PDA

View Full Version : Ryaniar - 2 Tail strikes in a week


Kim Jong
14th Apr 2013, 09:13
Did the FR tail strike in Malta last week slip under the radar unannounced or has the thread been removed? There was also one apparently in Poland.
One a week is unfortunate, but two will no doubt get MOL questioning the unevenness of the runways rather than any other contributing factors. Any other info?

BARKINGMAD
14th Apr 2013, 11:00
TRY THIS LINK? PERFORMANCE REFERENCE HANDBOOK 737 (http://www.performance737.com/incidents.html)

BOAC
14th Apr 2013, 13:23
I think the query was have they 'diisappeared' from PPRUNe, not has Hulshoff's site seen them?.

guidof993
19th Apr 2013, 12:55
Are Ryan Air still using Flaps 1 Take Off configurations almost at all time to save few Cents ? Think about.

sausage69
19th Apr 2013, 13:07
At Ryanair we use flaps 5 unless performance restricted.

40&80
19th Apr 2013, 13:44
Reference post Number 2.....Reading the link...It looks like some further training in landing on wet runways (not the sea) and getting stopped on the runway is needed.:{

Mikehotel152
19th Apr 2013, 14:04
Are Ryan Air still using Flaps 1 Take Off configurations almost at all time to save few Cents ? Think about.

What nonsense. I have never heard of anyone doing a Flap 1 take off at Ryanair, though it is permitted in certain circumstances.

MrHorgy
19th Apr 2013, 14:08
...and when it is - it is a Captain's only departure!

gcal
19th Apr 2013, 14:15
I wonder if the pax had to pay for the change of plan ;)

aerobat
19th Apr 2013, 17:49
We always used to take off with Flap 1 but this was changed to flap 5 a few years ago after several tail strikes and flap 1 is now Captains only take off.

Teddy Robinson
19th Apr 2013, 19:05
Quite incredible that safety related information is openly available on the internet, but reluctant to be discussed by professionals on this forum for fear of retribution from a company that does not like such issues to be discussed.
One hopes that in the wider interest of flight safety this iniquitous practice of discuss and be threatened is discontinued.

Aldente
21st Apr 2013, 11:29
According to Aviation Herald they've recently had three tail strikes in a two week period. Alicante, Krakow and Malta.

Sunnyjohn
21st Apr 2013, 12:30
With respect and without wishing to get into trouble, I think two points should be made here:
1. As Europe's most intensive short-haul airline, they do a lot of takeoffs
2. You rarely hear about other airlines' tail-strikes
Now I'll get me coat and shut up.

gcal
21st Apr 2013, 13:19
That is a fair point taking into account the size of the fleet and the number of sectors flown.
The size of the fleet alone is larger than the vast majority of airlines. If you multiply that by the number of sectors flown you have a massive organisation and obvious potential for mishaps.
I'd say, touch wood, that by and large they do a pretty good job.

kick the tires
22nd Apr 2013, 07:18
Incident: Ryanair B738 at Alicante on Mar 27th 2013, tail scrape on takeoff (http://avherald.com/h?article=460ffef5&opt=0)

Why depressurise at 13,000 and create all that drama? They had already descended from 22000 so why not wait another minute and get to 10?

Piltdown Man
22nd Apr 2013, 08:06
Firstly, I detest everything that miserable, penny pinching pikey MOL and his like stand for. But he does now appear to have competent group of employee and sub-contract pilots working for him. Every week they operate thousands of flights without incident so therefore I'll suggest that two/three tailstrikes in a week is almost certainly just a statistical anomaly. But, because of MOL's feral, punitive management style, he'll never know if he has a problem or not. Only when it starts to cost him cash will he do anything - but by then it will be too late.

Sober Lark
22nd Apr 2013, 08:44
I doubt anyone will be able to answer this but I'll chance it. How many pasengers have Ryanair carried since they started in 1985?

srobarts
22nd Apr 2013, 10:12
Sharpen your pencil Sober Lark, it is all here but you will have to add the figures up:
About Us (http://www.ryanair.com/en/about)

Sober Lark
22nd Apr 2013, 10:51
When I tried to add up the figures my calculator gave me a times ten to the power of E error so srobarts I ended up using a pencil and I got 509,676,285 passengers to end of 2011.

