Polish LOT 767 wheels up landing

[fungi]

Right now over Warsaw.
Hopefully they will land safely..

[man_in_poland]

A Polish 767 flight has just landed safely at Warsaw Airport. Main landing gear and nose gear failed to deploy. Appears all handled extremely well - no casualties reported.

[Capn Bloggs]

Come on, come on! It's been 2 minutes! Where's the video?!

[man_in_poland]

I have been watching this live on Polish TV. Very smooth landing, after circling for some time to reduce fuel load. Fire appliances at the aircraft within 15 seconds of coming to a stop. Sparks from engine cowlings dragging on the asphalt. Nose did not touch at any stage - it was essentially sliding along on the rear part of the fuselage. Passengers off in seconds via slides.

[arc-en-ciel]

All 3 gears not extended ?!?

[man_in_poland]

Correct - no landing gear at all. Landed on fuselage only.

[Thunderbug]

yep all 3 gear....

Polish TV (http://www.tvn24.pl/0,1722771,0,1,klopoty-boeinga-nad-okeciem,wiadomosc.html)

[arc-en-ciel]

thanks for info,
strange to have all gears not extended (or decided by pilot if partial deployment only)
- or you have hydraulics issues and all gears are affected but you can extend mechanically,
- or you have mechanical problem... but not on all gears at the same time !

[B767PL]

Kudos to the pilots on a nice landing.

[dl_88]

Hats off to the flight crew!!

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Brilliant landing.

[man_in_poland]

Apologies for the poor quality. This is a snap on my phone of a TV report....

http://krakowpost.com/lot.jpg

[arc-en-ciel]

I can't wait to know why they had all 3 gears up !!!!!

[Jetjock330]

So he landed without the "LOT" (of wheels):ok:
Brilliant job, well done to the crew. A couple of strong cold ones are in order of the evening, I'm sure;)

[CptRegionalJet]

Brilliant Landing for sure:ok:....but...did gravity fail today?

[kbrockman]

Strange to see it sitting on its tail during the whole slide.
CoG must have been well aft, maybe he told the pax to move to the rear:)

Anyway, kudoz and Slivovitz for all !!!

[man_in_poland]

The aircraft was circling for almost an hour before landing. Apparently they tried to lower the gear by all means - including manually. I am not familiar with this - is it possible? Highly experienced captain in command. There is talk that there may have been some other (electrical) problems as well prior to landing - not sure if this would be related.

[man_in_poland]

Another video here:

Boeing 767 wyl (http://tvp.info/informacje/polska/boeing-767-wyladowal-bezpiecznie-na-okeciu/5589860)

[antheads]

good video of landing after advertisement (http://www.tvn24.pl/0,1722771,0,1,klopoty-boeinga-nad-okeciem,wiadomosc.html)

also another view (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6bkv6tGCFA&feature=player_embedded)of landing


great work by polish pilots.

[BigGrecian]

Another one here :

Awaryjne l (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6bkv6tGCFA&feature=player_embedded)

[JeV]

gz2_dWZb_mM

[Pergatron]

Polish TV is reporting the runway was sprayed down prior to landing.

[Aussie]

My bad, Capt Tadeusz Wrona, been on the 767 for almost 20yrs now.

Hats off to them.

[kms901]

And judging by the windsock, a tailwind as well !

[Pergatron]

More images from Gwiazdy, Wydarzenia, Filmy, Sport - Fakt.pl (http://www.fakt.pl:)

http://www.fakt.pl/m/Repozytorium.Obiekt.aspx/-580/-500/faktonline/634557572772375684.jpg

http://www.fakt.pl/m/Repozytorium.Obiekt.aspx/-580/-500/faktonline/634557572789563404.jpg

http://www.fakt.pl/m/Repozytorium.Obiekt.aspx/-580/-500/faktonline/634557572794407216.jpg

http://www.fakt.pl/m/Repozytorium.Obiekt.aspx/-580/-500/faktonline/634557572757531744.jpg

[arc-en-ciel]

can a qualified B767 pilot explain how you can have all 3 gears locked up ?!?

[WojtekSz]

kudos to PF - landing was well balanced, and touched the tarmac with the rear of the fuselage, just a VERY small bump and slow lowering of the engines to touch the surface. Looked like a very unevenful landing. Excellend job.

kudos to flight crew as well: first people at the rear out within 5 sec from stoping, and 8 sec from the front doors.

congratulations!

and waiting for the info what went wrong!

[captplaystation]

Will be interesting to see if he had any gear avail, & chose to go with "none" rather than "some".
In any case, the immaculate landing leading to a safe outcome is what matters, & whatever decisions he has taken will not require any criticism from the office dwellers, during the inevitable post-mortem conducted whilst installed safely behind a desk.

[Tank2Engine]

Gotta love those low drag approaches! Who knows, they might even be able to use the airplane again.

Let's see; one Iran Air 727 last week, yesterday a Condor 757 with an EO due to a bird strike right after take off and now this. All I can say is that I'm happy I'm on vacation! ;) Way too much hassle and paperwork for me, but hats off to all the crews involved! :ok:

By the way, despite all that friction it still took quite a bit more runway to roll out than I was expecting.

I can't wait to know why they had all 3 gears up !!!!! I agree! One gear stuck: okay. Two gears stuck: all right then. But all three gears stuck/unable to extend... :confused:

Thanks everyone for posting the videos! :ok:

[Ptkay]

They tried everything to get the gear down for over an hour.

Polish Air Force pair of F16 were send up to help them and
confirm, that it is no computer glitch, but effectively no gear down.

They followed him to the final approach to warn him, in case something
unexpected happens, like the gear suddenly coming out just on
one side.

Cpt. Eugeniusz Wrona landed the plane.

Absolutely schoolbook landing and evacuation.

Polish pilots are truly amazing.

Police closed the main highway into Warsaw crossing the extended
line of the runway to prevent further casualties in case of failed
landing.

Controllers turned off the approach lights when aircraft was on short final,
to prevent fire in case they will land short.

[763 jock]

Normal gear retraction and lowering is on the centre hyd system. The ALTN system unlocks the main gear doors and nose wheel uplocks using an electric motor. Isaac Newton should then take control. If this motor were to fail (or its respective CB pop) after a centre hyd failure, then a "no gear" scenario could exist.

Unlikely, but entirely possible.

[Ptkay]

Polish President congratulating now the pilots and all services
for the successful landing.

He also congratulated the passengers on staying calm and cooperating
on preparation to landing.

He congratulated the perfect evacuation as weel.


"It was no luck, it was no coincidence, it was following the procedures:.
Polish President, Bronisław Komorowski said.

"The film of the landing will circulate the world to show perfect landing,
and perfect fulfilment of emergency procedures, in all training organozations" he said.

[sitigeltfel]

Elderly captain very familiar with his aircraft, according to the journalist.


I think the gentleman may prefer the word "Mature." ;)


Regarding the spraying of the runway. Many moons ago a civilian Comet, IIRC Dan-Air, landed at Manston with its nose-wheel up. We had laid a foam carpet for him starting approx half way down the runway and he was instructed to put his nose down, brake and run it into the foam. He decided to keep the nose up which meant that by the time it had been lowered the main bogies and brakes were saturated with slippery foam. The result was that he ended up in the overshoot, thankfully without casualties.

Do any airfields around the globe still have a foam laying facility?

[Ptkay]

Cpt. Wrona is a glider pilot, he perfectly kept the glide slope and AoA.
FO Jerzy Szwarc.

Cpt. still in the cockpit.
No one injured, absolutely no panic.

1h after t/o from Newark crew reported total failure of main hydraulic system.
They tried to "revive" it all the way down, then tried emergency electric
gear lowering.

7 tons fuel at Warsaw arrival, burned 4 tons, landed with 3.

Youngest 767 of the fleet, 13 years old.

[Ptkay]

Cpt. Wrona has 20 years experience on 767.

He is a member of Polish National Team in Glider Aerobatics,
from Leszno Aeroclub.

[fireflybob]

Bit of high speed tape and she'll be fit for flight again...!

Well done to all the crew - just what you need at the end of a sector from Newark.

1h after t/o from Newark crew reported total failure of main hydraulic system.

Cue long thread on PPrune by armchair critics about whether you should fly "all that way" after a hydraulic failure and that only a glider pilot could have landed it!

[skit_uk]

Looks like no spoilers were deployed. I guess that would be to prevent too much weight at higher speeds?

No spoilers, brakes, reverse thrust and a slippery layer of foam would lead to quite a large amount of runway being used. :)

great landing:D

[CY333]

Raw video: Polish jumbo jet makes wheels up landing - chicagotribune.com (http://www.chicagotribune.com/video/breaking/chi-raw-video-polish-jumbo-jet-makes-wheels-up-landing-20111101,0,2174662.htmlstory)

[Jamie-Southend]

Also on the Beeb.

BBC News - Footage shows Boeing 767 emergency landing in Warsaw (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15543209)

[Wojtus]

View from astern: Boeing bezpiecznie wyl (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7Q3gTXLOjI&feature=feedu)

[mnez]

Spotters already placed hi quality photos on airliners.net

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/3/1/9/2006913.jpg

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/2/1/9/2006912.jpg

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/3/9/8/2006893.jpg

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/2/9/8/2006892.jpg

My eyes are still wet.

[RAT 5]

Too long since I flew this beast; so forgive me if I've forgotten much. I can't remember the reserve electric motor to release the uplocks. If this didn't work it suggests a multiple failure, but on the same system. It does not sound a good design if the back up of any system has failed and when you need it you find it is not working. Is there no warning of this on the lower screen? Secondly, it seems too complicated to have an electrical back up system. The good old basic cable on the B737 seems perhaps more fail-safe, although someone will have a story to refute that: plus it would be a longer cable.
I do remember the story of a BA B757 on base training duty who could not get the gear down by any means. The solution devised (lucky they had the fuel while the tech gurus devised the solution) was to depressurise the hydraulic system which kept the gear up. Then the back up system could be used and once released aerodynamics + gravity did the rest. Here both primary and back up system failed. I appreciate the back up system is only to release the uplocks. A bad hair day. back to the drawing board Boeing. I'll be interested on the FAA's response.
After this I would expect a detailed update of the FCTM as to how perform this manoeuvre. Sadly, not every airline carries this on board. Strange that the instruction manual is not kept beside the equipment it is relevant to. Where do you keep your car manual? Next will be a glover box in front of F/O.

[silverhawk]

Bad day at the office

Great crew

Superb result. Respect is due.

Perhaps the bean counters can remind the travelling public how much a professional crew are really worth on the accounts sheets?


SAFETY COSTS MONEY.

[pappabagge]

Capt Wrona taking a leaf out of Sully's book there. First class arrival. Re foaming of runways, I know from experience that Geneva will do it. There's always going to be the Occam's Razor debate about the virtues of foaming a runway and the arguments against. A feeling of 'here we go..'

[grimmrad]

Hmm, USAir into the Hudson - Sully is glider pilot, here - glider pilot. Do I see a pattern (ok, n=2 is not a pattern, I know). Would it be a good idea to have the guys start with glider training before going to powered planes. Maybe 1 year or so (maybe 6 mo) longer training but saved lives?

[Guy D'ageradar]

Re foaming of runways, I know from experience that Geneva will do it Confirmed. Quite a number of airports have the facility - depends on the situation though and takes quite a while.

As for the landing, beautifully done.:ok:

[Ptkay]

If you check carefully the photos the spoilers were used,
but only in the final phase of slowing down.

[wto605]

More photos here, including what appears to be a clean runway (with the exception of the fire foam).
Photo Search Results | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=SP-LPC)

Some more good ones here JetPhotos.Net Aviation Photos-Registration Search: SP-LPC (http://jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?regsearch=SP-LPC)
Actually, this one (http://www.pprune.org/this%20one) at the beginning of the runway looks like there might have been foam and it ran off it.

[ZOOKER]

On the 'Yahoo' website, the headline for this story is... "Broken landing gear forces plane down"
Don't you love 'journalists'. :E
And don't you love the crew who did such a great job here. :ok:

[Starbear]

Rat 5 I do remember the story of a BA B757 on base training duty who could not get the gear down by any means. The solution devised (lucky they had the fuel while the tech gurus devised the solution) was to depressurise the hydraulic system which kept the gear up. Then the back up system could be used and once released aerodynamics + gravity did the rest.You remember well. In fact story went that Gear Lever actually came off in hand during UP selection, so all gear pressurised up and solution as you posted. There was a procedure in the QRH for that for many years afterwards.

