PDA

View Full Version : KD-Avia belly landing


TBSC
2nd Oct 2008, 08:26
KD-Avia B-737-300 had a belly landing in Kaliningrad yesterday. 108 pax on board, noone hurt (Barcelona-Kaliningrad flight).

RIA Novosti - Russia - Boeing 737 crash-lands in Russia's Kaliningrad region (http://en.rian.ru/russia/20081002/117378424.html)

TRIM-RUN
2nd Oct 2008, 10:34
With a small picture.

The Aviation Herald (http://avherald.com/h?article=40da3e28)

WHBM
2nd Oct 2008, 12:06
Possibly the most surprising thing is that on a scheduled route from Barcelona to Kaliningrad (which few in Western Europe could even place on a map) they can get virtually a full 737 load midweek. Things are maybe not as bad as portrayed.

Asdrius
2nd Oct 2008, 12:14
Possibly the most surprising thing is that on a scheduled route from Barcelona to Kaliningrad (which few in Western Europe could even place on a map) they can get virtually a full 737 load midweek. Things are maybe not as bad as portrayed.

Kaliningrad probably was a final destination for only few of those passengers.
KD Avia developed Kaliningrad airport as transit stop between Western Europe and Russia. I think most passengers later had to catch other connecting KD Avia flights to various other Russian airports.

CargoOne
2nd Oct 2008, 13:12
Media reports only ~20 pax (less than 20%) are locals, all other are transit to other Russian destinations

411A
2nd Oct 2008, 13:22
Things are maybe not as bad as portrayed.

Not for some, clearly.
Other small carriers make quite handsome profits as well, even with the rather high cost of avtur today.
These (mainly) are niche carriers, who cater to specific routes, where many times the 'big boys' simply have passed by...or never considered at all.
Many it remain such....:)

kms901
2nd Oct 2008, 13:36
From that small picture it looks like the crew did a good job. Congratulations to them all.

Romeo India Xray
2nd Oct 2008, 14:08
Quote: "Kaliningrad probably was a final destination for only few of those passengers.
KD Avia developed Kaliningrad airport as transit stop between Western Europe and Russia. I think most passengers later had to catch other connecting KD Avia flights to various other Russian airports."

Would explain why there was a KD 733 sitting on the ramp here in RIX at 05:00Z when I came into work this morning. Had been puzzling me a bit today.

RIX

p.s. how do you make the quote function work on here? Am I just getting too old to work this out without assistance?

captplaystation
2nd Oct 2008, 14:34
Not too easy to see in the picture but it looks like the nose gear may have extended, but neither of the main gears. Very unusual to have more than one leg not deploy, perhaps a second one gave up on the landing roll ?

Union Jack
2nd Oct 2008, 15:30
Kaliningrad probably was a final destination for only few of those passengers

Fortunately, Kaliningrad wasn't the final destination for anyone!

Jack

RIX BT
2nd Oct 2008, 19:55
Jetliner safely lands with retracted landing gear in Kaliningrad

KALININGRAD. Oct 2 (Interfax) - A Boeing 737 belonging to the KD-Avia airline safely landed with its landing gear up at Kaliningrad'sKhrabrovo airport at about 11:00 p.m. on Wednesday, KD-Avia ExecutiveDirector Leonid Itskov told Interfax. "The aircraft landed with its landing gear up. The fuselage was notdestroyed, and the passengers were evacuated through regular ramps. Noneof them was hurt," Itskov said. "For a Boeing 737, this situation could be called quite normal.Pilots train for it on the ground," he said. The aircraft is designed in such a way that, "in case one of thewheel assemblies fails to extend, all the other assemblies get blockedand do not extend either, and therefore this situation is considerednormal, and pilots are trained for it," he said. The plane was heading from Barcelona and carried more than 100passengers, Itskov said.

