are you browning your pants at this point?

View Large View Medium

Photo © Sam Chui

If the nose were still on the ground at that point, then it'd be time for such an action.

There is a photo in this database somewhere of another one doing the exact same thing in Austria, I believe.

I am at work, so I don't have the time to look for it.

No time to poop when you're looking for your swimsuit  

I am not a pilot, but I can imagine that at that point, since you are in such a big plane, you have already lost sight of the runway and see only water. I bet the pilots were listening for and dreading the sound of a landing gear hitting one of the strip lights.

Just took another look at the photo and there are not any lights, but there is a fence  

[Edited 2006-01-30 23:34:38]

Um...that one would have given me a pucker feeling. But, trusting and knowing your aircraft makes you feel a lil bit better. As 766UA mentioned, if the nose gear was still touching, there would have been a little bit more than a pucker feeling.

XJR

There are advantages to rotating at a higher speed, that is further down the runway. Maybe they COULD rotate earlier, but chose a higher rotation speed in order to get a better climb speed.

As XJRamper says, if you know the plane you feel differently from if you are watching through a telephoto lens.

Quoting Matt72033 (Thread starter): are you browning your pants at this point?

I remembered taking off from Norwich or Exeter with a 737 filled with 189 pax and more than 16 tons of fuel.Those airports have very short runways making every departure needs a precise TO analysis calculation.

I remember how fast the end of runway coming towards us and how slow feels the airspeed pointer climbs to VR speed.Thanks to its powerful engines and my correct calculations(I have to give little credit on myself here) 737-800 never made us look like this from the outside.

What will happen if unexpected circumstances occur? For example if there's a sudden gust of unexpected tailwind resulting in a drop in airspeed? I don't think there's anymore room to pick up speed?

Quoting XJRamper (Reply 5): Um...that one would have given me a pucker feeling. But, trusting and knowing your aircraft makes you feel a lil bit better.

I have to agree. If I was flying that it would have made me a bit nervous as there is not much room for something to go wrong. Personally, I'd like just a bit more room when departing a runway but sometimes you'll have to use most of the real estate. In the pictured case it's especially important to use all available runway, hold the brakes and spool up the engines.

TW

[Edited 2006-01-31 02:13:00]

Quoting Mr.BA (Reply 8): What will happen if unexpected circumstances occur? For example if there's a sudden gust of unexpected tailwind resulting in a drop in airspeed? I don't think there's anymore room to pick up speed?

You're assuming the aircraft rotated late because of insufficient airspeed. The pilots may have chosen to rotate well beyond the point at which the plane could sustain flight in order to get a better climb speed. Any extra tailwind would have resulted in rotation just a few more metres down the runway. Also, the telephoto lens does it's usual trick of making certain distances seem shorter.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10): Also, the telephoto lens does it's usual trick of making certain distances seem shorter.

Look at the aircrafts shadow on the threshold markers. This aircraft IS at the end of the runway.

BUT...

Judeing by rotation of the trucks of the center main landing gear, there is no weight on this aircrafts wheels. And as pointed out, it could have been well above it's normal Vr at this point.

I can't believe what I'm reading, does anybody realise that this plane is on the piano keys and still on the ground? Hello. I would fire both these pilots if I was the chief pilot.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10): The pilots may have chosen to rotate well beyond the point at which the plane could sustain flight in order to get a better climb speed.

You rotate at Vr (which allows for a tailwind, as it's an airspeed), no later. By the time you are in the air you will be at V2+10.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10): Also, the telephoto lens does it's usual trick of making certain distances seem shorter.

The aircraft is clearly over the piano keys. Telephoto foreshortening won't change that.

The aircraft is airborne, but only just. Something went badly wrong somewhere.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10): The pilots may have chosen to rotate well beyond the point at which the plane could sustain flight in order to get a better climb speed.

Well, what the pilots may or may not have chosen to do is beyond me: They did something wrong here, most likely on the calculation-side of the takeoff performance.

As you can see, climb performance is definitely not restricting here (they're taking off over the sea!). Even on a 4-engine aircraft, losing an engine right after V1 (which occurred, oh, say, a minute ago) would've meant disaster.

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 13): You rotate at Vr (which allows for a tailwind, as it's an airspeed), no later. By the time you are in the air you will be at V2+10.

Jetlagged, Starlionblue is correct in stating that it is a possible procedure. In order to improve climb performance, it's possible to adjust Vr upward, make use of level acceleration and then climb out at a steeper angle. It's called an "improved climb" procedure. But as I said before, that's probably not the case here.

