B-KAG Engine strike at MAN

[MAN777]

Dragonair / Cathay B747F engine cowlings struck the runway on landing, in the early hours of this morning at Manchester. One burst tyre and cowling damage.

T'was a tad windy last night 55 knots x wind.

[Spruit]

T'was a tad windy last night 55 knots x wind.

What was the weather at the time? I was under the impression that the maximum X-Wind component for the 747-400 series was less than this? Or was this a gust incident?

I'm open to correction on the maximum X-Wind!

Glad no one was injured tho, bit o bent metal and pride i'm sure.

Spru!

[geh065]

Isn't this the one they have just fixed and finally returned to service after flap damage?

[MAN777]

This was a couple of hours earlier when stuff was diverting, the winds became very gusty during showers, continued into the night.

METAR: EGCC 292250Z 28036G55KT 250V310 3700 SHRA FEW024 SCT029 10/07 Q0992
BECMG 27027G40KT 9999 NSW

[joebanana]

Isn't this the one they have just fixed and finally returned to service after flap damage?

No that was one of CX's Classics at FRA, HVY I believe. Struck 3 pods apparently. No 4 & 3 followed by No 1. :eek:

[spannersatcx]

Isn't this the one they have just fixed and finally returned to service after flap damage?

Yes it is the same 744 that had flaps changed there a little while back. The actual flap change took 8 hrs the rest of the time was logistics and weather.

[Basil]

Doesn't look like a 55kn xwind; more like about 25kn reducing to 15kn with gusts 35kn reducing to 20kn.
Still a handful on a dark and dirty night, tired etc.

[Chris Scott]

EGCC 010420Z 28029G42KT 9999 FEW030 SCT040 08/02 Q0998
EGCC 010350Z 27027G44KT 9999 FEW033 SCT036 08/02 Q0998 NOSIG
EGCC 010320Z 28028G39KT 9999 SCT034 BKN043 08/02 Q0997 NOSIG
EGCC 010250Z 28028KT 9999 FEW031 SCT038 08/02 Q0996 NOSIG
EGCC 010220Z 28023G35KT 9999 FEW038 SCT045 08/02 Q0995 NOSIG
EGCC 010150Z 28021KT 9999 FEW040 SCT045 08/02 Q0994 NOSIG
EGCC 010120Z 28024G39KT 9999 FEW032 08/03 Q0994 NOSIG
EGCC 010050Z 27024G34KT 9999 FEW028 SCT032 09/04 Q0993
EGCC 010020Z 26025G38KT 9999 FEW022 SCT026 09/05 Q0993 TEMPO SHRA
EGCC 292350Z 27024G37KT 9999 FEW032 08/05 Q0992 TEMPO SHRA
EGCC 292320Z 27025G36KT 7000 SHRA FEW022 SCT026 08/05 Q0993 BECMG NSW
EGCC 292250Z 28036G55KT 250V310 3700 SHRA FEW024 SCT029 10/07 Q0992 BECMG 27027G40KT 9999 NSW
EGCC 292220Z 26035KT 9999 SCT030 12/07 Q0991 TEMPO SHRA

Mag. Variation = 3W
Therefore, at 0120z, mean Wind bearing = 283(M)
Rwys 24L/R bearing 234(M)
Therefore, at 0120z, wind gust to 39 kts @ at (or more than) 50 degrees off Rwy bearing.
50 deg = 0.75
0.75 X 39 kts = 30 kts X-W/C

[For the uninitiated, wind bearings usually increase with gust in N. Hemisphere. In this case that would represent a "double-wammy", as far as the crosswind component is concerned.]
From 2350z, no rain reported.

Hope this helps.

[Basil]

Chris,
wind bearings usually increase with gust in N. Hemisphere
Very good point.
Glad I wasn't flying it, although I'd rather have been in the old dowager than a 737. Our ex fast jet guys used to comment on it's inertia but, sometimes, a bit of inertia calms things down a bit :eek::ok:

[Down Three Greens]

Landed at Manch in an Airbus A330 at around 0020Z - Flap 3. It was very bumpy from Dayne and on the 23R approach. A little sporty. 3,000ft wind in the region of 290/50kts but steady. Wind correctly shown as around 280/25G38-42 at touchdown and on instantaneous ND W/V readout. IAS Speed variation -5+10kts. Runway wet x 3 with showers to the North.