RIX BT
2nd Oct 2008, 19:59
Some pictures from accident:
PointNiner: 737 Gear-Up In Russia (http://www.pointniner.com/2008/10/737-gear-up-in-russia.html)

RAT 5
2nd Oct 2008, 22:47
The aircraft is designed in such a way that, "in case one of thewheel assemblies fails to extend, all the other assemblies get blockedand do not extend either, and therefore this situation is considerednormal,


Is this true? If so why, and how? First I've heard of it. I know this is not Tech Log forum, but the thread is here now.

Viking
3rd Oct 2008, 03:43
"The aircraft is designed in such a way that, "in case one of thewheel assemblies fails to extend, all the other assemblies get blockedand do not extend either, and therefore this situation is considered normal."


Absolute BS. I've flown the 737 for 17 years and 13000+ hours and have never heard of such a thing. Using the emergency gear extension system each individual landing gear can be extended independently of the others. Under normal conditions thay are all dropped together. If there is an issue with one the others will still extend normally.

GobonaStick
3rd Oct 2008, 11:45
Several reports from Kaliningrad that the passengers weren't warned before the landing.

Suggests to me that either the crew didn't want to tell them, or didn't realise the gear wasn't down.

captplaystation
3rd Oct 2008, 12:22
Neither of these two scenarios fits into the category "professional pilot", unless the gear collapsed on touchdown without warning ( as I believe happened to KLM @ BCN last year?) and despite having 3 greens.

veterangreaser
3rd Oct 2008, 14:17
How many times has this happened on a go-around? I have personnally witnessed it three times. (Not happened to me TG). Happened before and will happen again while complacency is still around. (And it's been here a long time). I've also served my time with the 737 and loved it, but never heard that it worked as stated in that previous post:=

TBSC
3rd Oct 2008, 15:12
@GabonaStick

Crew was aware of that, they even made a low pass before landing attempt to check the landing gear.
ASN Aircraft accident Boeing 737-3Y0 EI-DON Kaliningrad-Khrabrovo Airport (KGD) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20081001-0)

captplaystation
3rd Oct 2008, 16:35
Maybe I am being a bit thick here, but I can't easily imagine a tech problem that would prevent deployment of any of the 3 legs with the emergency system.
Did the crew perhaps have just one main available,chose to retract it to keep it all symmetrical & just lowered the nose gear ( it appears in the picture to be deployed ? ) with the emergency system. A novel approach if that was the case, but not very " Boeing".

TBSC
3rd Oct 2008, 21:39
Time will tell but I would not believe that authority. They told us a lot of nice things while being "based temporarily" here for 40 years. Sometimes they told the truth. In somewhere between 2 and 4 % of the cases. ;)

Kulverstukas
4th Oct 2008, 11:38
First - FAAT (Rosaviation) claimed that crew "forget" gears. Pilots suspended. :(

Second. Letter to Prosecutor General of RF. In russian. In short - Local police stormed control tower and demaded all TC to leave their working places to go to police station for interrogation. :mad:

First (http://www.favt.ru/news/index.php?idmd=news_081003_1)
Second (http://af1461.livejournal.com/218654.html)

His dudeness
4th Oct 2008, 16:32
First - FAAT (Rosaviation) claimed that crew "forget" gears. Pilots suspended.

A german newspaper said, that they "circled the city 4 times" and that the "F/As were nervous" and that "they have not being told about any emergency"

Id guess that this means more than one go around? And that the news spread from the cockpit to the F/As.


Second. Letter to Prosecutor General of RF. In russian. In short - Local police stormed control tower and demaded all TC to leave their working places to go to police station for interrogation.

Russia is an amazing place. IF they could get rid of all their bureaucracy and the policing mentality it could be a great place to life and work... :ouch:

Kulverstukas
4th Oct 2008, 16:51
A german newspaper said, that they "circled the city 4 times"

Confirmed that AC has problems with flaps and crew used emergency system to retract them. That's a reason for "circle 4 times".

Rumor is also that paxes was not warned because crew doesn't realised that they landing without gears until too late. :ooh:

Russia is an amazing place. ... it could be a great place to life and work...

