Japan airlines tailstrike... [Archive]

Yamagata ken

5th Apr 2012, 15:11

The weather on Wednesday was slightly more than a little grubby. NHK news reported last night that the low pressure system that moved up the west coast was the deepest in 50 years. I'm a bit north of Tokyo, but we had gale force winds and driving snow from Tuesday evening until late Wednesday. I had to drive across a mountain range on Wednesday, and lost over an hour in delays as emergency crews tidied up after four separate accidents where trucks and cars had slid off the road, and fallen trees cleared. I've lived in Japan for 8 years, and never seen that before,

SMOC

5th Apr 2012, 15:21

Got to love YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOjofgXJeAU&feature=share

MPH

5th Apr 2012, 15:28

I don't know if I am seeing things but,...... It looks like the reverses (a) are deployed?

small_dog

5th Apr 2012, 15:36

The video is very grainy but are the thrust reversers deployed during the balked landing?

Edited to add crossed posts with MPH

stepwilk

5th Apr 2012, 15:45

Seems like a need of bounce landing recovery technique to be (re)introduced......

It's a takeoff, not a landing. He's rotating.

sky jet

5th Apr 2012, 15:59

The article at the top of the thread clearly states that it was a balked landing. It also states the departure airport and the times of departure and arrival. I also think I see reversers. This could have easily been a CNN incident instead of a PPRuNe discussion.

The Sandman

5th Apr 2012, 16:03

Definitely looks like the reversers deployed, also first bit of tape looks like nose coming down, so might have been baulked landing/attempted G/A after thrust reversers deployed. In Airbus anyway this is definite no go

stepwilk

5th Apr 2012, 16:05

The article at the top of the thread clearly states that it was a balked landing.

It states that he was going around--i.e. rotating--at the time of the tail strike.

lomapaseo

5th Apr 2012, 16:08

The tail section of a Japan Airlines (JAL) Boeing 777-200ER suffered serious damage on 31 March after it struck a runway at Tokyo's Haneda Airport when the pilot aborted a landing and started a go-around.

I would have expected the pilot to cancel and stow the reversers before lifting the nose.

I'm assuming that if the engines are spooled up fully that the nose would be heavy to lift while still in reverse.

Comments from B777 drivers:?

Lord Spandex Masher

5th Apr 2012, 16:17

It states that he was going around--i.e. rotating--at the time of the tail strike.

You still need to rotate in both cases!

sb_sfo

5th Apr 2012, 16:28

I'd agree, looking at the video.

Doors to Automatic

5th Apr 2012, 17:56

That second camera has certainly seen its fair share of landing-related mayhem!! :p

Wirbelsturm

5th Apr 2012, 19:38

It certainly looks like the reversers were pulled! :eek:

In my company once the reversers are out you are totally committed to a landing as a go-around is forbidden after that point!

Until that point a go-around may be conducted from any point upto pulling the thrust reversers.

They were quite lucky to get away with a tail strike I would suggest!

Obviously I will wait for a METAR before making further ascertations!

5th Apr 2012, 20:12

Stepwilk - not sure if you're being obtuse or just winding people up? The aircraft was landing and attempted a go-around/baulked landing/(very late!) missed approach - it wasn't a "take-off".

Thrust reverses look deployed which will cause a pitch down so you have to really HAUL the yoke to get it to pitch.... You select TOGA, reversers stow, BIG thrust, aft yoke and BANG....DRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGG :\

777 is FBW - does it suffer pitch/thrust couple in its landing mode ( if there is one) - genuine question. They are BIG engines which must provide one hell of a kick when TOGA'd.

All will be revealed by FDR.

Feel for the crew - bad day at the office.

ngapsayot

5th Apr 2012, 20:27

zlin77

5th Apr 2012, 21:46

B777...Go-Arounds prohibited once thrust reversers are deployed/selected..from Boeing FCTM..

stepwilk

5th Apr 2012, 22:06

Stepwilk - not sure if you're being obtuse or just winding people up? The aircraft was landing and attempted a go-around/baulked landing/(very late!) missed approach - it wasn't a "take-off".

I don't see what's so obtuse about that. Let's break the procedure into its components: Final approach. Flare. Touchdown. Bounce (or whatever). Acceleration. V1. Vr. V2...