Glad we didnt arrive an hour earlier though as HF VOLMET gave gusts to 55kts. Raised a few eyebrows over France tho!!

DTG

[WincoDinco]

At a few points during the night, the Twr controller reported gusting to 62kts! Watching the approaches, it was very hairy indeed! Plenty of aircraft were going missed from upto 4 miles to touchdown.

[Molokai]

Yikes! I hope they did a clean sweep of the runway after that. Those pesky nuts & bolts, bits and pieces taht came off can prove really dangerous to following aircrafts.

[Outtahere]

Cx/ Ka Xwind limit B744 is 30 knots, despite the Fctm guidelines being higher.

[Suzeman]

Molokai

Fear not. The runway was closed for all operations for some 40 minutes after the event whilst a very thorough runway inspection was carried out using a mobile lighting tower and several inspection vehicles :ok:

Suzeman

[Pilot Pete]

Plenty of aircraft were going missed from upto 4 miles to touchdown. Interesting. With wind from that direction at MAN you need to get pretty near to the ground where it quite often calms down if you want to make a serious attempt at landing. (Don't get me wrong, no criticism of someone canning it at 4nm) We did so at midnight and it wasn't pretty all the way to the last 100' when it just steadied enough to be acceptable. Only other 'better' option at that time was LPL where it was howling, but only 10 degrees off the runway.

PP

[Chris Scott]

Quote from Down Three Greens:
3,000ft wind in the region of 290/50kts but steady. Wind correctly shown as around 280/25G38-42 at touchdown and on instantaneous ND W/V readout. IAS Speed variation -5+10kts.
[Unquote]

Presume GS-MINI (managed speed) was in use? How do you like it? In my experience, new guys (on the A320) used to be very suspicious of it until they got used to it. Also - on the FMC PERF page - they would often insert a higher wind strength than the mean wind reported by the tower, in the mistaken belief this would give them more fat above VLS, to allow for wind shear. [In fact, of course, the reverse is the case, because it results in a lower minimum GS, even though the "managed" IAS is higher.]

Excuse me for appearing to go off-topic, but would be interested to hear your experience of this last night. The B747, of course, does not have (automatic) GS-Mini.

Chris

[Pilot Pete]

We were downwind right under vectors with an airspeed of 190kts and ground speed of 275kts at 5000'.:ooh: Nice vectoring by the approach controller though, turned on just right. ohh errr.:p

PP

[oldsmithy]

Hi I have now changed my definition of having a bad day. Three POD strikes,bugger, bugger, bugger, oh that one's ok...........................

[cobra2driver]

More damage than first thought, all 4 engine coulings hit the runway with No 4 engine being a write-off. Will be grounded at MAN for at least 6 weeks pending repair.

[spannersatcx]

all 4 engine cowlings hit the runway with No 4 engine being a write-off. Incorrect, 1, 2 & 4 hit, no 1 & 2 nose cowls and fan cowls damaged but repairable. These will be removed and sent for repair (2 week turnaround).
No 4 C ducts damaged, to be replaced, no 4 nose and fan cowls damaged, repairable I think, no4 engine to be replaced as a precaution due some damage to gearbox, (engine will be overhauled).

[SMOC]

So is she still employed?

[spannersatcx]

yes 6 weeks has been quoted, this is due to the fact there are no spare nose/fan cowls, which I'm told will take 2 weeks to repair in Singapore, so they have to be removed, sent, repaired, shipped back and refitted.

[Fr8t M8te]

6 weeks to repair, surely not?!!

It's all part of a cunning plot to solve the KA crewing problem on the 400F...

:}:}:}

[ka500]

If She gets the sack, you will find the rest of the line pilots reducing their own crosswind limits down to 5 or 10 kts- Why risk any more?