You are welcome :cool:

His dudeness
4th Oct 2008, 17:17
Thanks! :ok:

Just left Moscow today....but I will be back!

Belowclouds
7th Oct 2008, 00:58
Just curious why ATCOs continued to work after police "stormed" into tower? Wouldn't be better to cansed all ops by unlawful interference and cool things down?

Belowclouds
7th Oct 2008, 01:00
sorry, "cancel" of course...

xolodenko
7th Oct 2008, 06:54
http://i38.tinypic.com/11lkep3.jpg

http://i38.tinypic.com/2yudlc4.jpg

Reverser Scotch-taped
http://i37.tinypic.com/dyqek9.jpg

http://i38.tinypic.com/2vn1e1w.jpg

Braking marks. Not too easily seen .
http://i34.tinypic.com/wrb6hc.jpg

pilottom10
8th Oct 2008, 23:44
By the look of these photo's the wheels go down just fine. I guess the crew were so preoccupied by the flap problem, they forgot the gear. Or disabled/ ignored the too low gear warning.

sengasengana
9th Oct 2008, 13:29
HD:
Russia is an amazing place. ... it could be a great place to life and work...

Kulver...:

You are welcome

First line not true,

Second: he didnae thank you for anything, mate...

Great example of eastern mentality of 1970s, cabin crew in the dark with fear of death not knowing what's going on, flight deck compiling problems in the front. Not just the training, it's the attitude as well...

Those in the know, choose your airline carefully, others... take a train...

ss

sengasengana
12th Oct 2008, 08:42
Lots of drivel here so back to topic.

Gear and flap warnings are usually separate and with fully functioning undercarriage, would make no sense to push "gear inhibit"-switch of the GPWRS, unless done accidentally under pressure from other problems. Never flew the 73, so somebody else can fill in.

On the other hand DMI might have been opened for GPWRS, who is to know...? And we definately are not going to get any reliable info, reference company manager statements earlier to all gear up landings.

Pilots are supposedly to be trained to recognise unusual situations, where additional mistakes are bound to occur. This comes with time, experience and training. Airlines tend to have their different areas where to concentrate, fortunately most operators have the knowledge and resources to accomplish this.

A deep breath, open mind and other crewmember's contributions in mind, a good judgement call is what you get paid for in the end of the day, despite who you have as passengers in the back. They finance you.(and your beancounters, unfortunately).

The best advice I got a long time ago was, "after a questionable decision, your next one better be a good one..."


ss

I'll Be Realistic
13th Oct 2008, 13:59
Looking at those pictures posted above, the terminal could do with a lick of paint... :rolleyes:

frogone
13th Oct 2008, 14:15
I'd hazard a guess and say that's a very very remote stand!! I don't think it would be good for business to park that heap in front of the main terminal building ;)

IR

Skyworker
15th Oct 2008, 09:50
We`ve got an official report that it was crew mistake. They were too busy deeling with flaps that forgot to extend the landing gear. Their EGPWS had only one switch called "Gear AND Flaps Inhibit" so that really "helped" them a lot.

captplaystation
15th Oct 2008, 12:33
The " switch" is called the " gear flap inhibit switch" in checklists etc. However in every 737 I have operated it was TWO separate guarded switches, one for gear one for flaps specifically to avoid this possibility. Seems more likely someone flipped them both up, or the wrong one ( if the subsequent landing used normal 30 0r 40 flap there would be no warning) Someone else then either didn't monitor the switching or didn't understand the implications ? Just a guess, but I can see the mechanism for it going that way, particularly if the crm style was "single crew hands all over the place if I want your advice I'll ask for it" which may or may not have been the case.

Skyworker
15th Oct 2008, 12:40
The fact that all 737 you flew had 2 separate switches doesn`t mean such aircraft do not exist. Some old versions have only one switch "flap inhibit" or like in this case combined one.

hetfield
15th Oct 2008, 12:43
Tea and biscuits?