I was going to venture something along the same lines for this LOT incident but you beat me to it in a way. However I think it is possible that this incident will turn out to be gear still pressurised up as that would be the only common link. Perhaps the selector valve stuck/trapped in UP position? Cable snapped after UP selection? This would preclude Gravity procedure.

Just a couple of thoughts.

[Ptkay]

The landing was so smooth, that the passengers were sure that
in the last moment the gear eventually was extended.

[Starbear]

Found it, I had posted this some time ago in another thread. It is for B757 not 767.

http://i317.photobucket.com/albums/mm382/bairbus/B757QRHGearLeverWillNotMove.jpghttp://s317.photobucket.com/albums/mm382/bairbus/?action=view&current=B757QRHGearLeverWillNotMove.jpghttp://

[ILS27LEFT]

Absolutely schoolbook landing and evacuation. I am astonished.
I knew the Polish are very hard working and perfectionist in anything they do but this really surprised me. No luck here, pure professionalism.
A lesson for all, especially the greedy Managers at the top of airlines.:mad:

[MidlandDeltic]

Glider
Hmm, USAir into the Hudson - Sully is glider pilot, here - glider pilot. Do I see a pattern (ok, n=2 is not a pattern, I know). Would it be a good idea to have the guys start with glider training before going to powered planes. Maybe 1 year or so (maybe 6 mo) longer training but saved lives?


Didn't the "Gimli Glider" captain also have gliding experience?

[Junkflyer]

This was not a glider, it was an airplane without landing gear. Great job by the crew.

[Ptkay]

Wrona means crow in Polish.

Over the Polish internet a new saying is circulating:

"Lataj jak orzeł, ląduj jak Wrona"
"Fly like an eagle, land like a Crow"

:)

Soon another definition of a "crow hop" will be needed
in the aviation dictionaries.

[plugnik]

is here (downpage, with 30-sec ad I'm afraid)

Flight from Newark makes emergency landing in Poland (video) - CSMonitor.com (http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2011/1101/Flight-from-Newark-makes-emergency-landing-in-Poland-video)

[Discorde]

Interesting that the tail skid is deployed. IIRC that is also extended/retracted by the centre hyd system on the -300.

[fireflybob]

[QUOTE]Absolutely schoolbook landing and evacuation. I am astonished.
I knew the Polish are very hard working and perfectionist in anything they do but this really surprised me. No luck here, pure professionalism.
A lesson for all, especially the greedy Managers at the top of airlines.
[/QUOTE

Have always been very impressed by the Poles - hard working and dedicated. Last company I flew with we went to lots of Polish destinations and everyone concerned were always very efficient, business like and professional.

My father was a flying instructor in the UK during WW2 and taught many Poles to fly - he always spoke very highly of their loyalty and dedication.

[Skyglider]

Excellent job by the pilots & cabin crew! thank good nobody was injured:)
Wonder if there will be any videos from inside the pax cabin on youtube?

[Smilin_Ed]

Cue long thread on PPRuNe by armchair critics about whether you should fly "all that way" after a hydraulic failure and that only a glider pilot could have landed it!

If they did not have specific indications of hydraulic failure that would affect the flight controls, going "all the way" may have been the best option given that it would be daylight on landing in Krakov while landing after burning down fuel in the U.S. would have had to be after dark.

[Jet Jockey A4]

Well once in a while we can speak on a positive note...

Congrats to the flight deck and cabin crew on a perfect job.

Glad everything turned out the way it should... Well, well done!

[aerobat77]

i just saw it- superb work ! here crew coordination, coolness and the following of procedures seemed to work perfektly ! the flaps seemed to deploy and he nevertheless seemed to keep the approach speed higher to prevent a high nose pitch up and a hard tail strike with gear up landing.

[Ptkay]

Cpt. Wrona has 15.000 h experience,
fortunately, not only on "fly by wire" aircraft. :)

[atakacs]

If they did not have specific indications of hydraulic failure that would affect the flight controls, going "all the way" may have been the best option given that it would be daylight on landing in Krakov while landing after burning down fuel in the U.S. would have had to be after dark.

Well I have no idea of the specifics of teh 767 but unless I can positively establish that the failure will not escalate I would be rather worried about crossing the Atlantic under such circumstances...

Looking forward to more info on what happened here :)

[fc101]

Hmm, USAir into the Hudson - Sully is glider pilot, here - glider pilot. Do I see a pattern (ok, n=2 is not a pattern, I know). Would it be a good idea to have the guys start with glider training before going to powered planes. Maybe 1 year or so (maybe 6 mo) longer training but saved lives?

Gimili Glider's capt was a real glider pilot and so were the two captains in the Transat fuel incidents IIRC

[fc101]

Cpt. Wrona has 15.000 h experience,
fortunately, not only on "fly by wire" aircraft.

What has FBW got to do with this incident? Or is this supposed to be a cheap shot at Airbus? Remember Air Transat 236?

[vctenderness]

What fantastic role models for our industry are these guys!!

The crew on the Hudson did a fantastic job and I reckon these boys just about take number one spot as much bigger beast and on runway just like normal landing.

This is why our colleagues on the flight deck deserve respect and reward.

Well done the cabin crew for the evacuation as well.

[aerobat77]

well. the "glider" experience is of course a pure speculation so far- BUT ... having a natural sense for pitch, airspeed and descendrate as raw aerodynamical data is NEVER wrong, regardless what kind of aircraft.

surely the 20 years 767 experience was priceless in saving lives. this pilots will have a big sallary boost or an open door in every other airline- the copilot included :-)

[captplaystation]

vctenderness,
Whilst in no way wishing to detract from these guys great landing, I would take issue with putting their achievment in the same league as Sully.

He was handed a glider, with no prepared site to land on, & pulled off a textbook deadstick arrival in a bloody river, in the middle of a city.

These guys performed an immaculate gear up landing on a runway, with adequate time to prepare, with full thrust/normal controllability available .

Great performance, but don't sully Sully's justified reputation by comparing the two.

Well done the LOT crew :D but we are really talking apples vs oranges, even if Ptkay believes we have just witnessed the arrival of the new Messiah.

[amicus]

Superb piloting by Captain Wrona and his crew and glad that foaming helped lower fire risk.
However there is a clear warning here for both FAA and EASA regarding 787 potential fire and FST hazards in a similar situation. Ignition temperature for aluminum is 2000 degrees F, but less than 600 degrees F for epoxies used on 787, 580 degrees F to be precise, thus less than 1/3rd that of aluminum.
Even with foaming which greatly helped in this LOT incident, epoxy based fires ignited on both composite nacelles which defines the low auto-igntion temperatures hazard. A lot of runways do not employ foam which only worsens the situation regarding skin friction heating and auto-ignition. This is why the FAA was urgently requested to perform a belly up skin friction heating test as part of a Special Condition, but they refused claiming "simulations were sufficient". In case of of 787 one can anticipate both nacelle and fuselage skin friction fires with consequent much more severe results re fire and resultant FST. They can't say they have not been warned.

[Starbear]

What fantastic role models for our industry are these guys!!

The crew on the Hudson did a fantastic job and I reckon these boys just about take number one spot as much bigger beast and on runway just like normal landing.Now you are going too far. This LOT crew carried out a text book non normal landing and assisted by cabin crew doing their job very well too. Kudos to them all.

However, this incident is in no way comparable to the Hudson A320 ditching-not even close. The LOT crew, as far as we are aware at this time, had an aeroplane with malfunctioning landing gear but was otherwise serviceable. The A320 crew had no thrust and so very very limited control of their flight path.

I would not detract one iota from the LOT crew's skills and teamwork in achieving a great success but please let's keep things in perspective.

[763 jock]

According to Flight International, LOT have stated that the centre hydraulic system failed. Whilst not an every day event, it is not that unusual either. I experienced the same (leaking spoiler actuator) on the centre system about 5 years ago.

This requires use of ALTN flap (20 versus 30) and ALTN gear. What will be interesting to discover is why the gear failed to extend on the ALTN system.

[PAXboy]

On a slight side note about the options available to Sully: The river he chose was on the ebb and therefore very smooth. Had the river been in flood, there would have been a very choppy surface. That does not detract from what he did.

The Polish crew (flight and cabon), with the ground crews and pre-landing support do indeed show where the money goes.

[q400cpt]

No need to compare the Hudson river case with this. Both are very good examples to the whole industry that we still need real pilots with real flying experience built up from the basics and that experience cannot be replaced by various courses..(MCC's;) or zero to ATPL in a year things;))

outstanding stick and rudder flying!
congrats to the crew! both air and ground crew!

[Zorin_75]

Great job, glad that worked out.

well. the "glider" experience is of course a pure speculation so far- BUT ... having a natural sense for pitch, airspeed and descendrate as raw aerodynamical data is NEVER wrong, regardless what kind of aircraft.
BTW the AF447 FO held a glider license...

[arc-en-ciel]

this would not have happened on a fbw airbus at least !!!
there is no such "electric" alternate, gear lowering back up is a good old style mechanical thing ;-)

[Enos]

Captain did a great landing,

And he did nothing wrong..

But the engineers might be abit worried, center hyd failure should leave the gear able to gravity fall as long as there is electrical power available, ie if you have an unlikely complete electical failure before the battery is gone lower the gear, the up locks are controlled electrically.

So a center hydraulic failure will not leave the aircraft in a gear up situation.

Boeing paid people alot of money to think this through, and its never happened before, the imparla's an old girl now and this is a first.

767 VS 757 hydraulic systems are very different.

Well done to all the crew.

[mnez]

thank you all for sharing extremely good words about us Poles.
yes we happen to have quite a few brilliant individuals, not only Curie, Chopin, Copernicus, Malysz, Kubica or John Paul II, but lots lots of nameless hard working people in every job in every corner of this planet.
the problem is though we don't work in teams, we don't organize, we are heroes not conquerers.
the whole air traffic in Poland is frozen at this very moment, no one knows when the body of B767 will be removed, all inbound flights are either diverted or on hold. my colleague is now stuck in Rzeszow, no one is able to tell him when and if he will board a flight to WAW.
another example is that from 230 people saved from the plane almost no one had passport with him, so majority had to wait 5 hours standing in the corridor just in front of immigration because border guard won't let them in without papers - as one of them reported.

I hope, 50 more years and maybe we will catch up.
Today, again, kudos to the pilot and the crew, who did their job in absolutely western standard.

[Ptkay]

No need to compare the Hudson river case with this. Both are very good examples to the whole industry that we still need real pilots with real flying experience built up from the basics and that experience cannot be replaced by various courses..(MCC's or zero to ATPL in a year things)


I am not making gods out of these pilots.
I just said, perfect landing, a perfect greaser as usual...
I am also not bashing Airbus FbW, but confirming the need of real flying
experience, as mentioned in the above quote.

There are more and more pilots, called by the old foxes from LOT,
"the thumb pilots".

They know only how to use their thumb to turn some knobs on the AP.

As opposite to "stick and rudder" pilots, hailed in the post:

outstanding stick and rudder flying!

[Ptkay]

so they had to wait 5 hours standing in the corridor just in front of immigration because border guard won't let them in without papers - as one of them reported.

Complete rubbish.

They were waiting in the VIP lounge, with catering and psychological
assistance. They were waiting for their belongings, hand luggage,
also some of them had their passports in the hand luggage.

Also they were asked some questions by the investigation commission.

Yes, it was long, but in most cases, the psychologists insisted on
checking carefully on all of them, for post traumatic shock.

[Clandestino]

I am pretty sure that congratulations to flightdeck and cabin for nice belly-landing and good evacuation are in order :D. Aeroplane is in one piece so there won't be long before preliminary tech details leak out. I'd guestimate it will be a day or two at least and week at most so some small amount of patience will be required.


this pilots will have a big sallary boost or an open door in every other airline- the copilot included :-) Well, in the most of them. Not in Korean.

can a qualified B767 pilot explain how you can have all 3 gears locked up ?!? It happens on about every flight but usually not on landing.

[JammedStab]

Looks like no spoilers were deployed. I guess that would be to prevent too much weight at higher speeds?



Perhaps due to the hydraulic problems that have been mentioned.