You tell me when the tail strike occurred.

Callsign Kilo

5th Apr 2012, 22:23

I was under the belief that if you deploy reversers, then on the ground you stay. Irregardless of aircraft type; logic surely dictates??

lilflyboy262...2

5th Apr 2012, 23:31

Out of curiosity, there is a squat switch or something of the like, that does not allow you to deploy the reversers.
What happens if you have landed on the mains and deployed reverse at the same time, then the aircraft is bounced back into the air again? Is there anything in the systems that will stop the engines from spooling up again while airborne?

Intruder

5th Apr 2012, 23:37

Probability of a main gear bounce after reversers are deployed is VERY low. Spoilers auto-deploy when reversers are deployed, even if not armed.

IF you could make it happen AND the airplane was still in 1 piece, reverse lockout should not prevent reselecting forward thrust. However, once in idle reverse, it should also NOT prevent pulling reverser handles further aft for increased reverse thrust.

safetypee

5th Apr 2012, 23:43

Whether a factor or not, it’s a good reminder of the need to be in trim at the final approach speed and not to trim during the flare.

Is there any significant trim change with reverse/spoiler deployment/retraction?

Pontius

6th Apr 2012, 01:19

Whether a factor or not, it’s a good reminder of the need to be in trim at the final approach speed and not to trim during the flare.

Safetypee, not a factor in the 777.

It looks to me, also, that the reversers are deployed and that is definitely a commitment to stay on the ground according to Boeing and, a little bird tells me, JAL. Even allowing for his very questionable decision, Captain-san then compounds the problem with a totally ridiculous pitch rate and one I would have bet a LOT of money on the outcome being a tail scrape. No power/pitch coupling problems, just a totally ham-fisted PF and very poor decision maker IF it turns out the reversers were as they appear on the video.

de facto

6th Apr 2012, 01:26

Reversers used is a no go for any go around,due loss of control and or TAILSTRIKE obviously,one needs enough forward thrust to get it up:E

SMOC

6th Apr 2012, 01:40

Spoilers auto-deploy when reversers are deployed, even if not armed.

Pulling reverse only moves the speed brake into the armed position, the spoilers still need to have the A/C on ground & thrust levers near idle, a bounce will cause the speed brake lever to move towards down again, however it's usually totally out of sync with the A/C by that point.

safetypee

6th Apr 2012, 01:42

Pontius; not a factor in the 777. How so?
If 777 uses autotrim follow-up, ‘a la’ Airbus, then autotrim presumably cuts out at touchdown. Even so, manual trim should be available during the late stages of an approach and flare. This would also be available on the ground; – setting trim before take-off. Or is this function only via a trim wheel and not a stick top electric trim?

My question was not directly about power-pitch coupling, it’s the aerodynamic pitching from reverse structures and/or spoilers which could be a factor, as they retract during a go-around after touchdown.

Wirbelsturm

6th Apr 2012, 07:45

To be honest anyone who has ever flown the 777 will have a bit of sympathy for the 777 nose gear as, during a normal touchdown, the spoiler deployment coupled with the selection of reverse thrust can slam the poor old nose gear into the contrete requiring a good old pull back to prevent First Class being buried!

In this situation I can only summise that with the spoilers up and the reversers deployed the pilot must have had to have the column in his lap to get a rotation rate, as the reversers stow, the spoilers drop and full power comes back on that pitch rotation rate would be dramatically increased leading to the tail scrape. All probably happening at relatively slow aerodynaminc airspeeds.

One would assume that this will result in a 'no tea, no biscuits' stand up chat with the management. Bring your hat!

nitpicker330

6th Apr 2012, 08:19

From the video the Reversers are either fully open ( deployed) or in transit. Either way he does not have significant forward thrust yet and as such the video shows a possible bounce recovery with a lot ( maybe full ) up Elevator causing a high pitch attitude. He certainly would not have enough forward thrust to be trying to get airborne!!

The transit time of the Reverser translating doors/sleeves after canceling Reverse is about 3 seconds, then the Reversers would need to be stowed closed before you could advance the thrust levers to TOGA. You can't even push the thrust levers forward until the Reverse interlock releases!!

So, in my humble opinion they either bounced and in the process of recovery obtained a very high pitch attitude or they way over flared. During the final touchdown they selected Reverse.