Note: Their 1995 figures are missing a zero and their 2002 figures mark a change to counting each passenger not just each thousand.

kick the tires
22nd Apr 2013, 13:20
Now THAT is thread creep!!

Sober Lark
22nd Apr 2013, 13:51
I respect you but how could a gentle introduction to probability and the law of large numbers be thread creep?

Tinribs
22nd Apr 2013, 14:17
I am an old fart who stopped flying jets 7 years ago so my views are a bit dated.

I flew all soughts of hardware starting with the Victor (proper plane that) and lots of time on the 737 400. I notice a gradual change over the years both flying and in the sim

We were hammered for not using the old fashioned method in the 60s 70s that is rotate to a certain small pitch angle and wait, if it gets airborne rotate further when safe. If it doesnt lift hold that low pitch angle consider firewalling and wait till the end of the concrete is nigh, only then rotate further.

All this came from the early Comet incidents of high induced drag through rotating too much or early for the actual weight/conditions.

Gradually over the years the weights became more accurate the weather better reported and the aircraft thrust more standard so the method sloooooowly changed to, await rotate call then pull at 3 per sec to about 15 nose up look over the side and see how high you are.

It works well and requires no skill or thinking if all the conditions are correct but if one is wrong you get a tail strike. Some aircraft are more vulnerable than others but all can do it if you insist

Facelookbovvered
22nd Apr 2013, 19:26
Clearly the more sectors you do as an airline the greater chance that there is of a mishap and other airline have had tail scrapes including Titan who do very few sectors and that was in a 300 using flap 1 believe

Alexander de Meerkat
22nd Apr 2013, 23:12
To those saying that Ryanair's tail strikes are a reflection of their high number of take-offs, I would quote the record of my own airline - easyJet. We have existed for around 16 years, and in the summer fly around 1300 flights a day. We have operated various aircraft - 737-300s, 737-700s, A319s and A320s. To my knowledge we have had one tail strike in our history - that involved an A320 on landing during a 200-hour cadet's first ever line training sector. I would therefore humbly suggest that if 2 tail strikes have occurred in one week that it may be appropriate to look for a wider range of possible explanations.

The Real Slim Shady
22nd Apr 2013, 23:43
Have operated: FR run 305 airframes, Easy 188.

I think your numbers are slightly out of kilter Senor Meerkat.

Yankee Whisky
22nd Apr 2013, 23:45
Does this not indicate a pilot's goof in using the im
proper speed at either rotation or descend ? Runways too short ? Approach too slow ?:ugh:

antonov09
23rd Apr 2013, 00:00
Incidents on occasion happen to every airline. Do you honestly believe you can compare a 16 year safety record with that of a 29 year. And your numbers are just a tad out with regards to both fleetsBBC News - Easyjet plane 'narrowly missed runway works', report finds (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-21446931)

Lord Spandex Masher
23rd Apr 2013, 07:21
Antonov, you're right. Why not just compare the last sixteen years then? Sooooo, is that still 3-1?!

fireflybob
23rd Apr 2013, 08:09
Modern aviation in many parts of the world is actually outstandingly safe so maybe you could argue that the number of incidents or accidents is statistically insignificant.

However I recall the Director of Safety of one large air transport undertaking (quoted I believe in a book titled "The Safe Airline" written in either the late 1970s or early 1980s) saying that in his opinion it wasn't so much the number of accidents which occur but the underlying causes underpinning those accidents or incidents and that these should be a wake up call for flight safety.

Cough
23rd Apr 2013, 08:34
Liverpool (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/dft_avsafety_pdf_502038.pdf)

737Jock
23rd Apr 2013, 08:46
Hmm Easy have 214 airframes... You are quoting 3 year old figures. Plus our aircraft are used more intensively then FR's so in terms of sectors operated the difference gets even smaller.

The real argument should offcourse be that easyJet operates predominantly a319's which virtually don't have a tailstrike risk. The a320 a bit more, but the longer landing gear struts still make it uncomparable to 737-800's risk.

EasyJet's tailstrike happened after a bounced landing, I'm not sure if that should even be discussed here. Don't know of it is the only one. Who cares anyway, sjit happens.

