Phuket Air lands B747 on 3 main gear

[mutt]

Phuket Air B747 HS-VAC landed in Jeddah this morning with one of the main undercarriage boogies "caught" on the gear door, it therefore didnt extend. The aircraft conducted a flyby of the tower following a gear indication, they were advised that the gear was down. After landing the aircraft tilted to the left, but the outboard engine didnt hit the ground.

I have one question, what is the maximum duty day for a "heavy" crew? 1 Captain, 2 FO's, 2 FE's? ATD JED 1120/04 ATA JED 0625/05....

Mutt

[Thermal]

In some parts of the world that would be an augmented crew.
In others the complement of an augmented crew would be 2 Capts, 1 F/O and 2 F/Es.
The rules I operate under would allow 16 hours duty.

A heavy crew would consist of 2 of each cockpit crew member. This would allow for 18 hrs duty subject to 3 bunks being available.
Another 3 hrs could be added to the FDP due to unforseen circumstances after sign on!

Don't know about the rules/FOM that Phuket Air operate under.

[411A]

If Phuket Air were operating for SaudiArabian, and SV is still using the same regulations as years ago, the FDP for an augmented crew is/was 24 hours.
Been there, done that...a long 'day'.:\

[mustangsally]

One of the F/O's may have be type rated as a Captain. Don't know.

Must have been the wing gear. I did have a body gear fail to extend some years ago. Took the number one hyd system with it.

Congrates to the crew and Boeing for making a good landing and a good airplane.

[PJ2]

Thermal, and others, re, In some parts of the world that would be an augmented crew.
In others the complement of an augmented crew would be 2 Capts, 1 F/O and 2 F/Es.
The rules I operate under would allow 16 hours duty.

Unless your airline is based in Canada, where a crew of 3, (C, F/O, Augment) can operate for 20hrs if there's a "legal" bunk, and 23hrs in "unforseen circumstances".

Now those are the CARS - individual contracts, for which pilot associations have handed over negotiating dollars to obtain a standard higher than the Canadian Regulations, permit 15hrs with 3 and 18hrs with 4 - 1 Captain, 1 F/O, 1 RP and 1 Augment F/O according to one contract - the complement varies but not the attitude.

[ExPhuketAir]

THAI DCA rules for that crew (1 Captain) are 15 hours block and 20 hours duty - apparently crew did over 18 hours block and over 30 hours actual duty time ! Problem at Phuket is little Indian tyrant who schedules crew illegally on lots of flights - if they don't comply they are threatened with dismissal.
Thai DCA are due this week for audit - probably will overlook everything as usual (money talks)

[mutt]

Is it true that as per their new contract, crews are only allowed 15 days off every 2 months and must pay for their own ticket, however crews were verbally warned that if they took these days off, they would be fired?

Fear and intimidation appear to be their "management policy"...:mad:

411A, SV policy calls for 2 Captains.

Will be interesting to see if the Thai DCA audit discovers the duty time discrepancies, the long term hidden MEL's and who knows they might even look into the legitimacy of the Chief Pilots qualifications :ok:

Mutt

[pilot5]

What is Phuket Air flying in Saudi? What routes?

[Skystar320]

They are operating a 743 wet lease for Saudi

[KaptKatoi]

If the crew pushed from JED at 1120 Z on the 4th and flew to Dakar and arrived back in JED at 0625 Z on the 5th, I come up with 19:05 hrs Duty, plus 1 hr prior and 30 min after for 20:40 duty which doesn't add up for a JED/DKR/JED turn.
This is more likely to be the Block hours, not Duty hours ? Please expand further if you can.

Sounds like an out of control scheduling department or non existant one, "still".

Illegal crewing. := What are the crews thinking when they accept this kind of rostering, don't they know that their very own licenses could be on the line ? :=

When are the Saudi's going to put a stop to this. Perhaps it will take intervention by ICAO or other governing bodies as the Thai's don't seem to give a S--T. :mad:

Sounds like this Phuket Air crew got lucky , again. :uhoh:

Sooner or later the luck will run out with this operation.

[ExPhuketAir]

Inside sources say that before departure from Jeddah crew were delayed at airport over three and one half hours waiting for passengers and then waited over three hours at Dakar again for boarding. Actual duty around 33 hours!!!!
Normal for that flight - previous two Dakar trips were done by Chief Pilot, Mathews, who has since resigned under pressure - lot of crews reportedly baling out at end of month - do not like intimidation and threats especially from little lying Indian "Crew Coordinator"

[mutt]

This is more likely to be the Block hoursThey are block hours.

20:40 dutyeven if you add the 3 hour delay from Jeddah, it only comes to 23:40.... where did you get 33 hours from?

Duty Math: 2 + 2 = ? (What ever the Saudi's want)There is nothing stopping Phuket from operating with a double crew, which incidentally is what the Saudi's do.

don't they know that their very own licenses could be on the line ? I'm sure that they learned that yesterday when they spent 3 hours explaining their actions to GACA. Now it will be interesting to see how GACA react.

Sooner or later the luck will run out with this operation.:{:{

Mutt

[411A]

I'm sure that they learned that yesterday when they spent 3 hours explaining their actions to GACA. Now it will be interesting to see how GACA react.