[Knoman]

This is a very curious incident,
AFAIK Alt. deploy just releases the uplocks (Elect) and allows gravity to allow the gear to deploy, and I believe the Airbus uses a similar type of system.
So even with NO Hydraulics, gear should still deploy. The use of Flaps and spoilers shown in the pictures would indicate that not All Hyd. went out, nor explain why uplocks would not release ...

Kudos to the Flight crew on averting a potential disaster!!!:D:D:D

[mnez]

PtKay: I dream to be wrong on that one, yet it's hard to distinguish what is PR and what is firsthand report. We'll definitely see testimonials in the press starting tomorrow morning.

[JammedStab]

Found it, I had posted this some time ago in another thread. It is for B757 not 767.

http://i317.photobucket.com/albums/mm382/bairbus/B757QRHGearLeverWillNotMove.jpghttp://s317.photobucket.com/albums/mm382/bairbus/?action=view&current=B757QRHGearLeverWillNotMove.jpghttp://

737-200 has a procedure as well for Gear Lever Jammed in The UP Position. It involves turning off the controlling hydraulic system pumps and then cycling the Speedbrake Handle to reduce hydraulic pressure below 500 psi, pull the manual gear extension handles and then cycle the speedbrakes until 3 green which could take up to 4 minutes.

[Ptkay]

Unfortunately, tomorrow we will see the typical jurno hunt for stories,
no matter, true or false, main thing, they sell... :ugh:

We, Polish, are the specialists, also, in turning any of our glories
into a mud slinging battle against each other, and eventually into disaster. :(

Lets, for a moment, at least, celebrate the great outcome
of this potentially critical situation and the skills and perfection
of the cockpit and cabin crew.

[salope]

I wondered how long it would be before Danair came up.

According to my recollection the Stansted wheels up was an Ambassador
There was a Comet wheelsup at NCL off a training flt

Anyone remember more details

Having said that the Lot 767 looks like a very classy landing and I dont really care about the technicalities of whether all three bits of gear malfunctioned

[747JJ]

It has been reported that the C hyd system failure happened about 30 min after departure. Having just had a look at my B763 QRH to referesh my memory. Is the C system loss is not a fairly significant failure to continue to WAW 8 some hours away?

[captplaystation]

Tiny bit of thread drift, but well, here we go. . . .

To echo what Clandestino has said, doors may well have closed, rather than opened for this crew.
If you check the requirements, for many many companies worldwide, the requirements are " NO ACCIDENT/INCIDENT " record, not, "no screw-ups & I heroically saved everyones @ss so this doesn't count record" , but "NO accident/incident".

Read about BA038 and you will see the significance of this on someones career prospects if he ventures forth subsequent to his "impeccable performance of duties" day.
Jobsworths who have no comprehension of the difference between saving the day for all concerned, vs fouling up royally, came perilously close to destroying the career/life of someone whose only fault was to be rostered as Capt for the wrong flight on the wrong day.
These LOT guys are similarly blighted in the blinkered eyes of the w@nkers who decide whether or not they are good employment prospects.
What Joe Public should be told at any subsequent press conference, is that these crew,simply because they were called upon to complete their jobs , in extremis, to the highest standards possible, have rendered themselves virtually unemployable , by the likes of Emirates/Korean & many others.
SCANDALOUS, & should be publicised as such by IFALPA whilst the iron is hot. If only a Union had the imagination & b@lls to seize on the opportunity,to attempt to right this, Oh so obvious, wrong, but of course they have far more important issues to ignore than this.
OK, rant over, back to the subject.

[captplaystation]

747JJ, I do indeed know,really know, where you are coming from with this. 20yrs Capt on 767,no doubt very senior in the company, no doubt mindful of what LOT would like. . . . but, as a previous poster has posted, the same thing in the dark,in the US, would have been a whole lot more difficult for all concerned,it would have been a good idea anyhow to burn off/dump fuel, so time would have been needed before any attempted landing.

I will leave it to those familiar with the 767 to state whether the loss of that system alone would have given them any qualms before setting off over the pond. Outside my type-specific knowledge, so cannot really comment.

[skol]

In my experience of aviation which is very long, I've always found that it pays to wait until the Court of Enquiry finishes its work before handing out the medals.

[lear60fellow]

I don´t get the hero point of this crew, you have a complete hidraulic failure 1 hour after T/O and you fly all the atlantic to Warsaw? Either someone got the wrong information or these guys are suicidal!!!

[Cpt. Underpants]

Reading the observations, questions and responses on this thread, I'm astonished at how few contributors to this site are "PROFESSIONAL PILOTS".

[crHedBngr]

Ignition temperature for aluminum is 2000 degrees F, but less than 600 degrees F for epoxies used on 787, 580 degrees F to be precise, thus less than 1/3rd that of aluminum. Even with foaming which greatly helped in this LOT incident, epoxy based fires ignited on both composite nacelles which defines the low auto-igntion temperatures hazard. A lot of runways do not employ foam which only worsens the situation regarding skin friction heating and auto-ignition. This is why the FAA was urgently requested to perform a belly up skin friction heating test as part of a Special Condition, but they refused claiming "simulations were sufficient". In case of of 787 one can anticipate both nacelle and fuselage skin friction fires with consequent much more severe results re fire and resultant FST. They can't say they have not been warned.. . . .well, that REALLY increases my comfort level when considering flying on the 787 . . . I realize that landings such as this are rare, but still . . . :ugh:

[captplaystation]

lear60fellow,
Don't think it was mentioned anywhere COMPLETE hydraulic failure, merely 1 (of 3 ), systems. Oh, and I think it was 30min after dep, not 1hr.

As I have said ( & you should also respect, I would humbly suggest) without a detailed knowledge of the 767 systems , it would be foolish to publicly applaud/nor castigate the crew at this stage, other than saying, damned fine landing ! !

[Hotel Tango]

:bored: I really can't believe the hype about a straight forward wheels up landing. There's nothing extraordinary about it. Any commercial pilot is capable of it. It's not that unusual an event. It might be text book and all that but come on folks let's not get too carried away now.

[MoodyBlue]

I don´t get the hero point of this crew, you have a complete hidraulic failure 1 hour after T/O and you fly all the atlantic to Warsaw? Either someone got the wrong information or these guys are suicidal!!! They did not have a complete hydraulic failure. They lost one of THREE "separate and independent" hydraulic systems. Not a very big deal and certainly not suicidal. In the very unlikely event that another hyd system were to fail on the same flight a landing could have been made on the one remaining system. And consider this: it doesn't make any difference at all whether you try your luck at alternate gear extention (which is supposed to work anyway) in New York, or eight hours later in Warsaw.
In my opinion, a perfectly logical decision. You just can't beat Murphy if he decides to fail the alternate system as well. Looks to me the crew played the hand they were dealt perfectly.

[763 jock]

lear60

What would you do? The C system has already done its job and raised the gear and flap. Not long later it quits. It does very little in the cruise apart from power the centre autopilot. You run the QRH and it eventually tells you to turn the system pumps off and prepare for an ALTN flap and ALTN gear landing. It specifically does not tell you to land and the nearest suitable airport.

I'm interested in why you think it is "suicidal" to continue.

[captplaystation]

Sad how a "professional pilot" is so keen to castigate other "professional pilots", without A - knowing the facts & B- having any specific type knowledge.

Welcome to the unregulated forums of pprune

& dont forget to read the text in RED at the bottom of the page. :hmm:

[Teevee]

Just SLF but even I don't understand Lear60's criticism.How long would you have had to fly round in circles to burn off enough fuel and reduce weight to have anything like the chance of the landing they eventualy achieved? I would have thought trying to land sooner, heavier and with a lot more fuel (and no wheels which is also probably a pretty big drawback)would have been far more dangerous?

[TRey]

And consider this: it doesn't make any difference at all whether you try your luck at alternate gear extention (which is supposed to work anyway) in New York, or eight hours later in Warsaw.
In my opinion, a perfectly logical decision. You just can't beat Murphy if he decides to fail the alternate system as well. Looks to me the crew played the hand they were dealt perfectly. Unless Murphy shows up over the Atlantic and demands to go to Greenland in the middle of the night.

[captplaystation]

You may be SLF (your description , not mine, you pay my wages ! ) but you are right.
lear60, is, possibly, professional, but is not, at this moment, being so. QED

[jet_noseover]

Awaryjne l (http://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/1,114871,10572763,Awaryjne_ladowanie_boeinga_na_Okeciu__Jak_ uniknelismy.html)

Half way through the article there is a pic of the LOT16 burning fuel while flying over Warsaw.

The tower tells the pilot, no gears and wishes them good luck.

[Capt Kremin]

The C system has three independent pumps powered by two independent sources. Therefore the only likely way for the system to completely fail is total fluid loss.

The landing gear has a Alternate system which relies on electrically releasing the three landing gear uplocks and allowing them to fall under gravity. You cannot selectively lower each landing gear via the Altn system so in all probability the entire Altn system also failed.

On the face of it, there must have been multiple failures on this aircraft. C hydraulic system, Altn Landing gear system? The question will be why.

Great landing by the crew, but I'd hold off on lionising them until all the facts are known.

I am a glider pilot too... but knowing how to fly a glider probably contributed very little to the safe outcome of this incident.

[piotro]

One more movie from landing, different angle.
scUoqzG67-w

If embedded doesn't work for you then click on it to open it directly on youtube

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scUoqzG67-w)

[MoodyBlue]

Unless Murphy shows up over the Atlantic and demands to go to Greenland in the middle of the night. Yes, that would make for a bad day - but only really so in the very remote case of a second hydraulic system failing (of course I'm not considering exploded tires or something of the like here, which could possibly damage multiple systems).
I guess it all depends on how comfortable you are with statistics and odds of 10 to the minus X.

[White Knight]

Cpt. Wrona is a glider pilot, he perfectly kept the glide slope and AoA

So he flew an ILS approach then:hmm:? It was only the wheels that were missing I believe, not the engines:ugh:

[IcePack]

Mm! No spoilers even after full touch down. :confused:

[captplaystation]

When, 22 years ago, I started flying 737's, I was told ( & how many times subsequently forgot ? ? ? :rolleyes:) whatever, WHATEVER the problem, check the circuit breakers, then, you, or the first officer, get out the seat, slide it forward, & check again, because many, many , faults can be fixed in 1 second by resetting a tripped circuit breaker.

As I retire for the evening, my fondest wish , for Polish colleagues, is simply that the system that controls the releasing of the up-locks, has not "malfunctioned" by the simple expedient of requiring that someone reset a circuit breaker.
This being the case, I understand, whole-heartedly the mistake, & can also predict (accurately) the outcome of the court of enquiry.

Hoping it is nothing of the sort, & that the guys involved are going to bed sometime later tonight I imagine,"well rested " :zzz: after combatting the effects of dehydration following a long transatantic flight. :D

Edited to say, the CB's on a 737 are hidden, in every nook & cranny possible, but principally behind where you sit,the 757 (& I guess 767? ) appears to present most of them right above your skull, so,my paranoid scenario is much less likely I guess/hope.

[Clandestino]

I've always found that it pays to wait until the Court of Enquiry finishes its work before handing out the medals. "Nice landing" medal is due even if the inquiry finds out that the problem was crew generated or aggravated. It can easily turn out to be otherwise. Patience on overall grading is fine.

I really can't believe the hype about a straight forward wheels up landing. There's nothing extraordinary about it. Any commercial pilot is capable of it. It's not that unusual an event.You might actually be correct, in some parallel universe, where widebodies make a dozen or so belly landings every day.

Mm! No spoilers even after full touch down. No WOW detection for reasons obvious for everyone who has seen the video(s). The aeroplane stopped just fine without them.

[skit_uk]

Regarding no spoiler deployment, on the last video you can see spoilers deploying briefly on the port wing but it would seem only as part of the roll control. I guess if they dumped the lift straight after touchdown that would lead to a lot more friction on the runway at high speed and possible less response from the rudder.

(I'm not a professional pilot yet. Unless someone wants to give me my first job :ugh:)

[Out Of Trim]

Mm! No spoilers even after full touch down.

Well, think about it! :ugh:

No wheels on runway... So no weight on wheels switch could be triggered!

[mikeepbc]

mnez,
so they had to wait 5 hours standing in the corridor just in front of immigration because border guard won't let them in without papers - as one of them reported.
A passenger of this flight I had an opportunity to talk with said they have been invited to Presidential/Senator lounges.

[repariit]

767 ALT Gear Extension employs electric unlock of MG Doors and Nose gear.

Here is an "on jacks" test of 767 ALT Gear Extension that failed: B-767 gear swing failure - YouTube

The subject case appears to have never released the locks if reports of "no hydraulics" are true.

