787 Nose Gear Collapses At Addis Ababa

starbucks · Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:17 pm

Apparently a ET B788's nose gear collapsed at the gate in ADD

http://avherald.com/h?article=494e63...rce=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Aesma · Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:51 pm

Ouch !

filler filler filler

TWA772LR · Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:59 pm

Cue the "Airbus 787 is a death trap" news stories.

Sooner787 · Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:02 pm

"..anybody see a nose wheel pin around here? ...oh, never mind"

seabosdca · Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:03 pm

Oops. I think some retraining is about to happen in Addis.

litz · Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:26 pm

Other than the repair from the burned out ELT, is this going to (possibly) be be first large-scale skin repair?

There's been much speculation over the years about repairing the carbon fiber on these things ...

roseflyer · Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:45 pm

Quoting litz (Reply 5):

Other than the repair from the burned out ELT, is this going to (possibly) be be first large-scale skin repair?

It depends on if a tow bar was hooked up and what was underneath the nose. When airplane skin and vehicles or other steel objects get in fights, the airplane never wins.

rbavfan · Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:25 pm

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 2):

Funny ,but no news here. Nose wheels do that all the time. Sadly.

BravoOne · Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:33 am

Quoting litz (Reply 5):
Other than the repair from the burned out ELT, is this going to (possibly) be be first large-scale skin repair?

Every armchair expert here on Airliners knows this airplane will never fly again. Beyond economic repair, no question about it

psolk · Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:35 am

Quoting litz (Reply 5):

Wasn't the ET bird that caught fire repaired already proving it was a non-issue?

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 7):

^^^This Certainly not a 787 issue but crew training issue...

col · Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:48 am

Ethiopian/Boeing will be the go to guys for 787 facials.

Hopefully minor and she is on her way soon.

trent1000 · Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:58 am

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 7):
Nose wheels do that all the time. Sadly.

Yes, but it was a 787! (drama)
It could have been worse - it could have been an AI 787... (irony).

[Edited 2016-03-04 16:58:56]

teneriffe77 · Sat Mar 05, 2016 1:48 am

Didn't one of their 787's get it's engine nacelle damaged by a jetway in Harare recently

TheRedBaron · Sat Mar 05, 2016 2:57 am

Quoting trent1000 (Reply 11):
It could have been worse - it could have been an AI 787... (irony).

If that was the case that would be good news ( To AI cannibal tribe of mechanics ).... Oh! well.

TRB

Francoflier · Sat Mar 05, 2016 3:56 am

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 7):
Nose wheels do that all the time. Sadly.

Well, yeah... But mostly while airborne.

.

NWAROOSTER · Sat Mar 05, 2016 5:52 am

Quoting francoflier (Reply 14):

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 7):
Nose wheels do that all the time. Sadly.

Well, yeah... But mostly while airborne.

Many years ago at Chicago ORD, I remember a fairly new hire mechanic was sent up to the cockpit of a Northwest DC-10 having been told by his Crew Chief to raise the flaps. He raised the gear handle from the down and locked position to the up position and guess what happened. Guess what happened then? The mechanic did not get in trouble. The Crew Chief did for sending up a new hire without supervision to "raise the flaps" and also for not making sure the nose wheel gear was not pinned and locked in the down position. He got some time off without pay……
Expensive lesson…..

7BOEING7 · Sat Mar 05, 2016 6:22 am

China Airlines did the same thing with a brand new 747F back in 2002. Stuff happens.

airboeingbus · Sat Mar 05, 2016 8:54 am

Surely a modern airliner like the 787 would have some sort of pressure switch or logic so it knows it is on the ground and thus won't allow for the retraction of gears, that is providing the gear was accidentaly raised and not some sort of failure.

Lofty · Sat Mar 05, 2016 9:53 am

Airboeingbus I agree you would think this would be one of the first things a new designed aircraft would have had fitted, to rely on a physical pin only! I know you do need to do work on the ground with the aircraft jacked up but you could have a override button.