I've spent some time at Turkish airports during long turnarounds where I'd go and visit some Tupolevs and Ilyushins and just gawk at their cockpits. Dials that I can't even decipher what they're there for. Chatting with a flight engineer on an IL-96 going from the south of Turkey to Moscow, I asked how long the flight was. He answered "about one hour". Back in my own cockpit, I checked the distance; it was 3000 km (1600nm). I didn't know IL-96 could fly Mach 3, and it didn't raise my regard for their operation much either. I also love those planes starting up with huge fireballs coming out of their engines every so often.
Simply stated, even though the IL-96 in point was as new as our own 757, it was clearly developed in a time when performance was sufficient when you didn't hit anything on takeoff and stricter regs weren't around yet.

Safe to say that you won't ever find me in one of those aircraft.

Grbld

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 13): Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10): The pilots may have chosen to rotate well beyond the point at which the plane could sustain flight in order to get a better climb speed. You rotate at Vr (which allows for a tailwind, as it's an airspeed), no later. By the time you are in the air you will be at V2+10.

Jetlagged, there is such a thing as "improved climb" takeoffs. With a heavy takeoff on a long runway, the Max Take off weight can be increased when the V-speeds are increased. With my operator this is done with a computer program on a laptop we have in the cockpit. No guesswork involved and all regulations are complied with. You are correct when saying that rotation is done at Vr, but this Vr may have been increased above the min Vr required at that A/c weight. That's how it works with a lot of operators.

Now, what this picture is concerned:
Well, I would be pretty scared if I were jumpseating in the cockpit and seeing the rwy end getting closer. Of course we don't know what happened, maybe they had an engine failure at V1? (I wouldn't be amazed if they flew on with that) Or perhaps they are allowed to use a margin of Vr speeds (I never heard of such a procedure, but I could imagine it existing) Let's imagine that a pilot would choose to delay rotation beyond V1 on a long rwy. Would that create any problem as long as tire limiting speeds are respected? I don't think so: if a engine failure occurs, the pilot can still rotate at a normal pitch rate and convert speed into height. We cannot know what happened here or if they were unsafe or not.
Anyway, I would not feel comfortable flying with one of those Russian operators.

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 12): I can't believe what I'm reading, does anybody realise that this plane is on the piano keys and still on the ground? Hello. I would fire both these pilots if I was the chief pilot.

This coming from a College Student who probably doesn't even have 200 hours of flight time? Something you should learn, especially if want to be a pilot, is do not get into another crew's cockpit. You might think you know what is going on, but your chances are very small you have a clue. IN short you can learn from this, and evaluate what might have gone wrong and what you would do different. To say what you did, is flat out irresponsible.

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 13): The aircraft is airborne, but only just. Something went badly wrong somewhere.

Expansion on the above comment. Just remember when you screw up, or you do something that might appear wreckless, then think about what you said here. I'm sure you wouldn't like someone telling you you are a bad pilot, so don't tell them. Clearly there is some exceptional flying skill here because the aircraft is off the ground.

Quoting Sabenaboy (Reply 15): We cannot know what happened here or if they were unsafe or not.

Well said, wish others shared this view.

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 13): Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10): The pilots may have chosen to rotate well beyond the point at which the plane could sustain flight in order to get a better climb speed. You rotate at Vr (which allows for a tailwind, as it's an airspeed), no later. By the time you are in the air you will be at V2+10.

As has been said, improved climbout speed procedures might have been in effect. Of course you rotate at Vr, but Vr may be modified.

Anyway, I'm not saying that's exactly what happened here, I'm just saying sometimes pilots want to use the entire runway.

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 12): I would fire both these pilots if I was the chief pilot.

And you have how many hours in Transport category aircraft? I sure don't know the particulars of that particular take-off; do you?

Why did the Pilot not Reject.
Or was things under control & the manuvere was delibrite.
regds
MEL

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 19): Why did the Pilot not Reject.

Well, it's better to get airborne just at the end of the rwy then reject and find yourself overshooting the rwy. Once past v1, you continue, "whatever happens" (note the parentheses)

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 19): Or was things under control & the manuvere was deliberate.

I don't know. The only people who can answer that were sitting in the cockpit. I sure wouldn't have been comfortable on that flight.

Regards,
Sabenaboy

Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 16): Clearly there is some exceptional flying skill here because the aircraft is off the ground.

Longbow...this comment is just as unfounded as the comments that doubt the skill and/or judgement of the pilots. We simply weren't there, so we can't possibly know.

Besides, I would hesitate to compliment one's "exceptional flying skill" when bad judgement or incorrect calculations might have gotten them into the situation in the first place.

