I believe we are all in agreement that the only thing that saved a disaster in Jo'burg was a huge amount of luck. The information that has since come into the public eye is a perfect example of what can happen when people not suitably qualified, even with the best of intention, try to perform the function of a flight testing department. Historically, pilots are renowned for trying to tinker, adjust and improve their aircraft - hence the pilot and dog 'ideal' cockpit - sometimes with devastating consequences.
I don't think anybody can come out of this smelling of roses. Airbus' flight testing department, who will argue that the sole reason for this occurrence was a blatant disregard of approved operating procedure, should question whether their brain-storming session on 'what ways can those stupid lineys kill themselves?' was extensive enough.
As much as Emirates' ambition to reduce tailstrike occurrences is understandable, the first thing they should have done once they had created this new procedure and before approving it, should have been to phone or fax Toulouse and let the professionals both run it on the computer and on a real aircraft to allow a go/no go answer.
The pilot himself was in a very difficult situation. Inexperienced on type, and no doubt very aware of the potential for a tailstrike on such a long aircraft, he would obviously be very susceptible to accepting helpful tips to reduce the chances of such an event. The fact this help seems to have come directly from the airline and not from another line pilot would only increase his susceptibility. Some people will argue that, as a pilot, you are paid big money to look after the folks on the other side of the door, who expect the person at the controls to operate their aircraft in accordance with approved methods only, and that he chose not to do so, inviting Sod’s Law.
Lastly, there is also the issue about this being only both pilots' second actual flight in this particular variant. Not knowing either pilot's previous flying experience, nor having the experience to comment on the significance of actual time on type compared to simulator time, especially when starting on a new variant, I will leave this for those who have the experience to make comment to do so.
If there are others out there who are using their own tweaked version of the aircraft flight manual or operations manual, hopefully this event may encourage them to fax the manufacturer and make sure what they are doing is safe.
If I remember correctly, the P.F. is a pprune member and made a posting after this particular flight. We are all glad you are still with us and know you will have learned so much since then. Take the flak, dust yourself down and get back on the horse. I wish you well in the future.
Happy flying!
VC10 Rib22