[aviatorhi]

Job well done on the landing... one thing strikes me as curious though...

I'm not 767 rated so the following is probably incorrect, just want to ask it anyway.

Even if the gear uplocks themselves would not release wouldn't the MLG doors open? But without HYD C they would be unable to close them. Is this correct?

[Joshilini]

When, 22 years ago, I started flying 737's, I was told ( & how many times subsequently forgot ? ? ? :rolleyes:) whatever, WHATEVER the problem, check the circuit breakers, then, you, or the first officer, get out the seat, slide it forward, & check again, because many, many , faults can be fixed in 1 second by resetting a tripped circuit breaker.

As I retire for the evening, my fondest wish , for Polish colleagues, is simply that the system that controls the releasing of the up-locks, has not "malfunctioned" by the simple expedient of requiring that someone reset a circuit breaker.
This being the case, I understand, whole-heartedly the mistake, & can also predict (accurately) the outcome of the court of enquiry.

Hoping it is nothing of the sort, & that the guys involved are going to bed sometime later tonight I imagine,"well rested " :zzz: after combatting the effects of dehydration following a long transatantic flight. :D

Edited to say, the CB's on a 737 are hidden, in every nook & cranny possible, but principally behind where you sit,the 757 (& I guess 767? ) appears to present most of them right above your skull, so,my paranoid scenario is much less likely I guess/hope.

I am very confident that the crew not only would have consulted the QRH for such failures (which would most likely tell them about a tripped CB) but also got in contact with the maintenance and operations department of the airline, who would have most definitely gone through step by step every possible scenario which would have caused a malfunction of the ALTN GEAR system.

It would be completely stupid if the crew noticed the failure of the central hydraulic system and ALTN GEAR system and thought "oh, erm, no point trying to troubleshoot up here. Let's land and then the investigation will take care of it."

They had 8 hours to troubleshoot everything to do with the central hydraulic system failure and another hour (?) to troubleshoot the ALTN GEAR failure.

[The Dominican]

Mm! No spoilers even after full touch down.
Of course not, it amazes me that people are even asking this question. Besides, enough drag/ friction coefficient for stopping distance not to be a concern

[Passenger 389]

"There's nothing extraordinary about it. Any commercial pilot is capable of it."


With all respect, you might want to rephrase that to "Any commercial pilot should be capable of it." Over the years, a substantial number of threads on this forum have been devoted to situations a commercial pilot seemingly should have been able to handle safely, yet somehow didn't. At least not on that particular day.

[misd-agin]

I'm amazed at the responses to the comments about no spoilers after touchdown.

WOW? Who cares, pull the speedbrake handle. It doesn't require WOW activation.

[The Dominican]

I'm amazed at the responses to the comments about no spoilers after touchdown.

WOW? Who cares, pull the speedbrake handle. It doesn't require WOW activation.

What for? You certainly don't need the additional drag to stop and you certainly don't need the possibility of uneven drag from partial spoiler deployment due to the hydraulic failure, no spoilers is the correct procedure in this case.

[Airbubba]

Reading the observations, questions and responses on this thread, I'm astonished at how few contributors to this site are "PROFESSIONAL PILOTS".

Well, the mods seem to favor other postings now that this is a commercial forum, their right I suppose. Many of the knowlegeable veterans (e.g. Ignition Override and Shore Guy) have either left or rarely post any more after some of the summary deletions. I can certainly relate.

On the face of it, there must have been multiple failures on this aircraft. C hydraulic system, Altn Landing gear system? The question will be why.

Some of the pictures posted earlier on this thread seem to show the tailskid down which would imply that C HYD was available at some point after the gear handle was put down. Unless of course, they crossed the pond with the gear up and the tailskid out, you would get both a Tailskid light and a Tailskid EICAS message in this condition. The tailskid on the -300 does not deploy with alternate gear extension.

This picture shows some of the spoilers (7 and 10 perhaps?) deployed on the uh, rollout:

Photos: Boeing 767-35D/ER Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/LOT---Polish/Boeing-767-35D-ER/2006892/M/)

With engine nacelles scraped some further loss of hydraulics would be expected but perhaps not instantaneous, this was the case in a 737 gear up touch and go incident in TXL years ago.

Apologies for talking shop here but some of us actually do fly for a living...:)

[Pinkman]

Was on the BA 850 about 25 minutes behind the LOT flight. Quick swerve and off to the alternate - Krakow. Three and a half hours on Polish rail later....

The aircraft is still sitting there and BA has cancelled all flights to Warsaw today..

Any suggestions?

[skol]

Spoilers are a non-event in this landing, I'm sure the co-efficient of friction once the aircraft touched down would have been high enough to do the trick.

[PAXboy]

(from an amateur observer) Watching the last of the landing videos that were linked, the belly warning lamp goes out about five seconds before touch down. Obviously, it might NOT have been but the questions are:


Once commited to the belly landing, would SOP be to shut down the engines?
and ALL possible electrical circuits?
Would it be done Prior to or at touchdown?
If such circuits are isolated - would that leave the handling pilot with no control surface?
In which case, a prescribed list of circuits to be isolated to reduce fire risk?

[flipperb]

Lowly SLF here, but wanted to offer a thought:

If the hydraulic failure left them with the option of a gravity drop, is it conceivable that they might have elected to the belly landing for fear that a gravity drop might have left them with an asymmetrical deployment? Per the video posted of a failed gravity drop test on a B767 - or perhaps other factors we don't know yet - could the crew have decided that a gravity drop created greater risk than a belly landing?

Kudos to the competent crew!

[Bearcat]

This is a major major incident for the Boeing 767. Folks are mentioning re cb's , resets etc. as a previous mentioned they had 8 hrs previous crossing the pond to go through all the eventualities in liaison with their maintenance folk. From the radar trace they must have held a good 40mins at Warsaw before commencing their approach as they I presume retraced all their options and set themselves up for a nightmare landing that none of us ever want to experience.

From an engineering view point, with all the damage incurred on the underbody will the repair cost exceed its hull value? Those 767s are a good age with LOT.

:D well done to the crew and the capt.

[sanjet]

Come to think of it, regarding the decision to continue 30 min after departure with a HYD sys failure. If you knew you were doing a manual gear extension, would you expose the failed system/parts to -40 degree temps at FL360? Pure speculation but what if staying at that temperature for 7 hours straight might have frozen some part of the landing gear that would be gravity extended?

[Fratemate]

First of all, well done to the crew. Looks like very competently handled situation and the best outcome that could have been expected.

I share Captplaystation's concern that a CB tripping could lead to snags with the ALTN lowering system but I'm quietly confident that would have been talked about and checked while they hung around in the overhead chatting to the engineers.

Despite the QRH drill for C Hyd calling for flap 20, it certainly looks from the photos like they went for a flap 30 landing (for obvious reasons). No criticism at all; I would have done exactly the same thing (after discussing it with my colleagues, of course) and just offer the comment as an observation.

Flipperb, I would suggest that thought would not have gone through their minds at all. Presented with a C Hyd failure you run the QRH. There is no reason to suppose the gear wouldn't come down on the ALTN system and I am quite sure the first time they would have thought 'now we've got a problem' is when it didn't. Until that point I reckon they would have been fairly relaxed with, let's face it, an unusual occurrence but something that is practised regularly in the sim and is not really a big deal.

Spoilers, schmoilers. They wouldn't have armed them for landing and not all of them work with a C Hyd fail anyway. IF I had time and remembered during the 'roll out' I like to think I might have popped the speedbrake lever but, as has been pointed out already, it really isn't going to help too much with the landing/sliding distance and it's just another thing to remember to stow prior to evacuating. It looks like this intrepid crew DID remember during the slide and just adds credence to a job well done :ok:

[frieghtdog2000]

There was a case some time back on a B757 Freighter on a high security European flight (money) where the local plod insisted on inspecting the landing gear bays. So open the panel underneath, select the Door Arm switch and Doors Open. Nothing. Scratch head, check the books and try again -still nothing. So AOG - same system does the alternate gear. The B767 has the same system.

Congratulations to the crew for plugging the last hole in the Swiss Cheese.

[Fratemate]

Since I'm on a 'roll'; Sanjet, what if they had the C Hyd fail 1 hour prior to landing? The various bits of landing gear would have still been exposed to the same environmental conditions for the same time and I'm pretty certain Mr Boeing's components are meant to survive those conditions on every other flight the aircraft makes.

For the record, I'm in the 'continue' camp. Presented with the same symptoms after leaving Newark, having run the QRH, established there's nothing else wrong with the aircraft and agreed the same with my mate(s) on the flight deck, I would have done exactly the same and pressed on to WAW.

Having sown that seed, I'll now shut up and leave the Flight Sim 2000 brigade to shout down how wrong I'd be and how we don't know what caused the damage to cause the leak, that might have also damaged a pump that could overheat and set fire to the hyd fluid spraying from a leaking hose, causing the aircraft to crash in a huge fireball and proving, therefore, that my decision would have been wrong :)

[bubbers44]

Having time in the B767 as a captain I would agree with their decision to continue to their base and burn off fuel. It made the landing at a lower speed and lots of time to comunicate with their company. Why the alternate landing gear extention didn't work is still unknown.

Landing early in a situation like this to avoid a crossing of the Atlantic probably wouldn't have helped matters. Yes, possibility of further failures due to the loss of Center hydraulics must be considered but as I recall the center hydraulic system can be isolated and have no direct connection to the engines. I haven't flown one in 8 years because I turned 60 so don't remember.

As I recall it is all electric pumps and pnuematic air pressure pressurizing the center system. They did a great job of sliding it in and don't think they could have done anything more to improve the outcome.

[sanjet]

Only speculation fratemate that is all. But with all due respect, a failed system exposed to 7 hours of -40 versus 1 hour of -40 temps would be a difference. I am not rated on boeing so I ask: does the failure of a HYD C sys result in a "Land ASAP" situation or Emergency status.
And yes I do agree in this situation to continue the flight with the given public data so far available.

[Rollingthunder]

Captain announced there were mechanical problems 4 hours into the flight.

For the record, I'm in the 'continue' camp. Presented with the same symptoms after leaving Newark, having run the QRH, established there's nothing else wrong with the aircraft and agreed the same with my mate(s) on the flight deck, I would have done exactly the same and pressed on to WAW.

Point of no return?

[Carbon Bootprint]

Point of no return? Perhaps, but with quite a few alternates, say Reykjavik, Shannon, Dublin, Heathrow, Gatwick, Schiphol etc. etc. While many interesting details are sure to emerge, at this point it appears to have been a calculated and rational decision that paid off. And whilst they fortunately had a few hours to work it out, it's not like they had days and days and the wisdom of hindsight in their favour. :8

Great job, guys. :D

[Bearcat]

What's the point of diverting to or Snn with a single Hyd fail and landing in the DARK? No thanks, they did the correct thing in continuing says me.

The big ?......what happened the Alt gear?

I kook forward to the report

[The Dominican]

a failed system exposed to 7 hours of -40 versus 1 hour of -40 temps would be a difference. I am not rated on boeing so I ask: does the failure of a HYD C sys result in a "Land ASAP" situation or Emergency status.
It does not, I don't think the "what if" question entered their minds as to the alternate system failing, it is an electric release that lets the gear fall on its own weight, I don't see them thinking about temperature exposure any more that you would think about it when you operate the gear normally, it is the same up lock system that you are commanding to release when you operate the gear normally anyway

[bubbers44]

A lot of pilots would have probably handled this in a different manner but I think these pilots did a perfect job of handling their situation. I salute them.

[Jabawocky]

And whilst they fortunately had a few hours to work it out, it's not like they had days and days and the wisdom of hindsight in their favour. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/nerd.gif

Great job, guys. :D

If only they could have jumped onto pprune and asked around for help :}

[bubbers44]

I think they already know we support them and they did the right thing. Glad I didn't have to go through this **** on one of my flights. 23,000 hrs and nothing happened. Maybe I was just lucky???

[Gloom_PL]

Some more info to drop in - the pair of F16s came in to check for visual (they expected electronic failure for gear expansion lights) and confirmed no wheels - and captain asked them to clear their altitude, so they can try to "drop" the wheels with higher G maneuvres. So I'd bet they tried everything, had plenty of time. They also contacted HQ for technical advisory, so I guess we should wait for preliminary report, which is scheduled to come in a month time.