[Tediek]

Maybe i missed something in reading, but did she slam that hard onto the runway that due to the wingflex the pods it the runway?

[Fly Borat]

Just for info. The captain was a chinese female, married to somebody in the KA trainings department. According to some KA F/O's who flew with her on the Airbus she was quite afraid of bad wx conditions and reportably unconfortable on the 400, looking to go back on the airbus.
My guess she won't be transfering to CX freighters!
The LH Airbus 320 in Hamburg was a female driver too!:eek:.

[T3HUY]

The crew have been named today as....

Captain Wan Win Lowe
First officer Wat Wen Wong
Flight Engineer Foo King El

[MAN777]

When landing at MAN the day after the incident, I noticed a nice set of 747 tyre tracks, they were well left of the normal rubber marks and at about 30 degrees to the centreline, I presume this is the impact ! / touchdown point for B-KAG ??

[forget]

I still can't picture how you can get a strike on an inboard engine. :confused:

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/747.jpg

[MAN777]

Great shot !

No weight on the landing gear at this point is there ?

So add a heavy landing combined with wing down and Manchesters cobbled runway, I think its possible :)

[EMIT]

T3huy:

Blilliant!!

[A. Le Rhone]

...brilliant? If you're six years old.

Borat you buffoon. 'Just for info'.

I see all the smart-a*se, armchair-experts out in force now with a bit of smug racism thrown in for good measure. I assume you are wannabe (PPL's) as nobody who's ever been in this situation, flown in HK typhoons or battled a heavy 74 in max x-wind would ever be as arrogant as to post in this manner.

PPRune. The 'P' bit stands for 'Professional'

[Anotherflapoperator]

......professional? A bit non PC perhaps, but not bad. The big thing about max crosswind gusting conditions is that if your little ring tightens too much, GO AROUND and find somewhere else to land. The need to save face and get it down on your intended runway has cost many a life in this industry over the years. It's just not worth it. Ever.

What was the wind like in AMS at the time, I wonder?

[dragon501]

Hi -f@ckin-larious

:}:}:}

Foo King El.........

Nothing to do with racism just HUMOUR

[buggaluggs]

Spanners

Just out of interest, from an engineering point of view what checks are required of the rest of the wing/strut/pod structure after an pod strike incident like this? There must be huge stresses placed on the wing to strut and strut to pod fittings. Although Boeing builds em good, there must be a point beyond which it's becomes a lot more involved than just a bit of panel beating? :O

Buggs

[nomorecatering]

As an instructor with over 1000 hrs training Chineese airline cadets. it does not surprise me in the least. They have an attitude to flying that simply horrifies me, unfortunately it doesnt change when they get onto the jets.

Airmanship is a concept that they just cannot under stand, and they dont want to understand.......to put it bluntly.

Racism?........no, just the way it is and nothing is going to change it ever.

[B-HUE]

You are 100% correct, its nothing to do with Racism its just a very different way of thinking... lets face it many here in Hong Kong can't master walking in a straight line or get confused when other drivers flash their lights at them for doing 40kph in the fastlane :ugh: ....... So you have to expect the western and Asian flying culture to be .... different.

[Captain Airclues]

forget

Draw your line with a small nose-down attitude (compressed nose-wheel) and you will see a very different picture.

Airclues

[forget]

Inboard engine strike? Well it can happen, because it did happen. Needs a bit of work to achieve it though. A serious Rate of Descent on touch-down to compress a lot of oleos, plus a ‘Bad Attitude’.

What’s the normal deck angle on a 747 approach, 12 degrees? But, if you work at it, you can still land a 747 nose wheel first. BA showed me one night at Perth. I was ready for it as we’d been strangely nose down throughout the approach – the rest of the punters weren’t - and were very surprised when ceiling panels came down around their ears as the main gear hit.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/1325178.jpg

[T3HUY]

Those of you that think I was just having a pop at the Chinese, I nearly forgot to mention the repairs will be carried out under the supervision of Manchester based engineer Arthur Bleedin Cowlingon.