Anyway, I don't think it's prudent to label this as "exceptional flying skill". I'm reminded of some words a wise man once said:

Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 16): do not get into another crew's cockpit. You might think you know what is going on, but your chances are very small you have a clue.

 




2H4

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 21): Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 16): Clearly there is some exceptional flying skill here because the aircraft is off the ground. Longbow...this comment is just as unfounded as the comments that doubt the skill and/or judgement of the pilots. We simply weren't there, so we can't possibly know. Besides, I would hesitate to compliment one's "exceptional flying skill" when bad judgement or incorrect calculations might have gotten them into the situation in the first place. Anyway, I don't think it's prudent to label this as "exceptional flying skill". I'm reminded of some words a wise man once said: Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 16): do not get into another crew's cockpit. You might think you know what is going on, but your chances are very small you have a clue. Wink 2H4

The thread should have been closed after reply 21 (for those who can't count nor read: It's 2H4's reply.)
I really liked reading it so welcome to my RU list.

Regds
jush

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 21): Besides, I would hesitate to compliment one's "exceptional flying skill" when bad judgement or incorrect calculations might have gotten them into the situation in the first place.

You wouldn't compliment the exceptional flying skills of the air transat 330 crew? I would  

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 23): You wouldn't compliment the exceptional flying skills of the air transat 330 crew?

You mean to keep them and their passengers going swimming becuase there was an un-accounted for fuel consumption? It is on par with the Gimli Glider. IMHO, I would wonder why one tank's quantity is decreasing faster than the other one, and then transfer more fuel into it...

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 24): I would wonder why one tank's quantity is decreasing faster than the other one, and then transfer more fuel into it...

yes, we all would, but would we had we been in the situation! very easy to say what you would have done with the benefit of hindsight!

Edit: What? i just read that properly! you would see that one tanks level is decreasing faster than the other, then transfer fuel into it? transfer fuel into the tank thats losing fuel quicker?

[Edited 2006-01-31 19:16:02]

Oi!! who changed my title? lol

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 25): transfer fuel into the tank thats losing fuel quicker?

Exactly. Simple math will tell you there will come a pont in time where the fuel supply will be exhausted. It is best when that happens, that you are on the ground. They screwed the pooch and were lucky to walk away from it.

Quoting Sabenaboy (Reply 15): You are correct when saying that rotation is done at Vr, but this Vr may have been increased above the min Vr required at that A/c weight. That's how it works with a lot of operators.

I didn't say that Vr was set in stone or couldn't be adjusted. I took Starlionblue's comment to mean the pilots had chosen to delay rotation beyond computed Vr, which would be unsafe. BTW why would improved climbout speeds be required for a takeoff over water?

Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 16): Clearly there is some exceptional flying skill here because the aircraft is off the ground.

Why exceptional? It's exceptional that the aircraft is flying? The crew making a mistake, then recovering is not exceptional flying.

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 23): You wouldn't compliment the exceptional flying skills of the air transat 330 crew? I would

Not sure what this has to do with the thread. 10/10 for the landing, nul points for the preceding events. Had they not made a basic error of airmanship they would not have had to land without engines.

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 27): Exactly. Simple math will tell you there will come a pont in time where the fuel supply will be exhausted. It is best when that happens, that you are on the ground. They screwed the pooch and were lucky to walk away from it.

why the hell would feed a a fuel leak?

Quoting Matt72033 (Reply 29): why the hell would feed a a fuel leak?

They cross fed from the tank that did not have an engine with a chafed thru fuel line. There was a discrepancy in the fuel qty, so they tried to balance it. They did not know it was going overboard.

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 30): They cross fed from the tank that did not have an engine with a chafed thru fuel line. There was a discrepancy in the fuel qty, so they tried to balance it. They did not know it was going overboard.

yes....but then they didnt close the crossfeed valve when it made no difference!...effectively pumping kerosine into the atmosphere.

You look at your tank quantity, you look at the fuel flow per hour, if they dont add up, you have a leak somewhere! its not in the tank, its not being used by the engine! theres no point transferring more fuel into the tank! as they proved quite effectively!

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 30): They did not know it was going overboard

this is the biggest problem......if they had trusted their instruments, and not blamed it on a faulty computer, they would have figured they had a leak one hell of a lot faster!

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 30): They cross fed from the tank that did not have an engine with a chafed thru fuel line. There was a discrepancy in the fuel qty, so they tried to balance it. They did not know it was going overboard.

They were losing TONNES of fuel, it doesnt take much to wonder where the hell its actually GOING! They did crossfeed the fuel from the left tank to the right tank, and thats what they did wrong - they basically dumped all their fuel overboard and starved the engines 160km out from the airport.