On the other idea - it's still too early for judging, but just a quickie - we assume no gear landing was an effect of no hydraulic pressure. Just give a thought to opposite - if there was a problem with gear which caused then a leak and loss of C system? We'll have to wait till report, anyways.

[worried SLF]

I think water landing and gear up landing can't be compared really. Polish pilots did a very good job but it has been done before. In 2000 Hungarian TU154 in Greece landed gear up by crew mistake, the tower noticed too late, but they managed to take off again, perform a go-around and land normally. And in 2008, Kd-Avia B737 in Kalinigrad, Russia, also landed gear-up and at night time. It was a crew error and not a real emergency. They were probably other occasions too.
So, Hudson landing must still be No1, or maybe Ethiopian, given the circumstances, bigger plane and ocean, no river to land on.

[rh200]

In 2000 Hungarian TU154 in Greece landed gear up by crew mistake, the tower noticed too late, but they managed to take off again, perform a go-around and land normally

Just had a quick read, and all I got to say is cr@@@@p", man they are one tough bird.

[NSEU]

You certainly don't need the additional drag to stop and you certainly don't need the possibility of uneven drag from partial spoiler deployment due to the hydraulic failure, no spoilers is the correct procedure in this case.

Doesn't the Center Hydraulic System control symmetrical spoilers?

On the subject of drag, how does the co-efficient of drag of aluminium and composites on a foamed runway compare with braked rubber on a non-foamed runway?

[criss]

On twr, we didn't get any information about problems until they were on approach, so it's pretty obvious they expected the altn systems to work normally. And only then did the problem arise. After that they circled for 90 mins, in contact with hq and one instructor pilot, so I assume all possibilities were checked, though of course we're only humans.
On our request, police closed the road just outside the airport perimeter. And then just waiting for the outcome, and lots of smell afterwards.

[arc-en-ciel]

it will take a few weeks before we know why this gears did not extend and the beautiful Boeing design of a back-up system...:rolleyes:
until then, the 767 is still blocking WAW airport, any clue how to remove it from the runways intersection ?:8

[arc-en-ciel]

just got a funny idea ... may be it can go on its own wheels :ok: as they stayed in their compartment and if they have not been too damaged by the bely landing, a crane, lift-up, gear extension (manually) and towed to the gate !!!

[IcePack]

Nseu well spotted mmm! (my point previous post)To me only inboard aileron seemed visible.
As for deploying spoilers manually I would have once the aircraft had fully settled. But do not think that would be an important issue.

[Gloom_PL]

> just got a funny idea ... may be it can go on its own wheels
> http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif as they stayed in their compartment and if they have
> not been too damaged by the bely landing, a crane, lift-up,
> gear extension (manually) and towed to the gate !!!

The pilots did their best to lower the gear on fly-in. While it turned out to be impossible, I'd bet against it. Especially considering landing and possible additional damage.

[Agaricus bisporus]

A few observations;

Its been done before. !!!! No kidding! Really? How many hundred times I wonder? (the go-around stunt was even acheived with moderate success by a prop plane, an Electra in Shannon with a crew of instructors as the perpetrators) Now that was an impressive feat.

The only planned pax transport jet ditching ever as far as I know was a DC9 in the Caribbean back in the 70s. I think the Hudson incident was the only other successful and deliberate jet ditching under control but was hardly premeditated. Ethiopian was a forced crash and hardly a success.

No need for spoilers, coefficient of friction. The crew would know the figures from a table in the manual I suppose? The landing distance required non normal config no gear (incidentally that is no "gear", not "gears") table perhaps? The coefficient of friction of metal on tarmac is not necessarily very high. When I tried it - no nosewheel only - the aircraft showed no discernable deceleration whatsoever. I'd suggest that in such an event you'd want to ensure you stop asap to minimise risk of a high speed runway departure or overrun, so unless the checklist says no spoilers or they are inop I'd have thought them very useful.

Surprise that the nose did not touch. Just think where the main gear is relative to the nacelles. Of course it didn't, it couldn't. Move pax to the back? OMG! Do they do that in flightsim I wonder?

Surprise that this didn't end in disaster. Why? The ring-frame in the nacelles are designed to cope with the loads. The rear fuselage is just tin so unless there is major disruption of the structure the danger of a significant fire is minimal.

Speculation about return/continue transatlantic. If we don't know what the malfunction/s were or when they occurred it's an empty exercise isn't it? The crew made a professional judgement. Leave it be until the report is published.

Heroism? Bolleaux. Utter bolleaux. It had to be done, there was no option, it was done skilfully. A highly professional landing for sure, but heroism doesn't enter into it. But its no good telling the maggots of the media that I suppose.
Just remember the poor sod who did similar in the Iranian 727 last week - he's had hic licence suspended pending what sounds like a criminal investigation and is probably deeply in the dwang. Nice!

In my incident (UK international scheduled public transport) it never made the press, my accident report was never submitted to the Authority and all I got was a bottle of wine and made "redundant" a few weeks later. No cries of heroism there. There are many different ways airlines choose to skin this particular cat.

[BlackandBrown]

so unless the checklist says no spoilers or they are inop I'd have thought them very useful.

But why? The ground spoilers put the weight on the wheels so that the brakes are most effective. This had no wheels or brakes therefore there use is surely largely reduced and possibly negligeble though every little helps. I wouldn't have thought it a make or break decision.

[aviatorhi]

Also, as far as I can tell, it would have been rather tricky to deploy the spoilers if the C system was INOP, which is what all indications are pointing to...

Still wondering if anybody could weigh in on my previous question though, regarding if the gear doors would have opened with the ALTN EXT procedure being used, regardless of if the uplocks released or not.

As far as heroism; I don't think it qualifies as heroism in the English sense of the word, but in the Polish sense it does (bohater).

[763 jock]

The 767 QRH gives advice depending on stopping distance. If it is considered critical, "Extend the speedbrakes after all gear, or the nose or engine nacelle have contacted the runway."

The spoilers powered by the left and right systems are still available. As you would expect, each is paired with the same panel on the opposite wing.

[arc-en-ciel]

can a local guy spot the location of the wreck on the airport chart, and location of LOT maintenance facility ?

[keitaidenwa]

Professional crew certainly, hats off from here.

But I have to wonder if there is engineer at LOT right now wondering "Eish, I think nobody tested the alt gear extension last time gears were maintained on that bird..."

[Capt Pit Bull]

so unless the checklist says no spoilers or they are inop I'd have thought them very useful.

But why? The ground spoilers put the weight on the wheels so that the brakes are most effective. This had no wheels or brakes therefore there use is surely largely reduced and possibly negligeble though every little helps. I wouldn't have thought it a make or break decision.

Increasing the weight on the tarmac/metal interface has the same effect as a tarmac/rubber interface in terms iof increasing friction.

(Note, I make no comment on spoiler use. I have no idea of the proportion of runway used, what the qrh says etc. But most assuredly the basic physics is comparable.)

[bartek d.]

Voila:

52.166772, 20.966206 do Warszawa - Mapy Google (http://tinyurl.com/6cylyuo)

Lot maintenance base is under the roof with big …. blue/white LOT:).

[stallspeed]

One thread in these 'ere forum moaning and groaning about pilots loosing their flying skills thanks ( or no thanks ) to all the electronic gadgetry in the cockpits.
Then, within a short time span ( LOT , Iran Air ), we see pilots at their best, outperforming racks full of hardware with gigabytes full of software...

I'm sure this is a conspiracy. A secret brotherhood of pilots, hellbent on discrediting those doomsayers at A and B, by generating emergencies to show off their skills...Muahaha (deranged laughter) ;)

[Bally Heck]

A bit of information. From the Boeing FCTM for 75/6. Not the entire story but the first para.

During a partial gear or gear up landing, speedbrakes should be extended only when stopping distance is critical. Extending the speedbrakes before all gear, or the nose or the engine nacelle in the case of a gear that does not extend, have contacted the runway may compromise controllability of the airplane.

As a current 75/6 pilot I can only hope that I can aspire to the outcome achieved by these guys. I would suggest the deployment or otherwise of the speedbrakes is of little consequence given this outcome.

[arc-en-ciel]

LOT Polish Airlines Announcement

Warsaw, 1 November 2011 LOT Polish Airlines confirms a successful emergency landing of a Boeing 767 aircraft at Chopin's Airport in Warsaw.

On board of LO 016 flying from Newark to Warsaw were 220 passengers and 11 crew members. After the landing passengers were safely evacuated by the crew of the aircraft and then transported to the terminal, where the support team and psychologists took care of them. During the landing the passengers stayed calm and nobody was injured.

After noticing a central hydraulic system failure the standard procedure for emergency landings at Warsaw airport were implemented. All airport authorities and emergency services were alerted and in place to assist the aircraft during the landing.

They start to say a few bull ****....:hmm: we will see what is next :=
so if I read well, 7 hours before the landing, Warsaw airport was in emergency already, and central hydraulic failure would be the only cause to avoid the deployment of the landing gears :rolleyes:

[lear60fellow]

I don´t know B757/B767 systems but lots of my friends do and fly them daily but me question is, you´ve already beaten murphy´s once today, then twice with that alternate system not working at all and you fly over the atlantic where murphy´s is most expected to come again (it did at the end)

Great landing for the guys, I wish I could do one like that but still don´t get the point to risk that long flight back to Warsaw. You´re ETOPS, is still the aircraft ETOP´s if you get that system failure?

So far on my trainning during the last 20 years if you have a main system failure stay where you are and then think, look at the alternatives and then proceed, but surely I will not go 7-8 hrs over the atlantic if I have an alternate airport 30 minutes away, come on, it´s an hidraulic system failure, it´s not an FMS or one generator off line.

[Hotel Tango]

I just thought this landing was also pretty good considering there were no injuries or fatalities and the hull looked pretty good at the end no break ups etc.

In my book it was a controlled belly landing on a foamed runway well executed by a professional crew. It would take considerable bad luck for it to end up a wreck with fatalities.

Too many OTT remarks in this thread in my opinion.

[B767PL]

Keep in mind that they discovered the gear won't come down, even by means of alternate extension, and they will be landing on the belly just a few minutes prior to landing, and not back over the U.S.

If you would have chosen to divert, that is fine, you choice and call. The fact they chose to continue, is fine just as well, and in compliance with their SOPs, and in my humble opinion was a good and calculated call, given the knowledge they seemed to have at the time.

[B767PL]

kpt. T. Wrona has just said it was a loss of quantity on the center hydraulic system. Don't know if that has been mentioned here yet.

[root]

I saw the footage and it looked really smooth and well executed.

I can't wait for the report and subsequent findings. I'm betting there's a whole department of engineers over at Everett scratching their heads right now.

[HighSpeedAluminum]

With all due respect Lear60fellow you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

you´ve already beaten murphy´s once today, then twice with that alternate system not working at all and you fly over the atlantic where murphy´s is most expected to come again (it did at the end)

The ALTN GEAR extension malfunction wouldn't have manifested itself until the crew actioned the deferred items in the QRH (CTR HYD SYS PRESS) [if in fact this was the root cause] so your point is moot.

With this hyd failure (767) ETOPS is not affected (in my experience).

Great landing for the guys, I wish I could do one like that

Honestly, you wish you could "do one like that"....Back to your computer and leave the conjecture to those a little more informed....

[Rananim]

Nice piece of flying from this LOT Captain and crew.The only thing that counts when things go wrong up there is airmanship and this was a perfect example of that.You can do all the CRM courses and study the SOP manuals till you're blue in the face but it wont amount to a hill of beans when something like this happens.In the final analysis,only airmanship counts for anything.Some airlines know this.Some dont.

[Airbubba]

With this hyd failure (767) ETOPS is not affected (in my experience).

Well, you do lose the HDG (aka HMG in the MEL). And, as you point out, you can be dispatched ER(=ETOPS) with the HDG inop with the other generators operating normally. For over 120 minutes ETOPS you need to run the APU during the ETOPS part of the flight.

Whether it is wise or legal to continue ETOPS with the loss of center hydraulics will be debated by the geniuses with diagrams and highlighters in the training building for years to come.:)

Some news reports seem to indicate that the hydraulic problem was not evident until the gear was lowered for landing. Anybody have an update on that?