[spannersatcx]

buggaluggs, although a hard landing didn't happen within the parameters of the MM, it was 1.5g, 1.7g or more then hard landing checks required. MM also has dragged engine/pod inspections. Hard landing check has 2 phases, if anything is found on phase 1 then phase 2 is required, phase 1 is looking for damage on keel beam, panels, creases, popped reivets etc etc, flying control checks etc. Phase 2 involves gear removal and a lot more.:eek:

Dragged engine, Pylon fuse pins require checking, no 1 & 2 borescope inspections, depending on findings determines what is required next. To my knowledge the only damage found was the cowls (nose/fan/C-ducts on no4 Nose and Fan cowls on 1 & 2).

[skiesfull]

"normal deck angle on a 747 approach" -do you mean the aircraft attitude? If you do, it'll be between 2 and 3.5 degrees depending on the land flap position (either 25 or 30 degrees). Touchdown with approx. 10 degrees attitude will mean a tail-strike.
As for BA landing nose-wheel first at Perth - I think you must have been at the drinks trolley!

[oldjet744]

I still can't picture how you can get a strike on an inboard engine. :confused:
With Flap 30 degrees, Gear Struts Compressed and assuming the Roll is about the outside tyre of the Wing Gear, at a typical pitch attitude on touchdown of approx 5 degrees Nose Up the inboard nacelle will contact the ground at a little less than 7 degrees roll angle (PW & GE engines) about 1/2 degree less for Rolls Royce Engines. Higher the pitch attitude on touchdown the lower the roll angle required for ground contact.

It's surprisingly easy to get there in challenging conditions.

I would have attached the chart but my posting skills fell short of inserting a jpeg image. If anyone can let me know how to do it I'll insert the chart.



Oldjet744 :)

[forget]

skiesfull. "normal deck angle on a 747 approach" -do you mean the aircraft attitude? If you do, it'll be between 2 and 3.5 degrees depending on the land flap position (either 25 or 30 degrees). Touchdown with approx. 10 degrees attitude will mean a tail-strike.

No. I meant Deck Angle. And I said approach - not ‘touchdown’.

As for BA landing nose-wheel first at Perth - I think you must have been at the drinks trolley!

skiesfull – you doubting my word? :suspect: Now if someone from BA Tech Records will kindly confirm for me – a 747 heavy landing at Perth, around 2am on the 14th September 1986. (I know it's 20 years ago but they'll be there somewhere.) The aircraft left SIN late evening of 13th. (For you skiesfull, I’ve even gone to the trouble of checking an old passport!)

Now I’ll tell you what happened, and I remember it very clearly because it scared me!

At top of descent the Captain came on to say it ‘was such a beautiful night he could already see the lights of Perth’. Down we came, and down. Then I started to see houses and street lights and reckoned we were at 4 to 5,000. That was when I had my first thought that this wasn’t quite normal. I was spending half my life on 747s and I had a suspicion that we were very much nose down.

Down we came to 2,000 and still nose down. I kid you not - I was alone in a J class row and I even checked the hang of the curtains on a galley across from me just in case my ears/balance were stuffed. :bored:

No doubt about it – a pronounced nose down attitude and we were now about to cross the perimeter fence. I pushed my brief case further under the seat - and strapped in hard. The nose wheel (I was sitting not far behind it) hit with an almighty whack and we pitched up. A split second later, as we ‘rotated’ the mains hit and down came the ceiling panels – accompanied by lots of screaming from the back end.

Then it started to get amusing. We'd taxied in and, eventually, we de-planed through the front door, steps and onto the ramp. A middle aged American couple was ahead of me, and he was pretty upset about something. Turns out, as I listened-in, he was going to wait for the captain at the bottom of the steps to enquire just WTF he thought he was playing at. This should be worth waiting for I thought. Five minutes later down came the captain in shirt sleeves and, I can picture this now, wearing the biggest hat I’ve ever seen – Russian Admiral style.