Somehow, I don't think Capt (flamed out) Berenji will be totally impressed.:ugh:

411A knows all about his past...as do many others.
Still, I'm sure he will be...ahhhh, fair.:rolleyes:

The GACA could do worse, much worse.
Several names come to mind.:uhoh:
Berenji is at least, practical, which is saying a lot.
A whole lot.
Full marks for him, considering.
When the weather goes TU, you have to make the best of the situation, and he did...long ago.
Also, the support staff at the GACA is quite good, expecially the superb fellow from...Arizona.
Superb references and experience, top notch. (And no, not yours truly).

[sevenstrokeroll]

correct me if I'm wrong...

but

isn't it proper to land on just the body gear and not the body and one wing gear in this situation?

isn't there a leveling mechanism that would cause the aforementioned tilting?

all wing gear plus one body is ok

all wing gear

all body gear


but two body and one wing...that makes you tilt, doesn' t it?

[avia77]

Just received an email forwarded by one of my friends at Phuket Air. Apparently the last CP, Mathews resigned due to a poison email circulated by an anonymous "truth teller", claiming to be an ex-employee, who continues to send more poison emails and make online posts everyday with insider info. He also I think could be one of the responders on this thread (ExPhuketAir???). Apparently, somebody (you can guess who?) analysed and found the source of the emails and emailed everybody including the owners at Bangkok with undisputable proof.

[742]

...isn't it proper to land on just the body gear and not the body and one wing gear in this situation?


My employer, which would jump off a cliff if Boeing came out with a new policy suggesting to do so, now says to “land on all available landing gear” for both the Classic and the -400.

It used to be as you describe.

[sevenstrokeroll]

Dear 742:

thank you for your input about the landing gear. do I understand that your employer states something different than Boeing does?

Not arguing, just trying to make sure I understand.

This thread includes the statement that the plane was tilting to one side...that would be due to the auto leveler on the wing gear, right?

[GlueBall]

If both body gears are not extended, the airplane may tip tail down, depending on CG location.

[B767Longhaul]

http://www.airliners.net/photo/KLM---Royal/Boeing-747-406M/1116891/L/

Please click on the link above and have a look at the 747 Body and Wing Gear. It gives a good view of the main landing gear arrangement on the 747. The forward pairs with the higher degree of "tilt" are the Wing Gear, and the inner ones with less tilt are the Body Gear.

While taxiing, with the Body Gear steering switch on, the Body Gear pivots left and right opposite to the Nose Landing Gear, so if the nose gear turns right, the Body gear turns left, like a hook and ladder fire truck. If one were to land with one set of Wing Gear not extended, then any turns to that side could result in the engine cowling making contact with the runway or taxiway.

If the crew did a tower fly by and the tower said the gear was down then that is one thing, but the gear indication should have clearly shown that that gear truck was NOT down and locked. The problem is that the crew took for granted that the morons in the Jeddah tower :ugh: know what the gear should/would look like when it is fully extended, apparently not in this case.

The gear tilts when airborne, and gear tilt has several functions "as we all know right", thru the gear tilt switches. But a tilted gear requires a smaller gear well than an untilted gear, so less space needed for a tilted gear when in the wheel well. Rember, do not retract an untilted gear, the landing gear handle is blocked preventing the handle from being selected to the up position when the gear "is not tilted" , then once further troubleshooting and QRH/Checklist's are followed to acertain that the gear is tilted, the Gear Handle blocker could be moved to allow the handle to be selected up.


This crew was lucky that the inboard engine on the malfunctioning gear side did not become an expensive icecream scoop. :D

[413X3]

how similar is the landing gear from a -400(your picture) to a -300

[B767Longhaul]

Except for higher gross weights and automatic Body Gear Steering,, they are identical. :ok:

[Notso Fantastic]

B767LH, could you explain this please? :This crew was lucky that the inboard engine on the malfunctioning gear side did not become an expensive icecream scoop.

I always understood that a 747 could land with any one main gear up and should be able to remain upright enough not to damage an engine pod, barring a serious adverse crosswind maybe.

[742]

...do I understand that your employer states something different than Boeing does?



Just the opposite. My employer does exactly what Boeing calls for, so if they now want us to land on "all available" I suspect that is the current Boeing thinking.

[munster]

i'm glad to read this post as i saw the above mentioned aircraft being towed at JED on three main gears, which i put down to a hallucination, having spent 21 days without alcohol and pork.

cheers :ok:

[sevenstrokeroll]

thanks 742 for explaining that...so Boeing says to land on whatever is hanging down...ok

I do recall, as do you, that it used to be that you landed on the body gear only in this situation.

I wonder what changed?

[pacplyer]

B767Longhaul,

Body gear steering gives 13 degrees max pivot either direction, IIRC, but you land with it locked straight ahead. I would think you would just stop straight ahead, get towed off the field and go have a cold one.

But what do I know, it always worked perfect for me. It is however, located right next to the anti-skid switch and you can guess what happened one day when the arriving captain was told at high speed to "expedite clearing the runway" and grabbed the wrong guarded switch..... :eek: Closed Ohare's only open runway at the time! Looked like a ship wreck with most of the tires blown and the outer pod engine almost touching the ground.

His sheepish Response was: "Hey Guys, it can happen...."