[Green Guard]

lear60

I will not go 7-8 hrs over the atlantic if I have an alternate airport 30 minutes away, come on, it´s an hidraulic system failure, it´s not an FMS or one generator off line.

very interesting, so you would gladly continue all over Atlantic without FMS or a Generator :*:}

[Airbubba]

very interesting, so you would gladly continue all over Atlantic without FMS or a Generator

Well, you can certainly be dispatched out of the blocks over the Atlantic with an inoperative generator on the 767 under 120 minute ETOPS. And you can enter ETOPS airspace with an inoperative FMC (you need two IRU's and two CDU's).

[criss]

arc-en-ciel:

A/c stopped exactly on the intersection of runways (11/29 and 15/33, landing was on 33), that's why the other runway can't be used, and AD had to be closed. LOT hangars are in the northeast part of the AD, near MIL apron, if you take a look at the chart. And no, AD certainly wasn't in emergency phase 7 hours prior to landing, there was no reason for it. As I said, first indication of any problems was only at final approach, HighSpeedAluminum is correct, altn gear extention malfunction was supposed to work correctly. So only after it's failure, AD was initially put on uncertainty phase, then alert (emergency).

[Ptkay]

Sullenberger commenting on the LOT 016 landing.

CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News (http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/11/01/erin-captain-sullenberger-poland-air-landing.cnn?iref=allsearch)

Very clear confirmation of the need of good flying skills to achieve such outcome.

[Swedish Steve]

There was a case some time back on a B757 Freighter on a high security European flight (money) where the local plod insisted on inspecting the landing gear bays. So open the panel underneath, select the Door Arm switch and Doors Open. Nothing. Scratch head, check the books and try again -still nothing. So AOG - same system does the alternate gear. The B767 has the same system.
The system of alternate gear extension are quite different on B757 and B767. the B757 has electrical switches that operate a hyd pump that uses L HYD to power the door locks open.
On the B767 a rotary actuator under the flight deck floor operates a cable system that mechanically opens the door up locks.
Strange that the B767 has mechanical cables under the floor of the flight deck, but a small electrical actuator to operate them. Why not a hatch in the floor like B737? Perhaps the switch is for commonality with the B757, to make the pilots think that two different systems are the same.

[arc-en-ciel]

thanks criss for info,
really a shame it stopped right at the intersection ,
any guess how the aircraft will be removed ? cranes ? lift bags ? on its own wheels or on jacks ?

I agree with you that airport was not in emergency 7 hours prior to the landing, that's why I don't quite understand the LOT announcement, neither that they have stated the center hydraulic only. It would have been more correct for LOT to write that BOTH Center and alternate hydraulics failed. Aviation accidents are rarely due to only one cause.

[arc-en-ciel]

So if I understand correctly, the B767 has a handle in the cockpit to operate the gear in emergency, with one cable that goes to the 3 gears, and then 3 electrical actuators (one on each gear) to open the uplock , correct ?
then or :
- the handle got broken :eek:
- the cable got broken :{
- the 3 different actuators all failed at the same time ?!?!? :hmm:

please don't tell me the 3 actuators are supplied by the same busbar:ugh:

[flipperb]

So if I understand correctly, the B767 has a handle in the cockpit to operate the gear in emergency, with one cable that goes to the 3 gears, and then 3 electrical actuators (one on each gear) to open the uplock , correct ?
then or :
- the handle got broken
- the cable got broken
- the 3 different actuators all failed at the same time ?!?!?

please don't tell me the 3 actuators are supplied by the same busbar

I would want all 3 actuators controlled by the same bus. Could really ruin your day if the left main gear deployed and the right didn't...

[grebllaw123d]

arc-en-ciel:

There is no handle in the cockpit for operation of the alternate gear extension system.
There is a guarded switch below the landing gear handle - by selecting this switch to ON supplies power to an electrical actuator which is connected to the uplocks with cables.
So a failure in this arrangement could explain the failure of all the 3 gears to extend.
See also #173.

[cfijacho]

http://bi.gazeta.pl/im/5/10578/z10578355X,Operacja-podnoszenia-Boeinga-767.jpg

[Ptkay]

Already towed back to hangar on her own wheels.

Not only all people saved, but probably the machine as well.

It is more and more probable that she will fly again. :)

http://bi.gazeta.pl/im/1/10578/z10578761X,Holowanie-Boeinga-767.jpg

[arc-en-ciel]

I would want all 3 actuators controlled by the same bus. Could really ruin your day if the left main gear deployed and the right didn't...

You would, I wouldn't, always better one gear than nothing (text book)

so when was the last maintenance of this actuators/cables/back-up system performed?

is it wise to leave an hydraulic system leaking everywhere inside for 7/8 hours ?

[canadair]

Lots of Capt Sully and Capt Wrona comparisons,
Not too take anything away from either, as both are highly professional pilots doing their respective jobs in times of stress, displaying very high levels of skill. but I suspect there will be one difference;
Capt Sully retired after the Hudson incident, entered the book world and speaker tour arena, and is now a Millionaire,
Capt Wrona will get some well deserved accolades and after a suitable amount of time will go back on the line...

Such is the world of Western publicity and hype.

oh, and both FO`s will forever be known as "the Copilot"

[aerobat77]

i think after departure the crew thought they have "just" a problem in the central hydraulics and decided that continue the flight with the ramaining systems to their own maintanace instead of retruning with an overweight landing and stranding the passengers far away from home is the better option.

many of you make one big mistake in this discussion :

the pilots after departure in new york surely DID NOT KNEW that the gear is completely failed !

the gear went up and they surely did not tried to lower it for a test- they focussed on the hydraulics.

the real eye opener came on final in warsaw when they moved the gear lever and nothing happened- not earlier ! then they made a go around and tried everything to get it lowered.

one another point: when we compare sully to wrona we have in both brave men one same thing : they both made in their life threatening situations the right decisions to save all lives on board- and this is the most important mission to every pilot.

beyond that the incidents were different- sully did not have the time to think about the situation, he had to make the ONLY right decision in seconds- a big decison in a pilots life- the decision to give up the hope that it will only be an incident and he will make it to an airport without scratching the plane and instead to go for a sure crash and ditching in the river because it will give the best option to save lifes - he was right. since the river was tall and long the decision to do it was bigger than the ditching by itself.

wronas situation was different : he had time to think , to go through the checklists, to try everything possible- but after no results were given he was finally faced with the situation that he has by hand to settle down a widebody on a runway without any gear, as smooth a s possible, and try to keep the plane on the runway.

in this case the hand skills on touchdown by itself were bigger that the decision to do it since he had time to analyse and finally no other option.

both mens did all right- all souls on board walked away.

[jack_o]

Here (http://www.sfora.pl/Zobacz-jak-przeniesli-Boeinga-Juz-stoi-w-hangarze-g37387-34001) are some photos, that shows putting the plane back on its gear. And I agree with Aerobat77 - cpt.Wrona said today that he didn't new about gear problem until he came to final approach at WAW. C hyd failure was handled using sop and there was no indication of further problems..

[jacek_flying]

Lots of Capt Sully and Capt Wrona comparisons,
Not too take anything away from either, as both are highly professional pilots doing their respective jobs in times of stress, displaying very high levels of skill. but I suspect there will be one difference;
Capt Sully retired after the Hudson incident, entered the book world and speaker tour arena, and is now a Millionaire,
Capt Wrona will get some well deserved accolades and after a suitable amount of time will go back on the line...

Such is the world of Western publicity and hype.

oh, and both FO`s will forever be known as "the Copilot"


Not sure where I read this but apperatly Captain Wrona is due back within a week for a flight to Hanoi not much rest for him then. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif

[763 jock]

is it wise to leave an hydraulic system leaking everywhere inside for 7/8 hours ?

Do your homework please. If pressure cannot be restored, the QRH directs that all the associated system pumps are selected off.

[Escape Path]

So far on my trainning during the last 20 years if you have a main system failure stay where you are and then think, look at the alternatives and then proceed, but surely I will not go 7-8 hrs over the atlantic if I have an alternate airport 30 minutes away, come on, it´s an hidraulic system failure, it´s not an FMS or one generator off line.

Yeah, right! It's not like an FMS or a generator isn't required for an ETOPS flight or anything :rolleyes:

At this stage and with the facts we all barely know, all I can say is: Kudos to the crew, you've done your job brilliantly (AFAIK) under quite a significant deal of pressure and the outcome couldn't had gone any better. Kudos extend to the cabin crew for a successful evacuation :D :D :D

[Max Angle]

You would, I wouldn't, always better one gear than nothing (text book)That is the perceived wisdom and the manufacturer procedure for most types but having seen how well the landing went with no gear its hard not to question that line of thinking to be honest. Nice job.

[Airbubba]

Yeah, right! It's not like an FMS or a generator isn't required for an ETOPS flight or anything

Well, actually you can certainly do ETOPS on the '76 with an FMC or a generator inop as I and another poster have observed. Did someone tell you otherwise?

[criss]

Captplaystation - they were in touch with ops, mechanics, and training captain, and circuit breakers were one of the first things they checked, and quite extensively. We we listening to their freq on twr.

[stillalbatross]

How does a manufacturer get an aircraft certified that can have three separate gear actuation systems fail at the same time. Airbus would never have this happen, last gear up I can think of before this was the Virgin Atlantic 340 years ago and the airbus system allowed for alternate to work if required.

[Airbubba]

Airbus would never have this happen

We knew this one was coming...:p

[arc-en-ciel]

Do your homework please. If pressure cannot be restored, the QRH directs that all the associated system pumps are selected off.

I did, when there is a leak (loss of quantity indicated) then , there is no chance for pressure !!! and even when the pumps are off, when there is a leak, it leaks everywhere inside the aircraft.... and at minus something for hours hydraulics can freeze or damage other systems when the fluid is not contained in a tank/pipes

[NSEU]

.... when there is a leak (loss of quantity indicated) then , there is no chance for pressure !!!

Depends on the system, where the system is damaged and how much is lost. From memory, the 767 has standpipes in the reservoirs which save fluid for certain critical user systems.

and even when the pumps are off, when there is a leak, it leaks everywhere inside the aircraft....

Everywhere inside the aircraft?

...and at minus something for hours hydraulics can freeze or damage other systems when the fluid is not contained in a tank/pipes

Freeze point of Skydrol <-62.2C. Freeze point of Jet A fuel -40C.

Do you have any examples of these other systems?

[Rananim]

You would, I wouldn't, always better one gear than nothing (text book)


Arc-en-Ciel

Theoretically,yes.But as max Angle says,flying isnt covered by a book.In this case,the belly landing worked..to perfection.One main gear down(as recommended by the book) may or may not have been so propitious if that had even been an option..The nosewheel collapse in the Gimli incident was a "fortune in disguise"...so a Captain has to consider these options that arent covered in the "book"..a deliberate all main gear UP landing over one main gear UP or a nosewheel UP landing with both main down as a deliberate tactic in the event of total hyd fail on a limiting runway.Its not in the book.Its airmanship.

[sidestick stirrer]

reading all the pages in this thread and the question was forming in the back of my mind early, had to read to the ninth page before someone beat me to it.
Unless the authorities have recently relaxed the minimum system requirements for entering ETOPS areas, my many years of plowing twin Boeings and Airbuses across oceans left me with the distinct memory that the relevant QRH page left no doubt: three functioning hydraulic systems required to fly beyond sixty minutes of an adequate airport.
Maybe the references to it failing half an hour or an hour after departure are incorrect and the sole mention of it happening four hours out is correct.
If it failed subsequent to ETOPS entry then continuing became an option.
Nice landing, nonetheless...

[Wrotaz]

many of you make one big mistake in this discussion :

the pilots after departure in new york surely DID NOT KNEW that the gear is completely failed !

In a todays interviews in the radio and on tv, the capitan said:

1. 30 mins into the flight they got information about fluid loss in central hydraulic sys.

2. They separated the centr hydraulic system, switched off the pumps "to have the rest of the systems safe".

3. They new that they would have to use alternate gear extension method at the arrival.

It was said in two different interviews.

Luckily, at least the alternate flaps extension mechanism worked.

[andrasz]

It is possible to do the northern route over N. Quebec-Greenland-Iceland-Norway non ETOPS, it added a penalty of about 35-40' to the JFK-BUD route. The EWR-WAW GC route would be more northerly, it woud probably not be very different from the non-ETOPS path. I do not see why continuing on two hyd systems plus two generators and a functioning APU would be in breach of any rules. In such an event our procedures would have been to check position, distance to alternates along planned route, and if all within limits continue to maintenance base rather than have a stuck aircraft at JFK. I'm sure the line of thinking at LOT would be very similar.