Antonov09 the incident you refer to is not a tailstrike, so what is your point?

Do you honestly believe you can compare a 16 year safety record with that of a 29 year.

Yes you can in fact, especially when you realise that MOL started in 1991. I don't think that flying around in bandeirantes has any meaningful relationship to the current safety.

BOAC
23rd Apr 2013, 09:21
EasyJet's tailstrike happened after a bounced landing - have you looked at post #30?

antonov09
23rd Apr 2013, 11:40
Yes that is correct.

Evanelpus
23rd Apr 2013, 12:09
Firstly, I detest everything that miserable, penny pinching pikey MOL and his like stand for

Are the moderators becoming more tolerant?

galacticosh
23rd Apr 2013, 12:33
Ryanair have had more than 3 tailstrikes in that time. All on takeoff due to the -800 being a stretch version. Especially a problem in x-winds with spoiler deployment on over correction with aileron.

-700 Liftoff attitude Fl 5 9.1 Tailstrike at 14.7
-800 Liftoff attitude Fl 5 8.0 Tailstrike at 11.0

Not sure how the numbers compare on the a319 but just by looking at it you can see it would take more to tailstrike.

Not sure EZY and FR comparisons tell us much.

fireflybob
23rd Apr 2013, 12:38
One bit of advice I was given by an experienced trainer on the type during conversion to the B737-800 was "Ten & Ten" - do not exceed 10 deg NU unless above 10 ft RA.

That said, surely the key is correct rate of rotation? (Boeing recommends between 2 and 3 deg per second - taking the average of 2.5 deg/second this means 6 seconds from zero to 15 degrees.) Also given modern flight systems is it really beyond the software guys to get the flight director to command the ideal rate?

Am retired now (thankfully) but over the years have seen quite a few rotations exceed this rate which got me wondering!

That said in the great scheme of things it seems that the odd tail strike seems to be part of the territory these days but it's what you do afterwards that counts.

RAT 5
23rd Apr 2013, 13:53
Also given modern flight systems is it really beyond the software guys to get the flight director to command the ideal rate?

I hope one does not look at the F.D. when rotating. Mk.1 eyeball outside until the horizon disappears about 9 degrees, then inside at the attitude to keep correct rate until what ever the correct target attitude is for your a/c. Climb out of FD yes, rotate on it, no. If the sharp boys could devise an FD with correct rotation rate guidance I'm not sure it would improve piloting skills: see all the threads about inability to do basics and magenta lines and FD's etc. etc.

BOAC
23rd Apr 2013, 14:02
Indeed, Rat - the ability to count would do:ugh:

fireflybob
23rd Apr 2013, 17:46
I hope one does not look at the F.D. when rotating. Mk.1 eyeball outside until the horizon disappears about 9 degrees, then inside at the attitude to keep correct rate until what ever the correct target attitude is for your a/c. Climb out of FD yes, rotate on it, no. If the sharp boys could devise an FD with correct rotation rate guidance I'm not sure it would improve piloting skills: see all the threads about inability to do basics and magenta lines and FD's etc. etc.

RAT 5, quite!

I made my comments,tongue in cheek, cognizant of the "Children of the Magenta Line"!

Hook, line and sinker?

Indeed, Rat - the ability to count would do

BOAC, your comment might be awfully close to the truth.

Generalisations are odious at the best of times but so many pilots these days seem to be trained to fly the aircraft "by numbers" rather than getting a real feel for the machine.

White Knight
23rd Apr 2013, 18:41
Every week they operate thousands of flights without incident so therefore I'll suggest that two/three tailstrikes in a week

May I suggest that those figures are SHOCKINGLY CRAP........ Shouldn't be any tailstrikes, FULL STOP!
Get with the program people:D:D:D

Love_joy
23rd Apr 2013, 21:18
Unless I skimmed this a bit quick, not one person has questioned if the aircraft is maybe just a little susceptible...

I currently fly the Q400, which as many will know is a stretch of a stretch of a stretch. And they want to stretch it further.

All this stretching puts the tail very close to the deck on rotation and especially landing. It's also well known, a firm touchdown, with a heavy load, on a cambered runway, with the tyres worn to limits CAN produce a tail strike at roughly 7 degrees nose up.