Francoflier · Sat Mar 05, 2016 10:10 am

Quoting airboeingbus (Reply 17):
Surely a modern airliner like the 787 would have some sort of pressure switch or logic so it knows it is on the ground and thus won't allow for the retraction of gears,

Thy do have such a system, which needs to be overridden for certain maintenance procedures.

What these airplanes have are detailed and methodical procedures for engineers and mechanics to safely operate those systems on the ground and perform all these checks.

The truth is, no matter how foolproof you design a system, you'll always find a a 'smarter' fool...

planesavvy · Sat Mar 05, 2016 11:23 am

Pushback tug driver's nightmare: a plane falling on your head. Hopefully no was hurt.

roseflyer · Sat Mar 05, 2016 1:51 pm

Quoting airboeingbus (Reply 17):
Surely a modern airliner like the 787 would have some sort of pressure switch or logic so it knows it is on the ground and thus won't allow for the retraction of gears, that is providing the gear was accidentaly raised and not some sort of failure.

The 787 has a switch that indicates if weight is one the gear or not as a part of the air ground system. This locks the landing gear lever in the down position. However, there is an override button next to the handle. Someone would have had to move the landing gear lever up while pushing the lever lock override button. I believe it says lock override in big writing. If the landing gear lever has to be moved on the ground, the procedures require a pin to be installed in the gear to prevent it from moving.

With airplane design there always has to be some type of override or cicuit breaker. For example what happens if that switch gets stuck or fails and continues to indicate weight on the wheels after the airplane takes off? I have no idea why this happened but there are some maintenance procedures that involve pressurizing the landing gear actuators. It is very important to follow the maintenance manual. When mechanics or pilots start doing things without following procedures incidents like this happen. Incorrectly pulling circuit breakers or overrides can have dangerous consequences like what happened to Air Asia 8501.

Classa64 · Sat Mar 05, 2016 1:59 pm

Since I don't know..... and I realize there is no report out yet on this case ...

If the gear indicates 3 green and locked why did this happen?

Also I have seen that the pilot checks if a pin has been removed and on the AVHerald someone said there was 2 pins?

Just trying to understand why gear collapsed when there locked in place when there down, they don't collapse when landing so why when pushed on they can or do.

Thanks

inflightVideo · Sat Mar 05, 2016 2:04 pm

Second ET 787 incident within 2 weeks with the jetbridge collision in HRE. Ouch.

DocLightning · Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:06 pm

Quoting francoflier (Reply 19):

The truth is, no matter how foolproof you design a system, you'll always find a a 'smarter' fool...

"The trouble with making something foolproof is that fools are so ingenious..."

StTim · Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:12 pm

It really should be Foolresistant - not foolproof!

curlyheadboy · Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:17 pm

Question: Would the large engines contact the ground in such an event?

nikeherc · Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:18 pm

Not to cast aspersions on our military, but when I was working on missile systems, we had a saying: "You can idiot proof anything, but you can G.I. proof nothing." This was in the days before the all volunteer military. I have immense respect for everyone who has ever served or is serving now.

The point is of course that you can design for what you consider to be the worst case, but somebody can always screw up worse than you thought possible.

roseflyer · Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:50 pm

Quoting StTim (Reply 25):
It really should be Foolresistant - not foolproof!

It is fool resistant. The lever locks down. You have to push a button that says lock override while moving the lever. It takes two steps to raise the gear in the ground. Normal procedure would be to have someone in the flight deck who visually verified the pins were in place before anyone ever touches the override button.

ThirtyEcho · Sat Mar 05, 2016 6:18 pm

Lemme show you how we can board passengers without using the jetway.

KC135Hydraulics · Sat Mar 05, 2016 6:40 pm

On the KC-135 we have a procedure for doing a simulated retraction of the landing gear, mainly for hydraulic leak checks. It is a checklist, not to be deviated from, and requires specially qualified individuals. It involves intentionally using the gear override lever, which should never be utilized under any normal circumstances, and is typically reserved for emergency use by flight crew only. Coincidentally, it is almost always the nose gear that will fold up if a landing gear lever is inadvertently operated on the ground with safety pins not in place. The weight of the aircraft on the mains makes them hard to pop unlocked under most circumstances.

