767 hard landing

[Colonel Sanders]

Ouch



You can see the wrinkled fuselage at 40+ seconds in.

Stick & rudder skills are indeed obsolete in our brave new world of technology.

[jpilot77]

Jesus

[Colonel Sanders]

Look on the bright side. They did better than these guys:

[pelmet]

767's have a history of being damaged due to fast de-rotation incidents. You may remember that Skyservice wrote on off in the Dominican a few years ago. Any investigation report(most likely only done internally) was not released to the public. If anyone has a copy, please publish.

It is important in any airliner(and really any tricycle gear aircraft to not just let the nose come crashing down after touchdown. The nosewheel should be flown on if possible. That is easier on some aircraft than others. I seem to remember that the Arrow I flew was difficult to keep the nosewheel off the ground for soft field landings while Cessna's were easier. Of course this was more for not having the nosegear on the potentially rough surface at higher speeds.

In an airliner this is not a worry, but the nose can be quite high off the ground on a long jet and if you let it come down quickly, damage can be done, to the nosegear or to the fuselage. Spoilers can have an effect on the tendency for the nose to pitch. Some people have damaged aircraft(I believe including the SkyService aircraft) because they have put a significant forward push on the control column after touchdown for whatever reason. I also believe that earlier 767's had a weaker structure up top than later models making them more vulnerable to damage.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeroma ... story.html

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... 005-12.pdf

[Rowdy]

Well thats the end of that airframe

[YYZSaabGuy]

Stick & rudder skills are indeed obsolete in our brave new world of technology.

A bit of a leap to extrapolate from one admittedly crappy landing to the demise of skills generally, no? On the same day that this one crew messed up, several tens of thousands of other crews did a fine job of using their stick & rudder skills and made non-eventful landings.

[trey kule]

A bit of a leap to extrapolate from one admittedly crappy landing to the demise of skills generally, no? On the same day that this one crew messed up, several tens of thousands of other crews did a fine job of using their stick & rudder skills and made non-eventful landings

Seems like there might be some other factors than a demise of skills to me.

[Colonel Sanders]

Response to TK's personal attack (above) deleted
after he deleted his personal attack.

[boeingboy]

Well thats the end of that airframe

Not really. In fact I think it will be repaired, due to the fact the damage is apparently not that bad - ie no torn out nose gear etc... and the plane is only 9 years old. Cheaper than buying a new one.

Boeing AOG teams have repaired similar damage to other 767's in about 6 weeks.

[boeingboy]

Stick & rudder skills are indeed obsolete in our brave new world of technology.

Reports are that there Was very considerable windshear, turbulence and a strong crosswind, on limits , at Narita that morning, following the close proximity of a typhoon. Don't be quite so quick to judge. Landing a heavy jet in those conditions can be really challenging, it's when you really earn your pay. Perhaps the hardest part is deciding on final approach whether to continue or divert.

[Eric Janson]

Well thats the end of that airframe

That's not correct - this can be repaired.

[polar one]

It is good to see that there are other that there are other possabilities rather than a lack of stick and rudder skills that might have caused this unfortunate incident.

[trey kule]

Back on topic - if you think this crew had stick & rudder
skills that met your standards, who am I to argue with you

I gave no such opinion, and I have to wonder why you would attribute that to me, and in particular, what comes across as condescending.
What I did question was the leap in your logic to generalize this one incident as a general lack of stick and rudder skills.

Why? Because, as others posted , there were thousands of uneventful and successful landings that day, and pretty much every day. Statistically, I dont think you can draw any conclusion of the stick and rudder skills based on this one incident.
Others have also mentioned the weather conditions may have been a factor.. I have no idea as to what the real cause , or root cause of this accident was.

As to your other two examples...Two...count em...two...not enough for me to generalize anything from that.

This was a sad incident resulting at the very least, I would think, some serious costs. So it is important that rather than jumping in and speculating on the reason without any justification, we should all sit back for awhile and find out what was the real cause.. I know it is not popular, but sometimes we just have to wait for investigations.

[Colonel Sanders]

I am certain that an SMS RCA (Safety Management System Root Cause Analysis) will discover that the Captain had difficulty potty training, which as we all know from the landmark NTSB study of 1982 has a significant statistical correlation exceeding 0.7 with respect to career accidents involving damages in excess of $15.7M (corrected for inflation since 1982).

[Rowdy]

Well thats the end of that airframe

That's not correct - this can be repaired.

Seriously? If so, then that in itself is impressive. I'd imagine there would be more damage than the visible wrinkles in the forward fuselage. Like the pressure capsule? Gear attaches? Engine mounts? Anything not designed for that kind of impact? Again, I know very little about airliners and their structures..

[linecrew]

Well thats the end of that airframe

That's not correct - this can be repaired.