Considering we can be at 5 degrees NU as we cross the threshold, this doesn't leave much margin, and is why some guys prefer to use a max-flap landing, even on long runways. The F35 approach results in some 5 degrees lower, and is why on some approaches we are significantly nose down at the threshold. Even more so with icing increments applied.

So, is it maybe the aircraft? The -800 is also a stretch of a stretch, and the margins must be severely eroded. A handful of other factors, and your streaking your pants along with the runway

Sunnyjohn
23rd Apr 2013, 22:04
Unless I skimmed this a bit quick, not one person has questioned if the aircraft is maybe just a little susceptible...

You did and they have - see post 31

go around flaps15
23rd Apr 2013, 22:10
Tail clearance is 20 inches with flap 5 and 13 inches with flap 1. Boeing state that the tailstrike pitch attitude is 11 degrees .

I have a few thousand hours flying on the 800 and thankfully have had no incidents but these things do happen from time to time.

Boeing are quite clear on the correct technique and I have always tried to stick to that, but again with these incidents there could of been other factors. It shouldn't happen with the correct technique and that's about the size of it.

737Jock
23rd Apr 2013, 22:52
@BOAC let me answer that for you by quoting what I wrote in full (as opposed to your partial (and possibly subjective) quote):
EasyJet's tailstrike happened after a bounced landing, I'm not sure if that should even be discussed here. Don't know of it is the only one. Who cares anyway, :mad: happens.

So no I didn't read post 30... But what the hell does it even matter?

Piltdown Man
23rd Apr 2013, 23:24
Shouldn't be any tailstrikes, FULL STOP!

I don't know if the above comment is one made in jest, made by a troll, done tongue in check or one by a complete idiot. But to be clear, if such a thing as a tailstrike is possible it will be done. "Full stops", shouting and such like will not change real life and will certainly do nothing to alter the future.

To reduce the risk of re-occurrence, events like this have to be understood. And one of the big questions is what was different with these flights from all the others that have occurred over the past few years? And even if the real facts emerge and resulting lessons are taken on board and become fully absorbed by the system, the risk will only reduce. It will never, ever become zero.

Alexander de Meerkat
25th Apr 2013, 01:43
antonov09 - I think you will find that my figures are correct regarding fleet sizes and numbers. And yes I do believe you can compare a 16 year safety record with a 29 year one. To make it easy for you why not ignore the first 13 years and then do the maths. Bearing in mind that for most of those years Ryanair had a combination of Bandeirantes, HS 748s, BAC One-Elevens and ATR-42s. From memory the first 737-200 only arrived in 1994. I am, however, grateful for Cough's AAIB report related to an easyJet 737 tailstrike back in 2000, which I was not aware of. That makes 2 that I know of in the Company's history. As others have pointed out, Ryanair did not exist in any meaningful sense until MOL got involved in 1991, and even then it was a tiny outfit, so to talk of 29 years of operations is just codswallop.

I have said this before and been much criticised for it, but at some stage Ryanair may have to look at an alternative method of controlling negative comments about them other than threatening legal action. I would have thought that internally Ryanair must be somewhat anxious about 2 tail strikes in a week - there again maybe each one was just 'one of those things'.

JW411
25th Apr 2013, 15:46
White Knight:

"May I suggest that those figures are SHOCKINGLY CRAP........Shouldn't be any tailstrikes, FULL STOP!"

I am a little bit confused (not difficult). It was my understanding that you fly for EK?

Now I cannot be bothered looking up all of the details (for that is one of the joys of being retired) but was it not EK that took out the approach lighting at the other end of the runway on take-off in South Africa and then managed a repeat performance in Australia?

Perhaps that doesn't count as a tailstrike in your books?

Please do correct me if I am wrong and I will happily apologise.

BOAC
25th Apr 2013, 15:49
Maybe 'Tailstrikes' are CRAP but taking out airfield furniture is ok?

JW411
25th Apr 2013, 16:35
White Knight:

Since I didn't have very much to do this afternoon(that is another joy of being retired) I decided to do a bit of digging.

