will be repaired. It's not too different than another Centurion gear collapse on the MD-11 from 2009 in Montevideo.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20091020-0

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12): KLM has been flying the MD-11 for almost 20 years in all weather conditions all over the world and I can't recall any incidents. Why haven't they had any problems? Video of landing at YUL in a very strong crosswind. Landing looks fairly smooth.

I think that one of the reasons for this, despite what I suspect are very high standards of training at KLM is that the Freighter versions are routinely landing at maximum landing weight where the approach speeds are at their highest.


IMHO In this set of circumstances the MD11 has historically been at its most unforgiving.


If we can get Wilco737 to add his input we will have the benefit of his actual experience flying the MD11.

The MD-11 is not the hardest nor the easiest plane to fly. As everything else in life it has its pros and cons.

If the MD-11 is flown as the training says, there is no risk of anything going wrong. As rules of thumb on the MD-11: Start flare at 50, retard throttles at 30-20. NEVER swap both (as you'd do in a 747 or 737). Of course other variables come into play: density altitude, landing weight, X-wind componen, etc....

From my training, the order of things are:
1 - STABILIZED APPROACH - If acft is not configured for landing over the outer marker or if you´re "dancing" on the approach - GO AROUND

2 - LANDING ZONE - If landing zone is missed (bounced landing, to long flare, etc..) - GO AROUND. There may be not enough runway distance to brake safely

If these two rules are met and the flare sequence is correctly done, chances of something going bad are close to nothing...


Just my 2 cents!

BR,
744lover

Quoting Spacepope (Reply 14): I think it will be repaired. It's not too different than another Centurion gear collapse on the MD-11 from 2009 in Montevideo. http://aviation-safety.net/database/...020-0

Interestingly, the avherald comments say this might be the same aircraft. Dunno, the regs do not match. But I don't know if they would change in some cases.

In any case, the pics look really bad. I'd say this was a a close call. Could have ended far worse.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12): KLM has been flying the MD-11 for almost 20 years in all weather conditions all over the world and I can't recall any incidents.

The characteristics of a freight vs a passenger configured airplane are extremely different. The initial index unit of an empty pax bird is around 66 whereas the freighter is 75, which is much more tail heavy and barely in the cg envelope. The freighter is a much more complicated plane to fly with low weight and an aft cg.

Given the gusty wind conditions reported in the METAR, I'd bet this has nothing to do with maintenance and is another garden variety bounced landing go wrong for the MD-11.

As a matter of fact a commenter on AvHerald states:

Quote: A brazilian pilot holding short of rwy 15 described the event as a bounced landing with the gear colapsed on the third bounce.

Which, if true, means they were lucky the spar held. But time and Cenipa will tell.

[Edited 2012-10-14 16:26:05]

[Edited 2012-10-14 16:27:05]

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12): KLM has been flying the MD-11 for almost 20 years in all weather conditions all over the world and I can't recall any incidents. Why haven't they had any problems?

Statistics: "Only" 3% of all MD-11s have bounces to destruction on landing. 3% of KLM's ten planes is 0.3 plane. If KLM had bounced one MD-11 to destruction, then their record would have been more than three times worse than world average for the type.

But imagine that 3% of all B737, A320 etc. had bounced to destruction on landing.... That would have been many hundred planes.

Another thing: 83% of all MD-11s, which bounced to destruction on landing, were freighters. The MD-11F is certified to carry 200,000 lbs payload, almost identical to the much larger B744F. A pax configured MD-11 will typically land with well over 100,000 lbs less payload even with full pax load. At MLW an MD-11F has by far the heaviest wing loading of all planes out there.

Just an update: The aircraft is still there and VCP has been closed for more than 24 hours.
Hundreds of flights have been cancelled or diverted to CGH and GRU.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 20): The MD-11F is certified to carry 200,000 lbs payload, almost identical to the much larger B744F.

That is not accurate, while the MD11F can carry a very respectable load the B747-200 can handle a 247,000 pound payload which is considerably more than the MD11 and the -400 can carry over 270,000 pound's.

And here's a video taken at the accident scene:

http://youtu.be/is_AQZj37yM

One of our members here used to fly the MD11 at DL. What he says below suggests that our friend from Brazil above has it right about getting it right.

Here's what MD88Captain said in Reply 42 in LH Cargo MD-11 Hard Landing In Mexico City (by Luftfahrer Oct 11 2009 in Civil Aviation)

"I've flown the MD11 at DAL. It is by far the most demanding aircraft I've flown in the landing phase and I've flown everything DAL has had in the last 20 yrs. The MD11 had a pretty small sweet spot for flare. Flare late and expect a bounce. Flare early and float forever. Better not start the flare before 50' and better be well into it by 30'. You'd better be on speed too. Throw in gusty winds and/or high elevation and it actually got tough. Cobbing on some power could save you in the 727 but in the MD11 those massive underslung engines pitched the nose up and down with every power correction. The autospoilers had a tendency to pitch the nose up on deployment which didn't matter much unless you skipped/bounced on landing. It was a beast, but it paid like a slot machine. I bid it again for the same money.