All you can eat?

captplaystation
15th Oct 2008, 13:22
Skyworker,
I stand corrected. A search on airliners.net showed most -300's with twin switches with a few sporting a single switch. Initially I could only find that switch labelled "flap inhibit" but then came across one labelled "flap gear inhibit".
What a crap arrangement indeed. For sure reading the landing checks will save you , but that particular switching arrangement makes it a whole lot easier to foul up. :hmm:

flyin_phil
15th Oct 2008, 21:17
I'd hazard a guess and say that's a very very remote stand!! I don't think it would be good for business to park that heap in front of the main terminal building


the aircraft is on a remote stand just to the right of the terminal as u look at it, where they park them up for maintanance etc. its a small compact airport but very well organised. the one thing i remember about it, and it was this exact aircraft too.. as we arrived we got pushed back into our stand, but was a bit like parking ur car, took about 5 attempts forward and reverse to get it in the stand. a 1st for me experiencing that.

demid
16th Oct 2008, 04:44
Skyworker, is the report available online?

HAWK21M
16th Oct 2008, 05:53
Agree 100%.
The report about it being normal for one u/s gear preventing the other from extending is never true on the B737.
regds
MEL

Connetts
16th Oct 2008, 10:38
I'm posting a question here apologising for the intrusion...... I'm a retired legal academic with various interests in aviation who wanted to fly, was frustrated by his father, and when at last was able to afford starting a PPL after retiring ended up with a Teflon aorta; so I'm the saddest "wannabe" lurking here.... I'm a permanent student pilot but having fun anyway

I read all serious aviation material I can lay my hands on and am thus slightly better informed than most passengers.

Something I have not understood is that the damage caused to the belly of a big, heavy a/c making a controlled wheels-up landing seems to be so slight -- absent fire, of course. I know it's severe, but the structure of the fuselage must be colossally strong to withstand the impact and abrasion. The skin, which I have assumed is relatively fragile, is not totally ripped off and the stringers, longerons and frames not so buckled and torn that the fuselage is distorted totally. Passengers and crew seem to be able to disembark and I am under the impression that the hull is not a total loss.

I have seen light a/c which have had such experiences, and note that one of my instructors planned a wheels-up landing with his student so neatly that the engines on the Piper were stopped on finals and propellors set horizontal. The damage was confined to scrapes. In view of the light weight and robustness of an airframe designed with training in mind, this seems to be understandable; but making things bigger yet able to withstand such impacts with comparable damage seems to require weight that increases at a rate that would make flight impossible -- for the same reason that an ant six feet long is impossible.

I should be very grateful if someone with a few moments to spare could explore these issues?

Incidentally, I have always found the undercarriage of a big a/c to be the most interesting part of the airframe; my ambition is to visit somewhere like Boeing or Airbus to see exactly how something can be made which has to withstand such gigantic and violent stresses yet can be so light. I shudder as I walk away from the Tomahawk, standing there with tears in its eyes, nursing its aching feet, and looking at me reproachfully but undamaged.... surely the undercarriage of a big jet is the most wondrous engineering imaginable?

I

FrequentSLF
16th Oct 2008, 11:13
Incidentally, I have always found the undercarriage of a big a/c to be the most interesting part of the airframe; my ambition is to visit somewhere like Boeing or Airbus to see exactly how something can be made which has to withstand such gigantic and violent stresses yet can be so light. I shudder as I walk away from the Tomahawk, standing there with tears in its eyes, nursing its aching feet, and looking at me reproachfully but undamaged.... surely the undercarriage of a big jet is the most wondrous engineering imaginable?

The steel used to manufacture landing gears is made by only a handful of steel companies in the world. The manufacturing requirements are extreme and the know-how is an industrial secret.