[The Dominican]

I'm sure there were many minds involved in that decision making process too, is not like these guys would have just "wing it" I'm sure they had their maintenance and operations department fully aware of the situation and they were in contact with them from the get go, we can't make assumptions based on some news paper article, we know very well how accurate those are:rolleyes:

[fireflybob]

Great Circle track Newark to Warsaw (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/distanceresult.html?p1=861&p2=262)

Ok it's probably a bit of an approximation to the actual track but not far off.

[Jetjock330]

As for the A330 (I imagine the same general rule to 767 would apply), the loss of single hydraulic is not a cause for diversion unless you don't fit into destination. Neither does it warrant a change in ETOPS once airborne. There is no land ASAP at all. Your capability is degraded to CAT3A, yes, so why divert and land at possible worse off adequate (which might only be a VOR anyway) airfield when home base might be fine with sufficient reserves and runway/weather/you name it. All legal and fine, that's why we fly redundant aircraft, and it so happens the gear gets stuck and is only confirmed once the effort is made to lower it

Further more, when will you know if the gear is hooked/hung up jammed??? of course when you try to lower it on final approach landing anywhere and in this case home base. Perhaps earlier, but it does not make a difference does it? He passed Boston, Halifax, Gander, St John, Rejkavik, Shannon, Dublin, Manchester, Standsted, Heathrow, Brussels, Amsterdam and he picked home base. That's fine by me, the rules were not broken and it turned out absolutely fine. Could you imagine diverting to a small insignificant adequate airfield only to find out the gear won't come down at 2000ft???

I believe the crew did a fine and outstanding job and I will not second guess them.:ok:

Well done Captain Wrona:D

[arc-en-ciel]

Landing Gear Alternate Extension
The alternate landing gear extension system uses an electric motor to trip the locking mechanism for each gear. Selecting DN on the ALTN GEAR EXTEND switch releases all door and gear uplocks. The landing gear free–fall to the down and locked position.

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/8208/b767ldglever.png

any more detailed info on this "alternate gear" thing?

[jamesbond6]

On subsequent pages there is an extended explanation. In order to use the alternate gear extension you are supposed to have the main lever in OFF position and move it to DOWN as a final step of this procedure. I wonder what would happen if it was in UP or DOWN position while putting the alternate switch to DOWN. Is it possible to lock some hydraulic valves in wrong position and disable the entire system, main or alternate, by f.e. leaving some hydraulic pressure?

[Airbubba]

Unless the authorities have recently relaxed the minimum system requirements for entering ETOPS areas, my many years of plowing twin Boeings and Airbuses across oceans left me with the distinct memory that the relevant QRH page left no doubt: three functioning hydraulic systems required to fly beyond sixty minutes of an adequate airport.

As for the A330 (I imagine the same general rule to 767 would apply), the loss of single hydraulic is not a cause for diversion unless you don't fit into destination. Neither does it warrant a change in ETOPS once airborne. There is no land ASAP at all. Your capability is degraded to CAT3A, yes, so why divert and land at possible worse off adequate (which might only be a VOR anyway) airfield when home base might be fine with sufficient reserves and runway/weather/you name it. All legal and fine, that's why we fly redundant aircraft, and it so happens the gear gets stuck and is only confirmed once the effort is made to lower it

Can anyone point to a relevant document to tell which of these opinions is correct? No matter what you decide these days, it will be second guessed unless you can point to it in the book (ask me how I know:uhoh:).

I have seen both views argued in ETOPS training over the years. Of course, I've also been told that you have to proceed to your ETOPS alternate if you lose an engine even if BIKF is CAVOK and nearby (I don't buy this one:=).

FAA AC 120-42B, the ETOPS Advisory Circular, has this somewhat generic guidance:

En Route.

(1) PIC Authority. No part of this AC is to be interpreted as reducing the PIC’s joint responsibility for determining that the flight can be safely conducted as planned before release. None of the guidance in this AC may be interpreted in any way to prejudice or limit the final authority and responsibility of the PIC for the safe operation of the airplane.

What this means these days is that we all know whom to blame for the decision to continue or divert.:)

[Starbear]

In order to use the alternate gear extension you are supposed to have the main lever in OFF position and move it to DOWN as a final step of this procedure. I wonder what would happen if it was in UP or DOWN position while putting the alternate switch to DOWN. Is it possible to lock some hydraulic valves in wrong position and disable the entire system, main or alternate, by f.e. leaving some hydraulic pressure?In short, yes it is. To use ALTN Gear extension, the Landing Gear Lever should be in the OFF postion (hydraulics in a "runaround" type circuit) so if there is any hydraulic pressure available, gravity extension will merely push the fluid around the circuit. If the lever is left in the UP postion then its possible for fluid/pressure to be trapped in up circuit and so resist gravity extension.

The lever is placed to down after extension to satisfy indication and configuartion warning circuits (as well as GPWS alerts). Possibly even antiskid operation but not entirely sure of that as I can't remember.

[Escape Path]

Well, actually you can certainly do ETOPS on the '76 with an FMC or a generator inop as I and another poster have observed. Did someone tell you otherwise?

Yes, I did read your post. But I reckon a generator or FMC failure is more critical to ETOPS operation than, in this case, the failure of one of three independent systems, which is what LJ60 was seemingly trying to portray.

Thanks for the clarification nevertheless :)

In my mind, the crew made the right decision; they had time in their hands to work out the failure and heading home they had also the choice of talking to their own staff. As some others had said, much better than having to do the same thing at an outlying station with much less support.

[Oilhead]

Air Bubba wrote - "I have seen both views argued in ETOPS training over the years. Of course, I've also been told that you have to proceed to your ETOPS alternate if you lose an engine even if BIKF is CAVOK and nearby (I don't buy this one)"

You are correct - alternates, whether destination or ETOPS, are for flight planning purposes only. There may be any one of several good reasons to not use a planned ETOPS alternate, that had been designated OK at point of dispatch or, of course, prior to ETOPS entry point, and go somewhere else. Hey, it may now be closed because someone else just did a wheels up a few minutes ago! As PIC you have both duty AND authority, including appropriate use of emergency authority, certainly under the US FAR's, to make the best decisions to protect the safety of aircraft and all aboard.

BTW, I fly the ETOPS 763, and I'm pretty sure the HMG is run from the centre system, in the event of AC power failure. To not have that back up "essential power" available, powering my basic flight instruments etc, would make me not want to wander too far at all from friendly surfaces, certainly within the (hopefully) 30 minutes battery life of aircraft.

[arc-en-ciel]

the question of entering ETOPS or not is paper story (they could have arrived from Hanoï it would be the same result).

the facts are :

1- Is it wise to leave an hydraulic system leaking for 7 hours ? (for my personal knowledge, I do not know the answer)

2 Why did this alternate gear did not work as designed ?!! (for the hundreds of other 767s in the world and the sake of their passengers and crew)

[Airbubba]

Yes, I did read your post. But I reckon a generator or FMC failure is more critical to ETOPS operation than, in this case, the failure of one of three independent systems, which is what LJ60 was seemingly trying to portray.


Sure, and some of this stuff is, to me anyway, somewhat non-intuitive. In the 'old days' you could always say you made a decision in the interest of safety and the chief pilot would back you up. Now, it is not so simple it seems.

I had a colleague initially hammered by the company for dumping fuel and diverting with a C HYD failure prior to a crossing. 'Why did you do that, you don't need the center system until you configure for landing?' they said. The FAA POI (Principal Operations Inspector) reviewed the incident and said it was the right decision, suddenly the company joined in commending the captain's wise actions.

I get my claim about 120 minute ETOPS dispatch with an IDG inop from the FAA MMEL 24-00-1 here:

FSIMS Document Viewer (http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=3E04D6842783DC6D86257784006BBA1C)

Of course, the MEL is for dispatch, not enroute guidance but like I said, you are legal to go in this circumstance.

In my mind, the crew made the right decision; they had time in their hands to work out the failure and heading home they had also the choice of talking to their own staff. As some others had said, much better than having to do the same thing at an outlying station with much less support.

I sure can't fault that reasoning but with the FAA at least, you have to be very careful about mentioning economic or even logistic considerations when justifying a divert/continue decision from my observation.

[Jetjock330]

Airbuba,

I have tried to look around and find something as you had requested, but I am not sure it's a final answer to your question.

Can anyone point to a relevant document to tell which of these opinions is correct? No matter what you decide these days, it will be second guessed unless you can point to it in the book (ask me how I knowhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/worry.gif).

Have a look at this general ETOPS from CAA CAP513 (http://www.pprune.org/www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP513.pdf), section 3.3

3.1
3.2

have the necessary information to make decisions on diversion at any point on the route.
Extended range operations are not permitted where any time limited system, that is essential for continued safe flight and landing has a minimum endurance that is less than the intended Rule Time, plus a 15 minute allowance for approach and landing at a suitable aerodrome, e.g. a cargo compartment fire suppression system.
If enhanced scheduled maintenance, replacement, and/or inspection are utilised to obtain type design approval for extended range operation, then the specified maintenance should be clearly identified in an appropriate approved maintenance manual and schedule.
Analysis of Failure Effects and Reliability1 General
The analysis and demonstration of system failure effects and reliability should be based on the maximum declared endurance of the aeroplane used in extended range operation.
Propulsion Systems

a) An assessment of the propulsion systems reliability for particular airframe/engine combinations will be made in accordance with Appendix A.
b) The analyses will review, in the context of extended range operations, the effects of operation with a single propulsion system, including probable damage that could result from failure of the first engine. Effects of failures, external conditions, or crew errors, that could jeopardise the operation of the remaining propulsion system under single power unit operating conditions, will be examined.

NOTE: Consideration should be given to any adverse effect of electrical failure on the aeroplane fuel supply system e.g. loss of fuel boost and transfer pumps.
Hydraulic Power and Flight Control Consideration of these systems may be combined, since many commercial aeroplanes have full hydraulically-powered controls. For aeroplanes with all primary flight controls hydraulically powered, evaluation of hydraulic system redundancy should include a determination of the ability to maintain continued safe flight and landing after the complete loss of any two hydraulic systems and either engine, unless it can be shown that such a combination of events is Extremely Improbable." unquote.

If safe flight cannot be continued safely, then a diversion is required, however, I believe safe flight can be completed as a single hydraulic failure is not an emergency or urgency.

[arc-en-ciel]

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3833/b767gearhydraulics.png

What bus supplies the electric motor ?

What is the frequency of the maintenance/check of this motor ?

[BN2A]

If a B747 or A340/380 lose one hydraulic system, how would that affect the situation?? Wouldn't be an ETOPS issue......

Just wondered...

:8

[Airbubba]

What bus supplies the electric motor ?

The Battery Bus (not the Hot Battery Bus, i.e. the Battery switch must be on).

[grebllaw123d]

arc-en-ciel,

I will try to answer your questions:

ad.1: I flew the B767 for many years and experienced 2 cases of leak from the CTR HYD SYST - in both cases the leak stopped completely after performing the malfunction checklist, which requires that all 3 HYD pumps are switched off. So I do not think that your concern is relevant in case of the B767.

ad.2: At this point nobody knows, but it should not be too difficult to find out. A post on another pilot website claims that the circuit breaker for the alternate extension system had popped and could not be reset.

[Admiral346]

No, loosing a HYD SYS on an a340 would, ad definitionam, of course not be an ETOPS problems. ETOPS refers to TWINS, hence the meaning of ETOPS!

I still wouldn't take an A340 running on 2 HYD SYS only across the Atlantic or any other remote part of the world. Why do you think they give it 3?

And 767jock: "is it wise to leave an hydraulic system leaking everywhere inside for 7/8 hours ? "
Do your homework please. If pressure cannot be restored, the QRH directs that all the associated system pumps are selected off. Well, before you tell others to do their homework - how about a deep long meditation on HYD SYS functions - is there not a reservoir pressurized to even out the bumps? Wouldn't it be pushing the soup out, and wouldn't it be flowing out after time anyways? And why do we switch off the pumps? To keep the fluid in the lines? No, sir, you switch 'em off to keep them from running dry and getting ruined...