Either way the nose would probably have come crunching down later as they lost Elevator

UPDATE:--
I just looked at the video again at the 9 second point and it shows the 777 further down the runway after landing with the nose de-rotating. Then the nose pitches way up as he selected Reverse!! I've seen and felt it happen on the 777 and 744. Both times we were lucky and controlled the pitch up and brought the nose down ok.

WASPERNATOR

6th Apr 2012, 17:14

As you say, a bad day in the office..

Let's hope they use the correct number of rivets this time if they need to repair the bulkhead..

asc12

6th Apr 2012, 18:02

Video removed, it seems.

SRS

6th Apr 2012, 18:52

Cannot view video, maybe pulled? I would think that Korean would be broadcasting it all over the world!!

suninmyeyes

6th Apr 2012, 22:08

A 777-200 tail will scrape at 10-11 degrees pitch attitude if the main gear is still on the ground. Typical target pitch attitude for a takeoff or goaround is 15 degrees. As long as you have the correct airspeed and do not rotate too quickly then there should be no risk of a tail strike.

An N reg 777 scraped the tail on takeoff from R/W 27R at LHR a few years ago. A lot of into wind aileron was applied and the resulting spoiler drag and a slightly faster than normal rotation (3.4 degrees per second instead of 2.5 degrees per second) resulted in the scrape. I believe there was also a slight loss of airspeed due fluctuating wind during rotation.The aircraft dumped fuel and returned to LHR.

mastercaution1

7th Apr 2012, 14:46

What happend to the Youtube video??? :eek:

WASPERNATOR

7th Apr 2012, 15:12

we was robbed.. someone doesn't want it viewed.

What airline was the 777 at LHR 27R?

suninmyeyes

7th Apr 2012, 18:10

Waspernator

The 777 tail scrape on takeoff at LHR was a United aircraft.

Accident report http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/dft_avsafety_pdf_501641.pdf

There was also a Korean Airlines 777 tailstrike on landing at Narita

BBC footage and video BBC NEWS | Special Reports | Korea plane lands on its tail (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8148527.stm)

I'm also aware of a Continental 777 tail strike on takeoff on a flight from Newark to Hong Kong in 2005 and A Malaysian 777 tailstrike on takeoff at Zurich see photo link below

JetPhotos.Net Photo » 9M-MRJ (CN: 28417) Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-2H6(ER) by Thomas Luethi (http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=331903)

So JAL don't have a monopoly on tail strikes....
　

Koan

8th Apr 2012, 14:28

If only 411a could be resurrected to blame the tailstrike JAL pilots for rough handling..It is Easter ya know.:ok:

Capn Bloggs

9th Apr 2012, 04:02

Interesting. Our Boeing (not 777) AFM contains limits on pitch (10° until reaching 35ft) after a rejected landing. Those limits never made it into the FCOM. :cool:

Al Goreng

9th Apr 2012, 05:13

This reminiscent of a Korean Air B777-300 that attempted a balked landing after reversers were deployed. The PF had just had a sim bounced landing training and he falsely identified the strut compression as a bounced landing, hence he tried rotating whilst the reversers and spoilers were deployed. It ended up with the tail strike. Luckily the checkers on the jump seats commanded him to stop and come to a full stop landing. So I heard!

Heard from an ex KAL pilot that the bounced landing training by the Alteon geriatrics at KAL training centre was a contributory factor. Most of the Alteon instructors at KAL training have never physically flown a B777 and take what they read and see in the sim as the gospel truth. They have never experienced the strut compression and reaction of the aircraft at ground spoiler deployment upon touchdown. Most, especially those from the B757/767 think that the B777 is a souped up version of their old clunker that they claimed to have so expertly flown, that they just taught these Korean newbies what they used to do on the B757/767s. Hence that newbie just misidentified the gear strut compression in response to the unloading of lift upon ground spoiler deployment as a bounce, hence his subsequent attempt to reject the landing forgetting about the fact that he had already activated the reversers!

This was a prime example of hold on from sim training whereby the trainee associated sim scenario with his actual flight. Sometimes such training however well intended can have such undesired consequences.

d71146

9th Apr 2012, 06:31

I believe that if we are honest a great deal of us miss 411a and his sometimes barbed comments on various things.