Great bit of flying after that, but they got themselves into that situation.

As previously stated "we were not there"

The only thing I see is that there appears to be considerable flap extension for normal take-off but I am not familiar enough to know.

Okie

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 21): Longbow...this comment is just as unfounded as the comments that doubt the skill and/or judgement of the pilots. We simply weren't there, so we can't possibly know. Besides, I would hesitate to compliment one's "exceptional flying skill" when bad judgement or incorrect calculations might have gotten them into the situation in the first place. Anyway, I don't think it's prudent to label this as "exceptional flying skill". I'm reminded of some words a wise man once said:

I do not recall any news of an accident involving this photograph either. I'd say that is exceptional flying skill that no matter what envelope of performance they were in, or out of.

The fact the aircraft is flying and didn't crash is a tribute to flying abilities, they definitely either consciously made a choice to do that or erred somewhere, adapted, overcame, and got airborne. We all acknowledge the miracle "it got off in time" look of the photo. So that alone means they did SOMETHING exceptional, right?

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 28): Why exceptional? It's exceptional that the aircraft is flying? The crew making a mistake, then recovering is not exceptional flying

I firmly believe you are not reading the thread Jetlagged, I believe there have been many thoroughly thought through alternatives to your hap hazard guess of a "mistake." I noticed you are an engineer, so stop over engineering it. Flying is more than just operating controls in sequence. If it was that simple, we would have more chimpanzees flying airplanes at a damn cheaper rate then our current pilots. There is a lot of Feel and Instinct in flying, and experience to back it up.

Again do you not see the flaw in your reasoning that since you were not there you could "HONESTLY" say they were screwing up? C'mon stop thinking that life is like Microsoft Flight Simulator. Once you hit V1 you better be going up.

You find the pilots of that aircraft and have them come on here and write what happened. If you are a professional, then you would be real quick to sit down and acknowledge any mistakes you have made. There is always something to be learned by it. If you want to side seat drive out here and say they did this, this, this, wrong, then you are not in the right either. You still were not there in the cockpit, when he lost one engine, had a compressor stall, or made a bad error.

We are all humans prone to errors, I have made mine in the cockpit, many times. I have had near misses and seen the worst. Does it make me a horrible pilot? No, you make mistakes, show and tell, learn and you get back in the cockpit again and fly on.

Get the picture yet?

Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 34):

Don't diss Microsoft Flight Simulator! I once aborted a takeoff past V1 on there and went off the end of the runway - that's realistic, eh? Flight Sim isn't easier than real life. You just can't kill yourself.

If there is a thread about "one thing that you learn in aviation that you can tell the others" there is only one thing I can say."It never looks like what you see from the outside".Every single flight is different and it has its unique circumstances.

We have nothing to comment about the situation since we have no access to the TO data of that particular flight and the process of the decision making of the crew up to that point.None of us is qualified to comment about the performance figures of the airplane either.

So it is really unfair say as a "mistake" without proper information.As I told in my previous post I have took of from very short fields with an airplane full of fuel and passengers.If there was a picture of it it may look a later than a normal rotation.I wouldn't appreciate any ridiculous comments if someone pictured my airplane and labeling it as a mistake without having a clue of how much I calculated every single possibility even before loading anything into the airplane.

And one last word to all future pilots;

This may as well be a mistake,as many many mistakes were done by many pilots.You'll never understand when you find yourself making the same mistake.Just don't judge them but try to learn from their mistakes.As a very vise man said "Try to learn from the mistakes of the others as you may not live long enough to make them all by your self and learn from it"

Quoting Jetflyer (Reply 35): Don't diss Microsoft Flight Simulator! I once aborted a takeoff past V1 on there and went off the end of the runway - that's realistic, eh? Flight Sim isn't easier than real life

WAOW.   That sure was scary isn't it?I flew thousands of hours on 737 and 320 family and never experienced such a thing.Maybe if you give more details ,lots of more pilots can learn from your valuable realistic experiences.

Quoting Jetflyer (Reply 35): Don't diss Microsoft Flight Simulator! I once aborted a takeoff past V1 on there and went off the end of the runway - that's realistic, eh? Flight Sim isn't easier than real life. You just can't kill yourself.

A little referance material
Can A FS Pilot Make A Regular Flight? (by D5DBY Oct 1 2005 in Tech Ops)

Its a bit bizarre that the photographer mentioned that fact that the nose wheel came off the ground before the 1000ft marker - and we still get this situation. Granted his observation might not have been that accurate. Wouldn't 100% agree that it was definitely exceptional, might have realised their mistake after V1, rotated, and screamed their Russian lungs out in the hope of a bit of luck. Impossible to know true scenario as mentioned above.