Seriously? If so, then that in itself is impressive. I'd imagine there would be more damage than the visible wrinkles in the forward fuselage. Like the pressure capsule? Gear attaches? Engine mounts? Anything not designed for that kind of impact? Again, I know very little about airliners and their structures..

Skyservice bent there's in almost the exact same way a few years ago after a pooched landing somewhere down south. The aircraft is still very much alive and well flying with Condor/Thomas Cook

[Meatservo]

It is important in any airliner(and really any tricycle gear aircraft to not just let the nose come crashing down after touchdown. The nosewheel should be flown on if possible. That is easier on some aircraft than others. I seem to remember that the Arrow I flew was difficult to keep the nosewheel off the ground for soft field landings while Cessna's were easier. Of course this was more for not having the nosegear on the potentially rough surface at higher speeds.

So basically what you're saying is that putting the nosewheel down hard enough to lift the main gear off again is not the correct procedure?

I've seen this manoeuvre before-it's called "the twin otter co-pilot".

[mbav8r]

//edit by Sulako. If you have a problem with someone's post, then report it. Personal attacks are not allowed on this site. Take the weekend off and enjoy the nice weather.

[HavaJava]

I can't say I'm a fan of Colonel Sanders (nor was I of Hedley)...but wow mbav8r...I don't think he deserves what you just said.

Those sort of remarks should be reserved for child molestors and serial killers.

[mbav8r]

//personal attack removed by Sulako. It's not nice to call people imbeciles.

[Beefitarian]

Harsh MB. He's just kind of jaded I hope.

[unregistered]

Skyservice wrote on off in the Dominican a few years ago.

As was mentioned earlier - this is incorrect. The aircraft was repaired in PUJ and returned to service.

[Colonel Sanders]

[Eric Janson]

Seriously? If so, then that in itself is impressive. I'd imagine there would be more damage than the visible wrinkles in the forward fuselage. Like the pressure capsule? Gear attaches? Engine mounts? Anything not designed for that kind of impact? Again, I know very little about airliners and their structures..

As stated earlier Boeing has a team of specialists that oversee repairs of this nature. A cost estimate will be done and if the cost of repair is less than the value of the aircraft it will be repaired.

From PPRuNe thread http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4884 ... t-nrt.html


These are the Metars

Metars:
RJAA 200600Z 22014KT 9999 FEW025 BKN200 27/22 Q0998 WS R16R WS R16L TEMPO 23020G32KT RMK 1CU025 7AC200 A2948
RJAA 200530Z 22015G25KT 190V260 9999 FEW025 BKN/// 27/21 Q0998 WS R16R WS R16L NOSIG RMK 1CU025 A2947 0506Z MOD TURB 500FT ON DEP COURSE RWY16R B787 AND 0514Z MOD TURB 400FT ON DEP COURSE RWY16R B767
RJAA 200500Z 23015G26KT 9999 FEW025 BKN/// 27/21 Q0998 WS R16R WS R16L NOSIG RMK 1CU025 A2947
RJAA 200430Z 23016G29KT 9999 FEW025 BKN/// 28/21 Q0998 WS R16L NOSIG RMK 1CU025A2948
RJAA 200400Z 22014G27KT 170V250 9999 FEW025 BKN180 28/22 Q0998 WS R16R NOSIG RMK 1CU025 5AC180 A2947
RJAA 200333Z 22017G27KT 9999 FEW025 SCT180 BKN/// 28/22 Q0997 RMK 2CU025 4AC180A2947
RJAA 200330Z 22019KT 9999 FEW025 SCT180 BKN/// 28/22 Q0997 TEMPO 23020G32KT RMK2CU025 4AC180 A2946
RJAA 200302Z 22017G27KT 180V250 9999 FEW025 SCT180 BKN/// 28/22 Q0998 RMK 2CU025 3AC180 A2947
RJAA 200300Z 22018KT 180V250 9999 FEW025 SCT180 BKN/// 28/22 Q0998 WS R16L TEMPO 23020G32KT RMK 2CU025 3AC180 A2947
RJAA 200230Z 21016G29KT 9999 FEW025 BKN/// 28/21 Q0997 WS R16L NOSIG RMK 2CU025 A2947
RJAA 200200Z 22017G27KT 180V250 9999 FEW025 SCT170 BKN/// 28/22 Q0998 WS R16R NOSIG RMK 2CU025 3AC170 A2948

Narita gets a lot of Windshear even with fairly light winds. The conditions above would make for a very challenging approach.

Any judgements are very premature - especially from people who don't fly into Narita or fly large jets for a living.

[TG]

Any judgements are very premature - especially from people who don't fly into Narita or fly large jets for a living.

Thank you for that...