nasty podstrike @ KLAX

[readywhenreaching]

podstrike landing captured at LAX yesterday amid many diversions because of strong crosswinds

A-net
and
JACDEC

[Airbubba]

Here's a famous video of another Santa Ana wind freighter go around from the late 1990's where they aborted the landing at ONT and diverted to LAX:

https://youtu.be/wGe7__S01P4

[Fzz]

These appear to be pictures of the damage:

https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/141975...6/26208714610/

[NSEU]

These appear to be pictures of the damage:

How big is that drain mast normally? 5~6 inches?

[ACMS]

Hell of a lot of left rudder applied.......

[Capn Bloggs]

Hell of a lot of left rudder applied.......

All crossed-up "below" 200ft... ain't that the published Boeing crosswind landing technique now?

[Doors to Automatic]

What would be the consequence for the pilots in a case like this? Clearly caused by a freak gust - presumably just put it down to experience, repair the pod and move on?

[NSEU]

Clearly caused by a freak gust - presumably just put it down to experience, repair the pod and move on?

I'd be curious to know if an engine change was called for. You would at least want a thorough inspection of the bolts which hold the engine on.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by NSEU

I'd be curious to know if an engine change was called for.

Reportedly not only No4 engine, but also the pylon, are being changed.

See the link in post #1.

[Airbubba]

What would be the consequence for the pilots in a case like this? Clearly caused by a freak gust - presumably just put it down to experience, repair the pod and move on?

Since the pilots are represented by the Teamsters Union it is unlikely that they will be fired. In a couple of similar cases elsewhere in years past the pilots were given some additional crosswind and windshear training in the sim and a line check and returned to normal flying.

[springbok449]

It's been reported elsewhere that the podscrape actually happened during a windshear go-around manoeuvre. Aircraft diverted to KONT...

[Piltdown Man]

What would be the consequence for the pilots in a case like this? Clearly caused by a freak gust - presumably just put it down to experience, repair the pod and move on?

If you have a proper airline, you will have selected and trained your pilots with a great deal of care. You will also have have spent the appropriate amount of effort creating an organisation that supports your business. All of this should have reduced the possibility of incidents like this occurring. But real life has a habit of exposing your weaknesses and delivering the unexpected. So when things like this happen, you should learn from it. Sacking your staff after they have tried to do their very best for you are the actions of a spineless, myopic management. Is the road to ruin. In the future, you won't get to hear about things that nearly went wrong, mistakes will get 'erased' and the first time you find out you have real problem is when people start dying and lawyers are banging on your door.

It is a shame that 'ambulance chasing' mentality has crept into our consciousness. In some people's mind, the "where there's blame there's a claim" attitude means that someone must always be at fault whenever there is an accident or damage. While it pays filthy lawyers and their grasping, scummy clients, it doesn't necessarily reflect what actually occurred and it certainly doesn't prevent re-occurrence. All it does is hide the truth, encourage the burying of evidence and make the world a significantly expensive and dangerous place to be.

I hope these guys are well defended by their union and their company use this a positive, but (very?) expensive learning opportunity. It's what properly run organsations do.

PM

[barit1]

I am NOT privy to any of this - but: It seems extraordinarily unlikely that the PF would have his/her feet held to the fire in a western country for a gusting crosswind - if forecast within AFM limits.

Punitive action is the signature of immature management in a third-world country. Yes, it happens there, and it's a risk one engages when so employed.

[Airbubba]

I am NOT privy to any of this - but: It seems extraordinarily unlikely that the PF would have his/her feet held to the fire in a western country for a gusting crosswind - if forecast within AFM limits.

As you said, things they will look at, was the crosswind within limits, were the company's stable approach criteria observed before the decision to go around and were the callouts on the approach made correctly?

A recent example of the feds pinging on exact callouts from the manual is with the 2013 Southwest 345 crash landing at LGA:

In addition, the captain did not follow SOPs at several points during the flight. As PM, she should have made the standard callout per the Southwest FOM when the airplane was above glideslope, stating "glideslope" and adding a descriptive word or words to the callout (for example, "one dot high"). Rather than make this callout, however, the captain repeatedly said "get down" to the first officer before stating "I got it." The way she handled the transfer of airplane control was also contrary to the FOM, which indicates that the PM should say "I have the aircraft."

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...23X13256&key=1

Also, it appears to me that the FAA and NTSB harvest the 'non-pertinent conversation' portions of the CVR record much more than in the past.

Remember for years we were taught that the CVR only recorded the last 30 minutes, you could erase it and anything on it would only be used to promote safety and never for punitive purposes?

Now there are at least two hours of conversation on the CVR and if you turn onto the wrong taxiway after landing it can become a reportable incident with the whole two hours fair game for review. And, that erase button may or may not really work on some models of the CVR it turns out.

One thing the Polar crew has going for them is the fact that they were flying a freighter, not a passenger plane. Traditionally you could crash widebodies for years in the cargo business (e.g. FedEx and more recently UPS) and the public and media would have little interest or awareness since there was 'no significant loss of life' as a local official infamously once said.

[JammedStab]

Regarding a couple of posts,

The drain mast on the bottom of the engine should always be checked on the walkaround as it is likely the first thing damaged and possibly the only visible damage from a pod strike. A VS pilot once discovered this during a walkaround according to a report I read.

As for erasing the CVR on the new solid state ones, I know of one incident where there was an overrun of a regional jet where the captain returned to the aircraft, powered up and erased. Little did he know that while the safety board could not read it, it could be returned to the manufacturer for retrieval of the recording.

[Doors to Automatic]

Not being a pilot I have no feel for how easy or difficult it is to land in these conditions. Is this situation down to bad technique - possibly as the result of poor training - or could it happen on any landing in such conditions and that it doesn't more often is purely down to luck, in other words no gust at the critical moment?

[Piltdown Man]

I'll stick my neck out. I find that the closer I get to my aircraft's limit, the more challenging it becomes. But it it managable. I can also tell you that the aircraft will normally handle some degree of misshandling. I think it would also be fair to say that this aircraft will have been flown by a competent, very experienced and well trained crew. So what went wrong? I'll try not to guess that one. But I'll tell you that the approaches I find the most difficult are very gusty, and highly variable cross winds. You are forever having to change everything to keep the thing going where you want it. Worse than that, the closer you get to the ground, the more accurate your flying has to be. And then, just at the moment when you don't want the out of limit gust you get hit...

PM