[jamesbond6]

In short, yes it is. To use ALTN Gear extension, the Landing Gear Lever should be in the OFF postion (hydraulics in a "runaround" type circuit) so if there is any hydraulic pressure available, gravity extension will merely push the fluid around the circuit. If the lever is left in the UP postion then its possible for fluid/pressure to be trapped in up circuit and so resist gravity extension.
But question is whether committing such an error once could possibly lead to no further possibility to extend the gear in any manner. That would be too simple explanation if systems allowed for such a simple pilot error, so I suppose that reconfiguring the gear lever and switching the ALTN to DOWN again would release the pressure and allow for gravity extension, despite not having center hydraulic system available.

The latest news (released by press/airport authorities, not the airline, so please consider some bias on accuracy) on the technical part of this topic is that the gear has been extended from the inside of the aircraft (I assume it means cockpit) by the engineers sent by Boeing. So could it have been possible after all?...

[NigelOnDraft]

I still wouldn't take an A340 running on 2 HYD SYS only across the Atlantic or any other remote part of the world. Why do you think they give it 3?So it could continue a flight to destination in the event of loss of 1 :ok:

[grebllaw123d]

jamesbond6,

You wrote:

"The latest news (released by press/airport authorities, not the airline, so please consider some bias on accuracy) on the technical part of this topic is that the gear has been extended from the inside of the aircraft (I assume it means cockpit) by the engineers sent by Boeing. So could it have been possible after all?..."

Another explanation could be that the fault in the alternate extension system had been found and rectified!

I doubt that the crew made mistakes - they had lots of time and apparently had great help from the company - see #189 below

#189:
they were in touch with ops, mechanics, and training captain, and circuit breakers were one of the first things they checked, and quite extensively. We we listening to their freq on twr.

[Airbubba]

No, loosing a HYD SYS on an a340 would, ad definitionam, of course not be an ETOPS problems. ETOPS refers to TWINS, hence the meaning of ETOPS!

Well, actually, FAA ETOPS now applies to four (and three) engine aircraft over 180 minutes from an airport. It's been in effect for almost five years now, with a one year grace period.

See: AERO - The New FAA Etops Rule (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_2_07/article_02_7.html)

Airbuba,

I have tried to look around and find something as you had requested, but I am not sure it's a final answer to your question.


Thanks, I saw that also, and the FAA ETOPS circular mentions a systems evaluation before going feet wet. Still, I wish the guidance were more clear if I someday find myself at the end of a long green table with no ashtray.:)

[pley]

Guys, I just registered to post the link to another vid that was recorded from the rear. Here you can see how 'soft' landing it was! Amazing.

Awaryjne L (http://youtu.be/xhLJDm1_CbQ)

[arc-en-ciel]

grebllaw123d

thanks for your answers,

so if it is not the electrical supply (the bat bus) then it could be:
- the switch (not connected)
- the line (cut)
- the electrical motor (damaged)

what else ?!?

[eu01]

Found on the net (tvn.pl):
View after the lifting operation http://m.onet.pl/_m/b82f36befee09ed5ed569ea4e9b5a5ed,18,1.jpghttp://m.onet.pl/_m/47c8ed5e87aa303aff240a50c9a247bf,18,1.jpg

[arc-en-ciel]

with a little painting, and off you go, sold to africa...

[crHedBngr]

Bet the passengers will be glad to get their luggage back - hopefully in one piece :)

[Ptkay]

Bet the passengers will be glad to get their luggage back - hopefully in one piece

The Fire Brigade had to cut the luggage containers to get out the bags.
They were jammed in the back of the bay, and the waiting for the luggage has
already been an issue for passengers, so they decided to sacrifice
the containers to shorten the process.

[skyscribbler]

For the old timers of this forum...

"THIS NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN THE L-1011!"

(forwarded from Capt Bob somewhere in the Flight Levels)

:cool:

[500N]

Impressive. No bump or bounce at all.

Was impressed with how fast the fire safety services were on scene and spraying foam.

[woodpecker]

I do remember the story of a BA B757 on base training duty who could not get the gear down by any means. The solution devised (lucky they had the fuel while the tech gurus devised the solution) was to depressurise the hydraulic system which kept the gear up. Then the back up system could be used and once released aerodynamics + gravity did the rest.

You remember well. In fact story went that Gear Lever actually came off in hand during UP selection, so all gear pressurised up and solution as you posted. There was a procedure in the QRH for that for many years afterwards.

I was going to venture something along the same lines for this LOT incident but you beat me to it in a way. However I think it is possible that this incident will turn out to be gear still pressurised up as that would be the only common link. Perhaps the selector valve stuck/trapped in UP position? Cable snapped after UP selection? This would preclude Gravity procedure.

Just a couple of thoughts.

Not quite correct, I know 'cos I was there... 21st May 1985

During base training, on selecting the gear up a bolt in the gear linkage had worked it's way out (never had a nut on it!!) This left the gear selector not connected to anything (although we didn't know it at the time) and the gear itself being powered up irrespective of any uplocks being removed and gravity(emergency lowering) supposedly taking over.

It was a team effort within the a/c (no "fixes" from the ground engineers). The hydraulic system that was powering the gear up was depressurised and the gear dropped and locked down under gravity. However, even though all pumps were selected off there was slight flow, enough to unlock the main gear (braces moving from locked over centre position). This was overcome by dissipating the pressure/flow from the pump by cycling flap selection on the approach.

At that time Boeing still had a resident engineer at LHR who was rather embarrassed when microscopic examination of the bolt that "fell out" showed it had never had a nut fitted.

If anyone wants further information I still have the ASR report. Ironical that having flown the Trident for over twenty years with not a single problem with the U/C, the first time (base training) with it now being called the Gear we couldn't get it down!!

[OilCan]

...so we don't know why the alternate failed

but

we do know why the primary failed....the pumps had been switched off in response to a contents drop. :confused:

Unless the contents had gone completely (unlikely) is there any reason why they couldn't switch the pumps back on and accept a further contents drop till the wheels were locked?

...or have I missed something?? :uhoh:

[jamesbond6]

we do know why the primary failed....the pumps had been switched off in response to a contents drop. :confused:
It's not that obvious. There is an inteview with F16 pilot who intercepted the 767 and he says the crew were specifically asking about the tail skid which, as previously mentioned, was indeed extended. I am not sure whether there is any alternative extension method for tail skid, but if there isn't - they must have switched the pumps on again(?).

[Fratemate]

Unless the contents had gone completely (unlikely)

Why is it 'unlikely'? I had a split hyd line in a 767 and it emptied the entire contents of the hyd system over the ramp in no time at all. By the time the warning came up, we'd had a look at the contents reducing on the Status Page and then turned the pumps off, all the fluid was gone. It doesn't take long at 3000 psi.


why they couldn't switch the pumps back on and accept a further contents drop till the wheels were locked?

(a)See my suggestion above (b)if you're going to rely on 'stand pipe' hyd fluid then you're out of luck, since the 767 C system reserve fluid only supplies brakes and steering and relies on the Altn system for gear lowering.

[gierma]

best video from an emergency landing in Warsaw
Boeing 767 Newark-Warsaw Okecie

[OilCan]

Fratemate

Yes, I've also seen a number of emptied systems but by far the majority have stabilized after completeing the relevent drills - hence "unlikely" but I agree not "impossible". :ok:

Can anybody tell me what holds the tail skid up when there's no pressure?

[gierma]

rescue after landing and f-16 in the background;)
Awaryjne L

[Pugilistic Animus]

He got her down for a very graceful landing on that silly old cow:ok:

[JeV]

8min video from pax cabin:

Awaryjne l (http://www.tvp.pl/wroclaw/informacyjne/fakty-program-informacyjny/widzowie/material-nakrecony-podczas-ladowania-boeinga-767/5605975/awaryjne-ladowanie-boeinga-767/5606092)

[captplaystation]

skyscribbler :ok: , but I doubt he wouldn't have liked the 767, great workhorse.
After so many years in service it will be fascinating to see why this "result" never materialised before :hmm: :rolleyes:

[gierma]

DRAMATIC EVACUATION Emergency Landing LOT Boeing 767 Warsaw DECK AMATEUR VIDEO
DRAMATIC EVACUATION Emergency Landing LOT Boeing 767 Warsaw DECK AMATEUR VIDEO - YouTube

[Midland63]

Quick question from an SLF? In that last vid I noticed the slides from the aft doors were at a very shallow angle and difficult (it looked like) to slide down. Got me wondering if there could be scenarios in which the slides are an obstacle to evac - or are they solid enough that they can be walked (run) along as well as slid down?

Thanks for the opportunity to comment - sorry if it's a daft point.

PS - nice of the guy filming to go back and help the lady who'd fallen over behind him :hmm:

[nomorecatering]

Got to give it to the Poles, text book operation in all facets.

Cabin crew weere professional and efficient. Interesting to not the lack of hystaria that would be present in most western cultures.....they just got on with the job of evacuating the aircraft and then apparently a cuppa.

[eu01]

The Captain has now to share credit for the fortunate landing with... God, according to ABC News report (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/warsaw-airport-back-work-plane-emergency-14871651#.TrUt-IJtRpg).
A Roman Catholic friar aboard the Boeing plane that made an emergency landing in Poland says he gripped a tiny lock of hair of the recently beatified Pope John Paul II [relics he took with him] as he prayed for the passengers' survival.

Father Piotr Chyla told The Associated press Thursday that he made the sign of the cross and whispered final absolution for all the 231 people on board while the pilot — who has attained hero status — guided the plane to the ground without wheels after its landing gear failed to deploy.

Chyla says he now credits God, as well as Capt. Tadeusz Wrona and his crew, for the safe landing that some in Poland have hailed as miraculous.
:rolleyes:

[4whisky]

There are some gossips from technicians that the alternate LG system circiuit breaker was found popped out on ground. Looks bad for the crew then...

[Jet Jockey A4]

4whisky wrote...

CB...

"There are some gossips from technicians that the alternate LG system circiuit breaker was found popped out on ground. Looks bad for the crew then..."

What if the CB had popped because of a malfunction and could not be reset?

With all the time they had available to them in the crossing and prior to landing while burning excess fuel, I find it hard to believe a single CB related to the emergency gear lowering process was overlooked especially after we know others outside the cockpit crew (maintenance) were involved in the trouble shooting.

I guess time will tell when the investigation starts coming out with some of its findings.

[Antek22QR]

Greetings to All !
This is my first post and I have my first question already :rolleyes:

Am I correct in assuming that with "C" hydraulic system "out", only one autopilot (left) remains operative?

[Mishazeltser]

w8h-9vWsmgI

[763 jock]

Left and right still available. Right autopilot stab trim is inoperative.

[Antek22QR]

Thank you.
I made a mistake omitting the adverb "fully" before the adjective "operative" (:

[gravity enemy]

Quick question from an SLF? In that last vid I noticed the slides from the aft doors were at a very shallow angle and difficult (it looked like) to slide down. Got me wondering if there could be scenarios in which the slides are an obstacle to evac - or are they solid enough that they can be walked (run) along as well as slid down?

An Air Canada 767 that ran out of fuel, commonly referred to as the Gimli Glider, couldn't get it's nose gear to extend during 'free-fall' extension, due to the strong airflow. It landed on its mains and its nose. As a result the tail stuck way high in the sky when the plane came to rest. The slides were almost vertical, and that's where most injuries were sustained during the evac.

[GayGourmet]

Quick question from an SLF? In that last vid I noticed the slides from the aft doors were at a very shallow angle and difficult (it looked like) to slide down. Got me wondering if there could be scenarios in which the slides are an obstacle to evac - or are they solid enough that they can be walked (run) along as well as slid down?All aircraft types are different regarding the use of the slides if the aircraft comes to a stop at an abnormal attitude.

For example on the B744, if the aircraft tips on its tail, then doors 1 would not be used in an evacuation (too steep). In a belly landing, all doors would be useable, but doors 3 (overwing) would be selected to manual (no slide deployment) and people would be evacuated onto the wing - otherwise the slides at door 3 and 4 would meet.

Cabin crew are trained in these scenarios, but would also visually check outside for hazards prior to opening the door, or redirecting passengers to another exit.

But yes, where a slide is too shallow to "slide" on, they are rigid enough to walk on, just as they would be when used as rafts.

[aviatorhi]

What if the CB had popped because of a malfunction and could not be reset?

Not sure about the 767, but on the 727 I can hold a CB closed if I desperately need the associated equipment to operate.

[stepwilk]

I believe you can do that with any circuit breaker. You can also put a penny in your household fusebox, if you have one of those old-fashioned things, instead of a screw-in glass fuse...