Quoting Jetflyer (Reply 35): Don't diss Microsoft Flight Simulator! I once aborted a takeoff past V1 on there and went off the end of the runway - that's realistic, eh? Flight Sim isn't easier than real life. You just can't kill yourself.

I hope you are joking. If not, I am sure many pilots on this website are now kicking themselves for the tens of thousands of dollars they spent and years wasted in training when all they had to do was pluck down $70, buy ms Flight simulator, and take a few months to master it.  

Yep it's easy to say that there is something wrong there butt...
No one likes to be second guessed, but I'm going to do it anyway.

Every calculation in turbojets is assuming that you will loose an engine at or above V1. Yes it is very odd be cause you will likely have something else go wrong besides an engine, but back to the point. After that engine failure, the calculations are SUPPOSED to have the aircraft over the departure end of the runway at 35ft with the attitude for V2.

So what could have happened is that they lost one at V1, and then "held it down " a little to get under this huge flock of birds that were just over head as they where thinking about rotating a thousand feet prior!  

By the way, A very large drop off at the end of the runway before you skip off the water always helps! Just ask the navy!

bbl

I wonder what the Photographer was thinking while readying for the Pic.

Guess What happened in the Cockpit would never be known.
regds
MEL

Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 34): I do not recall any news of an accident involving this photograph either. I'd say that is exceptional flying skill that no matter what envelope of performance they were in, or out of.

I think what you are saying here is that anytime an aircraft completes a cycle without an accident, there is exceptional flying skill involved.

What?

I must be a damn exceptional pilot then.

-Meister

Quoting Airfoilsguy (Reply 40): I hope you are joking. If not, I am sure many pilots on this website are now kicking themselves for the tens of thousands of dollars they spent and years wasted in training when all they had to do was pluck down $70, buy ms Flight simulator, and take a few months to master it.

I hear you Airfoilsguy. I was a product of Microsoft FLight Sim, when I first took to the skies in a 152. Now I fly longbows in the Army, and truely know Microsoft FS is a game. There is a HUGE disparity between the two that will never be real.

Sure it looks nice, is fun to do, and even now I use it to practice my IFR Crosschecks. It still pales incomparison to the real thing, where you have propriosceptive (SP), and vestibular illusions. You also have many variables that cannot be put into a digital program for accuracy. It is an awesome piece of software, just can't call yourself a pilot because you can play a game. You still learn a lot and know more then the average joe after playing such a game.

Let me suggest that we close this thread after this reply!  

Allow me to summarize:

Quote: "Is this an unusual takeoff"

answer: yes (we wouldn't be discussing it if it wasn't)

Quote: are you browning your pants at this point?

I'd be close to doing that. I'm sure the crew held their breath too.

Quote: Was this a deliberate maneuver?

We can't know, but IF it was deliberate, it is safe to say that they cut it too close! We can speculate as much as we want, but we will never know unless one of the pilots involved is an a.net-member and informs us.

Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 16): Clearly there is some exceptional flying skill here

That's impossible to tell! The DHL Baghdad crew demonstrated exceptional flying skills. I'm reluctant to use such words for this Russian crew.


If I would have been watching this takeoff, I would have said:
"Wow, what the f... happened there?"

And that's the only smart comment that can be made about this picture with the facts that are available to us!

Regards,
Sabenaboy

Just a curiosity...

Remembered a photo of the very same airliner taking off from BCN cutting it quite close too (although, not that extreme!)


View Large View Medium

Photo © Marlo Plate - Iberian Spotters

Quoting Airfoilsguy (Reply 40):

No I'm not joking because some flight simulators reproduce pitch+power=performance very well like FS2004. I learnt to fly real aircraft about 3x quicker than anyone else thanks to using it. I love it. So what if everyone else thinks it sucks.

Quoting Jetflyer (Reply 47): So what if everyone else thinks it sucks.

Great, take your soap box and go to the Hobby forum. Let me guess, you are also qualified to fly a 747-400 3X faster than an airline pilot going thru a transition program too?

Mods, please close this thread as this is headed in the wrong direction.

Agreeing with XJet, yea the pucker factor would be high on that one high. I fly a 152 into a little grass trip called Mt. Pleasant Airport here in PA all the time, and almost every take off is like that, over trees. (depending on the runway its 2200ft...not bad at all..,..or 1600 ft over trees....high pucker factor, both are grass)


ATCT