BA A321 tailstrike.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Nearer home than before!
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would hazard a guess that luck and statistical anomaly would play a part.
When I started flying, there was a lot of difficult and unpleasant aircraft to master. Many a cruel dinosaur to placate and also many old wizards to learn from.
My last type rating was onto the 737 after years of flying more primitive and temperamental beasts.
The Standard Alteon CBT and FSTD training were the "modern way". I of course went through the system fine and came out able to follow SOP and fly the thing easily and safely, like all the others before me. I still basically knew nothing about the aircraft... But that's seemingly how Boeing want it.
I have spent the last 2 years correcting that... On the line, in the hangar, anywhere I can. Watching my colleagues looking at the Wx radar trying to figure it out because they can't work out what the flippin' great black cloud in front of us is or them busily tapping at the FMC to build a pink line to give VNAV guidance as they simply cannot figure it out by looking out the window is saddening.
Yes, the everyday safety of modern avionics is great. But the lack of airmanship, common sense or basic flying ability is growing daily and just once in a while it still comes in handy.:
AF447. BA038 (meant to say this being the exception!!), in fact the various ATRs, Airbus Boeings and others that have either crashed because of mis handling or not because of good airmanship over the last few years.
When I started flying, there was a lot of difficult and unpleasant aircraft to master. Many a cruel dinosaur to placate and also many old wizards to learn from.
My last type rating was onto the 737 after years of flying more primitive and temperamental beasts.
The Standard Alteon CBT and FSTD training were the "modern way". I of course went through the system fine and came out able to follow SOP and fly the thing easily and safely, like all the others before me. I still basically knew nothing about the aircraft... But that's seemingly how Boeing want it.
I have spent the last 2 years correcting that... On the line, in the hangar, anywhere I can. Watching my colleagues looking at the Wx radar trying to figure it out because they can't work out what the flippin' great black cloud in front of us is or them busily tapping at the FMC to build a pink line to give VNAV guidance as they simply cannot figure it out by looking out the window is saddening.
Yes, the everyday safety of modern avionics is great. But the lack of airmanship, common sense or basic flying ability is growing daily and just once in a while it still comes in handy.:
AF447. BA038 (meant to say this being the exception!!), in fact the various ATRs, Airbus Boeings and others that have either crashed because of mis handling or not because of good airmanship over the last few years.
Last edited by RVF750; 15th Jul 2016 at 13:10.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What ever happened to 2.5 to 3 degrees per second basic pilot training
Well that doesn't work on different a/c.
Consider this statement - "2 to 2.5 degrees per second, reaching a target of 7-9 degrees in four seconds." That's an actual pitch rate of 1.75-2.25 degrees per second.
Knowing the actual limits, and techniques, of different a/c is important.
Boeing has tail strike guidance on it's HUD's. Dotted line, keep the VV (velocity vector) at or below the limit. What's the basic limit? Two degrees less than tail strike angle.
That's not that tough to see. Tail strike limit of 9.5 degrees on the 321? Freeze the pitch attitude at the 7.5 mark on the ADI and wait for the plane to fly.
11.5 degree tail strike limit on the 319? Freeze it at the 10 mark until liftoff.
737NG? Target/freeze of 7.5 degrees (HUD limit display at 8 degrees)
757-200? 10 degrees.
767-300? 7.5 degrees.
777-200? 10 degrees.
777-300? 7.5 degrees.
Rotate - freeze/pause if necessary at target limit, liftoff, mini pause, continue rotation. Done smoothly it's unnoticeable to the passengers.
Well that doesn't work on different a/c.
Consider this statement - "2 to 2.5 degrees per second, reaching a target of 7-9 degrees in four seconds." That's an actual pitch rate of 1.75-2.25 degrees per second.
Knowing the actual limits, and techniques, of different a/c is important.
Boeing has tail strike guidance on it's HUD's. Dotted line, keep the VV (velocity vector) at or below the limit. What's the basic limit? Two degrees less than tail strike angle.
That's not that tough to see. Tail strike limit of 9.5 degrees on the 321? Freeze the pitch attitude at the 7.5 mark on the ADI and wait for the plane to fly.
11.5 degree tail strike limit on the 319? Freeze it at the 10 mark until liftoff.
737NG? Target/freeze of 7.5 degrees (HUD limit display at 8 degrees)
757-200? 10 degrees.
767-300? 7.5 degrees.
777-200? 10 degrees.
777-300? 7.5 degrees.
Rotate - freeze/pause if necessary at target limit, liftoff, mini pause, continue rotation. Done smoothly it's unnoticeable to the passengers.
Last edited by misd-agin; 6th Jan 2016 at 14:54. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look ahead of the aft section "dome"..and who says she's not a curvy thing of beauty.
When Boeing introduced the B737-400 they also included a tail bumper. Why didn’t Airbus put something in place as well when introducing the A321?
So it's not true then; the pilot can take an AB outside its comfort zone. A RAD ALT on the tail link into the pitch computer and a filter than resists further pilot input. Being a Boeing man I thought that's what all these Toulouse electrons was about. Don't let the pilot bend the a/c. There have been other demonstrations of this myth being false; here's another.