Ancient Mariner
16th Oct 2008, 12:05
Chemistry Data :
http://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gifhttp://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gifCarbon 0.38 - 0.43 Chromium 0.7 - 0.9 Iron Balance Manganese 0.6 - 0.8 Molybdenum 0.2 - 0.3 Nickel 1.65 - 2 Phosphorus 0.035 max Silicon 0.15 - 0.3 Sulphur 0.04 max http://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gif http://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gif
Principal Design Features http://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gif AISI 4340 is a heat treatable, low alloy steel containing nickel, chromium and molybdenum. It is known for its toughness and capability of developing high strength in the heat treated condition while retaining good fatigue strength. http://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gif http://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gif
Applications http://www.suppliersonline.com/images/transpix.gif Typical applications are for structural use, such as aircraft landing gear, power transmission gears and shafts and other structural parts.

http://www.suppliersonline.com/propertypages/4340.asp#RelatedNames

Per

FrequentSLF
16th Oct 2008, 12:11
Chemistry Data :
Carbon 0.38 - 0.43 Chromium 0.7 - 0.9 Iron Balance Manganese 0.6 - 0.8 Molybdenum 0.2 - 0.3 Nickel 1.65 - 2 Phosphorus 0.035 max Silicon 0.15 - 0.3 Sulphur 0.04 max
Principal Design Features AISI 4340 is a heat treatable, low alloy steel containing nickel, chromium and molybdenum. It is known for its toughness and capability of developing high strength in the heat treated condition while retaining good fatigue strength.
Applications Typical applications are for structural use, such as aircraft landing gear, power transmission gears and shafts and other structural parts.

Chemistry data are well know, the heat treatment process is the know-how. Furthermore the gases ppm is an important factor

Terentiy
16th Oct 2008, 12:58
Yes, I have to agree with skyworker. We have this safety report too, and it clearly says it was a pilots' mistake. They were too busy preparing to land with higher speed because of problems with flaps and didn't read the landing check-list. Lack of experience and flight hours...

demid
17th Oct 2008, 05:32
Despite all my delight in sky I'm starting to be afraid of flying over Russia as a passenger... :(

threemiles
17th Oct 2008, 08:16
Circumstances of the event: According to the preliminary information, in the process of fulfilling the landing approach from [MKpos]-243 before the third turn with the installation by the crew of exhaust gear rod of flaps from position 2 to position 5 because of the wear and tear of signaling about the asymmetrical extension of flaps operated blocking their release. By this time [VS] was located at the height of circle (400 m), crew reported to dispatcher, that because of the problems with the extension of flaps was made the decision to continue flight at the height of 400 meters without a decrease. In the process of circling flight the crew carried out the necessary actions according to QRH B -737-300 with this malfunction: set the exhaust gear rod of flaps to position 2, opened the signaling of flaps and chassis [vyklyuchatalem] of " GROUND PROXIMITY FLAP|GEAR Of iNHIBIT" , it calculated required and that located landing distances for the data of conditions. Subsequently after the fulfillment of actions according to QRH, were read the divisions of the map of the control checks to the division of " LANDING CHECK Of lIST". [VS] by this time, after carrying out circling flight, was located in the region of the 3rd turn. On by prelanding straight night, under the conditions of shower precipitation, turbulence and concentration for fulfilling the landing on wet VPP with large landing weight and flaps not in the landing position, crew lost control of landing gear lowering and was not executed the division of the map of the control checks of " LANDING CHECK Of lIST" , Copilot erroneously reported to dispatcher about the readiness of crew for the landing in this situation. Landing with not discharged by landing gear struts was as a result produced. After stoppage [VS] in the limits [IVPP] the passengers were evacuated on the ladder. There was no fire.

sengasengana
17th Oct 2008, 10:50
Sounds about right...

priceless...

ss

Algy
17th Oct 2008, 11:24
Thanks for posting it - but what document is that exactly?

Terentiy
18th Oct 2008, 12:25
It is a translation of the above-mentioned safety report issued by Rosaviatsia (one of the structures in the Russian aviation administration), so it is a official source. I can post here a original text in Russian if you want.