Our American friend physically grabbed him, introduces himself as a 15,000 hour PanAm 747 captain and, as I said, asks him just WTF he thought he was playing at. His genuine fury was tempered with some curiosity as he didn't believe it possible to set up a 747 for an approach and then produce a nose wheel first landing. I’d have paid money to watch this! Our Admiral, very wisely kept silent for the bollocking and then wandered off - tail between legs.

Trust me. You can land a 747 nose wheel first. How? I don't know. But it can be done.

[ZAGORFLY]

I DO HOPE that this question i WILL EVER never reappear AGAIN here.
I know her with a profound love professionalism and respect for the Flying career. She started as ATC and she is one of the most of you that have done fine and the best to become a captain. Yes, after all better to lower your cross wind limits and go to the alternate instead trying to do your best all career to save fuel and money for you company and being slaughtered in PPprune...

Tough moment for you but if you have survived the command course you will do fine here too. Sorry ,Rosa.

[RingwaySam]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=514945&nseq=0

This one bounced and whent nose first. I'll ask my mate if he still has a slideshow/sequence of this landing.

[inciter]

Since when has operating an aircraft competently well within its approved operating limits has become a risk?

[atlast]

That's a photo and a half right there! Phew!
I've never heard of anyone landing the 74 nose first but I guess it could happen; to the fly-er-ons more than the flarers.
Now, the Convair 240! That was a wheel barrow!

[Dan Winterland]

When we used to land our Classic freighters empty with about 12 tonnes of fuel on board with flap 30, the landing attitude was very flat and it's entirely feasible to land nose leg first. For that reason, flap 25 was often the choice.

[forget]

Well thank you Dan! I've mentioned this over the years, and been ridiculed. 'Not possible to set up a 747 and get a nose wheel first landing' they'd all say. This aircraft had a very light pax load, and would be well down on fuel (but where's the nearest diversion for Perth?) so this could be the answer. Wrong flap.

Or it may have been the captain; an optical illusion caused by the big hat. ;)

[A37575]

Invite for tea and bikkies soon?

[skiesfull]

Humble apologies, FORGET. I can understand a 'wheelbarrow' landing following a bounce or skip, but would have thought a nose first touchdown would have produced serious damage (oxygen masks and ceiling panels do not count!). I am more surprised that I started my 747 course shortly after and do not remember any 'scuttlebutt' about the incident, especially from the F/E's who always delighted in relaying stories about pilot's f*****g up the landing!
- still do not understand the term "deck angle" can you explain?
As for a design flaw, the -400 has more active ailerons than the 'classics'. A pitch of 2 degrees nose-up with approx 7 degrees roll angle will cause inboard and outboard engine contact (P&W) -RR and GE have slightly different values.
One hopes that the pilot will receive further cross-wind landing technique training and no further discipline measures.

[MidgetBoy]

Within operating limits or not, gusting winds or not, the captain should be able to judge whether or not she can do that landing with her skill. Whether or not it will gust, she has to be careful.

[forget]

skiesfull. Thank you for the apology but no need, – this is Prune. ;) You asked me, what is Deck Angle. Simple I thought, I’ll do a Google on ‘Define Deck Angle’, find a Boeing definition, and copy and paste. :ok:

Not so simple! I can’t find a single definition. As I understood it, and this could well blow my street cred - it’s Pitch Attitude plus Angle of Attack. So, your aiming point/touchdown point on approach is viewed not through Pitch angle alone, but a combination of the two. I’m struggling with this, but if I’m way out, and in my defence, I never did get paid for flying.

PS. The Perth 747 in question: I’d be very surprised if it didn’t pick up some crinkles around the nose wheel. Maybe you can find someone in Tech Records and find out if it ferried empty after Perth.