Andy Mayes

9th Apr 2012, 08:50

The earlier video that was posted has been removed, anyone know when I can watch it elsewhere?

A-FLOOR

9th Apr 2012, 17:06

Two videos are still up, one of the actual landing:

LiveLeak.com - 2012-03-31 JAL82 B777-246/ER JA701J Tailstrike Video

And one of the damage afterwards.

JAL

Discuss.

Just as a precaution I saved both to my harddrive in case the lawyer types get these pulled down as well.

blueloo

10th Apr 2012, 11:55

The you tube link is dead showing the aircraft damage. Any chance you can put it somewhere so it can be downloaded...

So far this incident is getting rapidly "erased" from ever occurring ...... Lots of references to it are being cut resulting in dead links to not only videos but news articles as well.....

heavy.airbourne

10th Apr 2012, 12:54

It is advisable to save critical web pages to your harddrive with all its content. They won't be able to delete it there.

Bungfai

19th Apr 2012, 07:10

[Bumpy landing - Go around] Japan Airlines Boeing 777-300 (JA8941) at ITM (Osaka - Itami) - YouTube

Sqwak7700

19th Apr 2012, 07:49

This is starting to look like a company SOP or training problem. In my many years as an airline pilot I have never witnessed such strange behavior from an airliner during landing.

Very strange. What would cause such odd flare / touchdown ocillation. I mean the nose gear does not look to even contact the runway during the ocillation. This leads me to think that they have a massive amount of thrust still in when they touchdown, also preventing spoiler extension.

WTF???

nitpicker330

19th Apr 2012, 08:26

Yeah I agree. Did you see the windsock at the end? Not a lot of wind at the time.
Extremely bad Piloting ability it seems. A lot of pushing a pulling going on there. They seemed to thump it on then get a bit of Kangaroo hopping!! Out of sync and way over controlling.

At least they went around I guess!!

Sqwak7700

19th Apr 2012, 14:40

At least they went around I guess!!

That also makes it even more scary, it is not a go-around, but a touch and go. Touch and gos in an airliner should not be a common thing, and it is certainly much more dangerous than a regular go-around.

I can't believe they did not drag the tail on that one, it looks extremely close to the ground towards the end, although it could just be the poor lighting. I would imagine trimming while in the flare and then adding boat-loads of thrust is just a recipe for a tail strike, especially with the underslung engines. You suddenly find yourself pushing on the yoke to control rotation rate, which is the opposite of what you are doing on a takeoff.

Normal in a go-around, but when airborne you at least have a little more playroom to overshoot and correct back down - not so when inches above the tarmac.:eek:

lomapaseo

19th Apr 2012, 14:42

That also makes it even more scary, it is not a go-around, but a touch and go. Touch and gos in an airliner should not be a common thing, and it is certainly much more dangerous than a regular go-around.

Why on earth is that :confused:

Sqwak7700

20th Apr 2012, 16:17

Why on earth is that

Because it is not something you train for in most carriers. It is basically a takeoff in which the aircraft is trimmed for a very low speed, with flaps not in a TO setting and the TO Config blaring at you. This wasn't a base training TnG, it was an "ohh sh1t, we are running out of room to stop" TnG. I've never heard of a carrier actually training this maneuver.

And it is one thing to set about doing touch and gos, or actually grazing the ground during a low altitude go-around - but this is completely different. These guys rolled down the runway several thousand feet, getting closer and closer to hitting the tail.

Can it be done? Sure, but it is a maneuver that increases the risk quite sharply of something going wrong, and should therefore not be "normal". I guess if you think you are gonna go off the end it might be a better option, but it certainly is a much more dangerous maneuver than a plain old GA.

lomapaseo

20th Apr 2012, 16:44

Because it is not something you train for in most carriers. It is basically a takeoff in which the aircraft is trimmed for a very low speed, with flaps not in a TO setting and the TO Config blaring at you. This wasn't a base training TnG, it was an "ohh sh1t, we are running out of room to stop" TnG. I've never heard of a carrier actually training this maneuver.

Thanks

Point Taken :ok:

my brain was fried with all the touch & go's that I watched with JAL 747's at Moses lake and PanAM when they took those L1011's ... but that was many years ago :)