The ugliest landing I every personally witnessed was while I was holding for ground traffic downfield in CVG and I got to watch the last 500' approach of a DAL MD11. We were right beside the landing runway and got to watch its wrrival from almost head on. And it was a pretty sight untill they start the flare and nothing happened. It just kept coming hard at the runway. I watch an extremely hard landing with the struts bottoming out and a big bounce back into the air. The second arrival seemed just as hard. I would normally laugh at them over the radio but I just felt sympathy. It looked textbook perfect, but it slammed on just the same."

[Edited 2012-10-14 23:45:22]

[Edited 2012-10-14 23:46:27]

According to my friend at AZUL, she's supervisor (VCP is Azul's base), only 244 flights cancelled so far!  

Wow, this aircraft was a HQ in GSO not long ago, I remember snapping a picture of it.

Quoting Spacepope (Reply 14): It's not too different than another Centurion gear collapse on the MD-11 from 2009 in Montevideo.

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 17): Interestingly, the avherald comments say this might be the same aircraft. Dunno, the regs do not match. But I don't know if they would change in some cases.

If you can believe the a.net photo database - it is the same aircraft - c/n 48434/476

Reg
PP-VOP - with Varig
N701GC - with Gemini Air Cargo
N988AR - with Centurion Air Cargo though it wasn't re-reg until after being repaird after the Montevideo incident

https://www.airliners.net/search/phot...arch=48434/476&distinct_entry=true

Quoting andrefranca (Reply 25): According to my friend at AZUL, she's supervisor (VCP is Azul's base), only 244 flights cancelled so far!

Azul's operation got washed out like a sand castle!

There will not be a second runway at VCP for a while. Azul needs an effective alternate plan if the VCP runway closes. I will guess they do not have one and were caught off-guard.

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 5): How does the md11 handle slow and dirty compared to the DC-10 ?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 12): KLM has been flying the MD-11 for almost 20 years in all weather conditions all over the world and I can't recall any incidents. Why haven't they had any problems? Video of landing at YUL in a very strong crosswind. Landing looks fairly smooth.

A friend of mine who now flies for Emirates was a DC-10 and MD-11 pilot for Swissair. I asked him the same question, and he said that the DC-10 was absurdly stable - on a calm day you could land it using trim tabs only. The MD-11 took the airframe out of that perfectly balanced condition, and made it less stable. Certainly not dangerous, but you had to pay attention the whole way, and not take a nap on final approach like you could almost do on the DC-10.

Aircraft still has not been removed and looks like it will take much longer to do so. Over 400 flights have been cancelled so far out of VCP. Airport has been closed for over 40 hours now.

http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/cotidia...-acumula-400-voos-cancelados.shtml (portuguese only)

Azul is definitely not having a good monday...

Quoting voar (Reply 31): Aircraft still has not been removed and looks like it will take much longer to do so. Over 400 flights have been cancelled so far out of VCP. Airport has been closed for over 40 hours now.

I wonder if it would be possible to use Jundiai for a skeleton Azul operation in this type of situation. Passengers would check in at VCP and would be bussed from the airside of VCP to the airside of Jundiai. Three or four departures per hour would provide Azul with some of its capacity.

The avherald article has some interesting pics of the incident,
http://avherald.com/h?article=457695b2&opt=0

Ugh. AvHerald is filled with complaining about this "dangerous" aircraft. Point out that "only KLM" still operates it in pax configuration.

Guess they forgot about World, which also hasn't had an MD11 incident like this, ever, to my knowledge and still flies them in pax and cargo charter service. Again, most likely procedures, experience and training (and maybe a little luck) have something to do with that.

Oddly, the near-disaster smash-it-on-the-runway World accident at BWI a couple of years ago involved a DC10, which according to the posters in this forum is so-much-more-stable. In that one, after smashing the airplane onto the runway, they went around with, instrument-wise, pretty much the whiskey compass. And then greased the second landing. And then the aircraft was written off. So...it isn't that simple, folks.

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 33): Ugh. AvHerald is filled with complaining about this "dangerous" aircraft. Point out that "only KLM" still operates it in pax configuration.

By ANY standard it has a very poor safety record.

The aircraft has been removed from the RWY through TWY F and parked on C, between TWY C and E.

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 33): Oddly, the near-disaster smash-it-on-the-runway World accident at BWI a couple of years ago involved a DC10, which according to the posters in this forum is so-much-more-stable. In that one, after smashing the airplane onto the runway, they went around with, instrument-wise, pretty much the whiskey compass. And then greased the second landing. And then the aircraft was written off. So...it isn't that simple, folks.

Yes, nothing is simple. But there is hardly any airliner type which hasn't sufferer a write off after hard landing (except the very newest types), so this single accident tells little or nothing.

The devil is in the numbers. If we extrapolate the MD-11 bounce to destructions onto for instance the B-777... That would be some 25 or 30 bounce to destructions by today!!! Extrapolate to all the world's jet airliners, and we would see at least half a dozen each month.