Dan W. A small project for you. Define Deck Angle. :)

[NOR116,20]

For clarification some definitions:


Chord line
Infinitely long line drawn through the trailing edge and leading edge of airfoil (wing)

Angle of incidence
Angle between longitudinal axis and the chord line of the wing

Angle of attack
Angle between the relative wind and the chord line of the wing

Pitch attitude
The angle between longitudinal axis and the horizon

I understand forgets posting that there was a negative pitch attitude throughout the approach shortly until touchdown. Comparing the normal pitch attitude of a B744 being 2 – 3 degrees in a stabilized approach a negative pitch attitude will generate such an excessive rate of descent and, if not timely changed to a correct pitch attitude making a normal landing impossible.
Some years ago I watched a TU154 approaching St. Petersburg. Though pitch attitude was not negative its rate of descent was so excessive that it hardly bounced on the main gear then went airborne again approximately 2 meters high to hit the runway on its nose gear then. Strangely enough nothing broke and nothing fall apart.

I’m asking myself what kind of piloting this is about.

[NOR116,20]

Something to add to my previous posting:
Having 10 years experience on this a/c type I do not believe that only a hard or bounced landing even if it is excessive will cause 3 pod strikes on a B744.
For the Manchester incident I assume an unwanted bank angle due to crosswind and gust conditions (maybe similar to the LH incident in HAM) leading to pod strike on the one wing followed by overreaction banking to opposite direction, maybe in combination with a hard landing.
However, it’s just my assumption rather than to blame anyone.

[spannersatcx]

how about wind shear at approx 100', as that's what happened I'm told?

[skiesfull]

I'm with NOR116.2 's theory, having seen both outboards touch during cross-wind training in the sim - over controlling the ailerons. Windshear at 100ft may well have caused the hard landing, but I'm guessing the aircraft did not touch down 'straight-and-level', otherwise the inboard would not have touched. Obviously very difficult conditions, and one hopes that the crew will undergo further training and then be able to put the incident behind them.

[MAN777]

B-KAG Now found shelter inside the old BA hangar.

[ZAGORFLY]

Any picture of the damages?

[spannersatcx]

Now fixed just waiting for a crew that's not gone sick:ugh:

[cobra2driver]

ZAGORFLYAny picture of the damages?

Have images of damage taken on ramp 8/3/08, but unsure how to include in reply. Can anyone assist?:confused:

[spannersatcx]

Finally left MAN today unbelievably it has been sat for 7 days waiting for a crew:eek:

Put your pics on photobucket or similar and then link to them.

[cobra2driver]

http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll79/cobra2driver/P3060006.jpgspannersatcxFinally left MAN today unbelievably it has been sat for 7 days waiting for a crew:eek:

Put your pics on photobucket or similar and then link to them.
http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll79/cobra2driver/P3060010.jpg
Thanks spannersatcx.http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll79/cobra2driver/P3060007.jpg
http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll79/cobra2driver/P3060008.jpghttp://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll79/cobra2driver/P3060009.jpg

[cobra2driver]

Not got hang of reducing images yet, but will try harder next time.

[GlueBall]

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/photos/middle/6/9/6/0538696.jpg

[spannersatcx]

Thanks for the images, dont look as bad as we all had thought There's plenty you can't see from those pics.:eek:

[Storminnorm]

Call that damage?
It wer much worse in my day!
Soon fix that with a 4lb club hammer & a
bit of high-speed tape, Cor blimey mate!:cool:

[superspotter]

KAG is now sat in HKG with one or two engines off the wing so maybe there was more damage??

[superspotter]

B-KAG has now been written off by Dragonair!!

[Flightmech]

Thought I saw B-KAG at HAECO (in the bay that faces out to sea) a few weeks ago with engines and at least one pylon removed. has it really been written off?

[Exiled Aviator]

No rush to repair as no crew and 5th 400 arriving soon. Both to be used as hot spares, again due to no crew.

[B-HUE]

Sitting in M1 last time I saw her..... Did have engines but cowlings missing.

[superspotter]

Yes it is parked right at the end of HAECO and yes, it has been written off.

[Fly747]

Last I heard it was to be £10mill US to fix, parts being robbed for other aircraft both KA and CX as KAG not exactly needed at present. Would require a much bigger bill than that to write it off.