But I do ask the question as a technician, not a pilot: why not have proximity sensors in the tail linked to pitch channel; both take off and landing?
So it's not true then; the pilot can take an AB outside its comfort zone. A RAD ALT on the tail link into the pitch computer and a filter than resists further pilot input. Being a Boeing man I thought that's what all these Toulouse electrons was about. Don't let the pilot bend the a/c. There have been other demonstrations of this myth being false; here's another.
But I do ask the question as a technician, not a pilot: why not have proximity sensors in the tail linked to pitch channel; both take off and landing?
I agree with Glad Rag, Airbus FCTM A320 say that although it is 3 degrees a second but anything down to 2 degrees has no significant degradation of performance. I always ease off and hold near before the critical pitch, aircraft flies fine. Most tail scrapes do occur on landing though, more variables and different geometry.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ijatta
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by misd-agin
Rotate - freeze/pause if necessary at target limit, liftoff, mini pause, continue rotation. Done smoothly it's unnoticeable to the passengers.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the PF flies the aircraft then when visual the PM becomes the PF and the now PM retards the thrust leaver? How utterly bizarre and in contraction to the airbus FCOM.
Surely if people retard at different and inconsistent rates its going to make flaring that little bit more difficult and create more of a challenge for perfectinf the technique.
Chop the thrust and down she goes. Smoothly and progressively closing them can aid a good touch down. Not having clue as to when and how quickly the other guy will cut the thrust just seems a bit odd.
BA has used cadets since then days of Hamble has it not?
Surely if people retard at different and inconsistent rates its going to make flaring that little bit more difficult and create more of a challenge for perfectinf the technique.
Chop the thrust and down she goes. Smoothly and progressively closing them can aid a good touch down. Not having clue as to when and how quickly the other guy will cut the thrust just seems a bit odd.
BA has used cadets since then days of Hamble has it not?
Meatballs - you've totally misinterpreted BAs monitored approach technique. Assuming visual and stable, at 1,000' the PM (who became PM at TOD) takes over and lands the aircraft, they handle the thrust levers until touch down when the PM selects reverse. I used to be skeptical about the monitored approach before joining BA but seeing it in action, I actually think it's quite a good thing.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh. I get it now! I feel for the guy/gal. I can't think of a worse thing to happen so soon into their career. I hope s/he is back online and hopefully moving on.
From the AAIB report
Have BA put such restrictions in place and if so, what are these experience requirements? Do other operators of the A321 limit landings to crew of a certain experience level?
In addition, the operator is considering introducing an
experience restriction for co-pilots performing landings on the A321.
experience restriction for co-pilots performing landings on the A321.
So if co-pilot experience restrictions are already in place, that's only been done in the last few days.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The report is from the current month's AAIB bulletin and can be assumed to be reasonably up to date. It makes a clear distinction between safety actions that the operator has already implemented, like specific A321 differences training, and those that are so far just being considered.
So if co-pilot experience restrictions are already in place, that's only been done in the last few days.
So if co-pilot experience restrictions are already in place, that's only been done in the last few days.
New cadets cannot fly A321 aircraft until they have been line flying for 6 months. This policy has been in place for some time (6 months or so)
That's incorrect.
New cadets cannot fly A321 aircraft until they have been line flying for 6 months. This policy has been in place for some time (6 months or so)
New cadets cannot fly A321 aircraft until they have been line flying for 6 months. This policy has been in place for some time (6 months or so)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squawk7700 - Apart from the top of page 8!
My comment was in regard to experience not being listed as one of the factors to the accident.
The airline certainly thought it was a factor, which is why not only do they have some measures in place already, but also state they will evaluate restricting A321 landings even further for inexperienced crew.
de minimus non curat lex
I am sure the Operator has learnt a lot from this event.
The benefit of hindslght is a wonderful thing.
Two days post completion of line training still requires very careful handling, and I doubt very much even if "PITCH" had been called by the Captain it would have prevented the incident.
A similar event occurred at KOS a few years ago, and was subject to an AAIB enquiry. Worth reading as it highlights the importance of being fully and consistently competent at landing the beastie.
As to why the non handling pilot has the task of selecting REVERSE must lie in some ancient SOP [Boeing 707? VC10?] as a sensible procedure in a stonking crosswind where the handling pilot had both hands on the control column initially. ?? Hardly applicable to the BUS.
Perhaps someone can shed some light as to this procedure?
The benefit of hindslght is a wonderful thing.
Two days post completion of line training still requires very careful handling, and I doubt very much even if "PITCH" had been called by the Captain it would have prevented the incident.
A similar event occurred at KOS a few years ago, and was subject to an AAIB enquiry. Worth reading as it highlights the importance of being fully and consistently competent at landing the beastie.
As to why the non handling pilot has the task of selecting REVERSE must lie in some ancient SOP [Boeing 707? VC10?] as a sensible procedure in a stonking crosswind where the handling pilot had both hands on the control column initially. ?? Hardly applicable to the BUS.
Perhaps someone can shed some light as to this procedure?
Last edited by parkfell; 15th Jul 2016 at 15:49. Reason: syntax
So not the same thing at all, unless you're suggesting the AAIB have got the wrong end of the stick.