Again, looking at the numbers, very rough rule of thumb calculations indicate one MD-11 bounce to destruction for every 200,000 to 250,000 landings. KLM hasn't nearly made that many MD-11 landings yet. To reach that number of landings they must keep their whole MD-11 fleet active until 2030 or 2040, but they have already parked one plane.

After the rather resent LH MD-11F accident I wrote on this forum that a rather accelerated MD-11 phaseout wouldn't surprise me, simply due to increased insurance fees.

Now this isn't fun, but anyway for the fun of it I played the game of an insurance company to cover a mixed fleet of MD-11F and B-777F with my calculator, again with very basic rule of thumb figures. My result was that I would demand between $250,000 and $300,000 per year more to cover each MD-11F than for each B-777F, and in the long run expect to cash in the same insurance company profit on both plane types. That's a significant figure, but hardly enough to speed up the phaseout.

I dare not do any such calculation on a pax plane. Simply because if such a thing should happen again on an MD-11 pax plane, then all previous MD-11F accidents will fill the court rooms for the next decade, and unimaginable claims will be made. I don't think it it relevant either, because an MD-11 pax plane usually lands 100,000 lbs lighter than the MD-11F, therefore is much more easily controlled, and it accepts a slam much better when the hammer is 100,000 lbs lighter.

Brazil’s civil aviation authority (ANAC) has issued a warning to Centurion Cargo that, "it will take “appropriate measures” against Centurion, which could include fines, restrictions on operations and even a suspension of the airline in Brazil."

Centurion Cargo faces suspension in Brazil after landing incident

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 37): Brazil’s civil aviation authority (ANAC) has issued a warning to Centurion Cargo that, "it will take “appropriate measures” against Centurion, which could include fines, restrictions on operations and even a suspension of the airline in Brazil."

And what is ANAC going to do against the airport administrator? It showed complete lack of preparation and incompetence in resolving the crisis.

Quoting incitatus (Reply 38): And what is ANAC going to do against the airport administrator? It showed complete lack of preparation and incompetence in resolving the crisis.

Aren't both government entities?

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 39): Aren't both government entities?

I would like to see the customers who were prevented from traveling take the airport administrator to court in an action class lawsuit.

Quoting incitatus (Reply 38):

Quoting incitatus (Reply 40):

And why exactly was the airport operator Infraero (soon to become the consortium that was awarded the concession in February's auction) unprepared and ill equipped to handle the crisis? I am not familiar with the particulars of the removal operation, but would be curious to know why you clearly believe that the airport operator was negligent in this particular situation and not just being in the unfortunate position of needing to deal with an aircraft incident?

Any specifics would be welcome.

Hi Incitatus,

From the news I discovered that the private administrator will just begin its work in November. From August until November they are just "watching" infraero do its work and learning from it. From November to February they will begin operating the airport under Infraero supervision and from February on they will have full hands on it.

I do not see where the new operator is to blame on this occasion. Keep in mind that the responsibility of having the "rescue kit", under Brazilian legislation, is from the airlines, not from the airport.


BR,
744lover

I've been in the -11 for 12 yrs and it's really just what 744lover said. stable approach and any bounce or hard landing go around. NEVER NEVER unload the elevator to try to get it back on the ground. You will be sorry.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 34): By ANY standard it has a very poor safety record.

I think you should differentiate between cargo and passenger operations. Ignoring Swissair 111 where the aircraft type wasn't a factor, I believe there have only been 5 fatalities in 2 events in MD-11 passenger operations in 22 years of service.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 44): I think you should differentiate between cargo and passenger operations. Ignoring Swissair 111 where the aircraft type wasn't a factor, I believe there have only been 5 fatalities in 2 events in MD-11 passenger operations in 22 years of service.

But it is still bad compared to, say, the 777 which has many more flying and has not had a single fatality yet, a record shared with the A340.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 44): I think you should differentiate between cargo and passenger operations. Ignoring Swissair 111 where the aircraft type wasn't a factor, I believe there have only been 5 fatalities in 2 events in MD-11 passenger operations in 22 years of service.

Whether it has boxes in the back or people it has a very bad record.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 46): Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 44): I think you should differentiate between cargo and passenger operations. Ignoring Swissair 111 where the aircraft type wasn't a factor, I believe there have only been 5 fatalities in 2 events in MD-11 passenger operations in 22 years of service. Whether it has boxes in the back or people it has a very bad record.

How many accidents involving passenger MD-11s are you considering? As mentioned, I only see 2 with 5 fatalities (plus Swissair 111). Many other types have far worse records in passenger service.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 47): How many accidents involving passenger MD-11s are you considering? As mentioned, I only see 2 with 5 fatalities (plus Swissair 111). Many other types have far worse records in passenger service.

You can't cherry pick the statistics to ignore freighter aircraft, it's still the same machine, pretending it's safe because there have been less passenger variant crashes is completely disingenuous.