ETinCaribe · Sun Mar 06, 2016 7:37 am

Big time oops,

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 28):
It is fool resistant. The lever locks down. You have to push a button that says lock override while moving the lever. It takes two steps to raise the gear in the ground. Normal procedure would be to have someone in the flight deck who visually verified the pins were in place before anyone ever touches the override button.

... time to update some procedures at ET, perhaps.

I wish we had better pictures to see the extent of the damage. From those who have experience in this area, how long would it take to fix this?

HAWK21M · Sun Mar 06, 2016 8:30 am

Was this a mx check of the LG lever and someone not putting in the LG Pin.......as required.

Tristarsteve · Sun Mar 06, 2016 9:50 am

The problem arises carrying out maintenance on the ramp. The technician inserts the NLG downlock pin so that he can move the selector, The ground ops man removes it as part of his pre departure check.
This happened to BA at CWL a few years ago.
I have moved the selector on the ramp for maintenance. On some Boeings (B747 and B767?) you have to select up to remove the right MCDU as the lever is in the way. I only do this with hyd off and the pin in. I believe that if you have to have hyds on, then the NLG fuselage jack should be fitted.
No matter how safe you think you are, there is always someone else on the ramp to get in the way.

WIederling · Sun Mar 06, 2016 10:18 am

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 33):
The technician inserts the NLG downlock pin so that he can move the selector, The ground ops man removes it as part of his pre departure check.

Outch.

You need personalized "pin with flag" to fix this.
ground handling then can only remove their own while "maintenance" can only be removed by .. the maintenance guy.

( but further up someone wrote that you need two pins ( steering and gear lock ) inserted for push back?)

litz · Mon Mar 07, 2016 8:32 pm

Quoting psolk (Reply 9):
Wasn't the ET bird that caught fire repaired already proving it was a non-issue?

I wouldn't call it a non-issue .. that fix involved quite a lengthy period of AOG repair under a weather-sealed tent.

My point was ... other than that issue (which WAS fixed), has there been any other potential skin repair required on a 787?

If not, then this has the potential to be the first beyond the ET ELT fire repair.

Winterapfel · Mon Mar 07, 2016 8:50 pm

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 33):
The problem arises carrying out maintenance on the ramp. The technician inserts the NLG downlock pin so that he can move the selector, The ground ops man removes it as part of his pre departure check.
This happened to BA at CWL a few years ago.

Based on my Process Safety experience, I would expect the maintenance pin to be locked, with the key being in possession/in the hands of the technician during his activity.

Sooner787 · Mon Mar 07, 2016 9:01 pm

Have they said for certain that the forward fuselage made contact with the ground?

I looked at one of my 788 models over the weekend, and it appears the plane
would come to rest on it's engine casings?

777X · Mon Mar 07, 2016 9:07 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 37):

I'm no expert, but I'd guess that the engines would be crushed/bent so that the nose does indeed contact the ground. You model wouldn't show that...

aerorobnz · Mon Mar 07, 2016 10:13 pm

ET-ASH Serial number 38754 LN:283 . Almost a year old.

Sooner787 · Mon Mar 07, 2016 10:30 pm

Quoting 777X (Reply 38):
I'm no expert, but I'd guess that the engines would be crushed/bent so that the nose does indeed contact the ground. You model wouldn't show that...

I looked at the photo again and it looks like the engine are bent up slightly,
so it may have damaged the engine casings as well as impacted the
underside of the nose(fuselage).

Looks like an expensive repair job

Aesma · Tue Mar 08, 2016 10:08 pm

Quoting litz (Reply 35):
I wouldn't call it a non-issue .. that fix involved quite a lengthy period of AOG repair under a weather-sealed tent.

My point was ... other than that issue (which WAS fixed), has there been any other potential skin repair required on a 787?

If not, then this has the potential to be the first beyond the ET ELT fire repair.

No ramp rash of any kind ? That would be surprising.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net