The two events that I referred to were:

EK764 Jo'burg to Dubai A343 A6-ERN 09 Apr 04

EK407 Melbourne to Dubai A345 A6-ERG 20 Mar 09

Both of which almost resulted in huge loss of life.

As to your working for EK;

A quick search on Pprune reveals a multitude of admissions that you work for Emirates including one on "EK Advice Please" on 21 Aug 12:

"A happy man joins Emirates. A happier man has left Emirates"

Your response was "Depends on your POV.......So I left BA."

It is only a suggestion but have you considered fitting your computer keyboard with a breathalyser?

Let he who casts the first stone.........

LNIDA
26th Apr 2013, 01:10
In absolute terms a tail strike is not a disaster unless you make it one by going on to pressurise the aircraft, i think Ryanair will be concerned about any trend that puts at risk their business, they more than say BA are very much at risk over public perception of how safe they are, thankfully we are not talking about a Lion air type of event here, MOL is very canny to imply that he is cheap because of an efficient operation not because they cut corners on safety and that mantra must be repeated at every opportunity, to be clear they don't cut corners on safety, their pilots are well trained and the maintenance is first class, they have a low cost base as a result of a ruthless approach to all costs.

There is of course a large body of people including me who would love to see MOL brought down peg or two, but not a crash for that does the industry no good at all, but yes I would love to see some body in the EU take them to the cleaners over their employment methods, but i suspect MOL is light years ahead of the slow grind of EU regulators, the more likely is that the axe will fall on the pilot workforce over tax & NI payments or lack of

Piltdown Man
26th Apr 2013, 11:13
I believe LNIDA is correct. And I'm sure RYR (whose lawyers we now know read every word where their name is mentioned) also believe that they are doing all they can to maintain what is an enviable safety record. But I'll suggest that there is a limit as to how much RYR can achieve with their current corporate culture.

I'll pose a few questions. If you worked for RYR -

1. ...do you think you could personally explain to Mr. O'Leary that you delayed a flight because you weren't satisfied with something that in hindsight you should have known about?

2. ...as a member of cabin crew who, because of a distraction, forgot to report a cabin fault, which resulted in a departure delay; what would happen to you?

3. ...as a ground handling agent, what do you think would happen if you were responsible for a loading error? Would you be paid for that turnaround?

4. ...would you find them supportive to your request for compassionate leave following the death of a close relative?

5. ...and had, two level bust in week; what would happen to you?

I know a few RYR pilots, both current and former and they are good operators. They have been well trained and perform to a high standard. But they aren't the ones to worry about. It's the less able pilots. It's the handling agents who have problems hanging on to good staff. It's the cabin crew who are on a final warning for reporting late. And it's when one of these "makes a mistake" or has a "bad day" it will probably go un-mentioned.

To move forward, RYR has to shake off it's hard nosed, cash is king macho attitude. Failure to do so means they will not have a worthwhile reporting culture which in turn means they will not have the information they need to in order to effectively manage their operation. And to quote the last two sentences of a Donald Rumsfeld quotation: "But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know." and these are the things that bite your bum!

PM

Sober Lark
26th Apr 2013, 11:38
Is this an example of why a well known Middle Eastern airline doesn't even allow their name to be mentioned on this site?

Gulfstreamaviator
26th Apr 2013, 12:48
Perhaps not, as he who must be obeyed, loved (loves) any publicity, so to change this to sue any thing that is anti RYR might be difficult.

Sober Lark
26th Apr 2013, 13:34
If the unmentionable airline can do it any airline can. and I somehow doubt he'd be strutting about with great show and braggadocio at some of the comments.

Piltdown Man
26th Apr 2013, 13:58
Is this an example of why a well known Middle Eastern airline doesn't even allow their name to be mentioned on this site?

I must have my eyes and ears shut. Is this for real? I can understand that some might be upset with inaccurate and slanderous statements. I can understand why some organisations, lacking in confidence and afraid of bad press, instruct legal muscle (a bit like the East End criminals sending round the boys) try to force people to keep their mouths shut. But to comply with wishes of any Tom, Dick or Harry not to have their names even mentioned devalues this site and the content contained within.

Tinribs
26th Apr 2013, 14:56
The previous attitude to events and yelling CRAP seems not to be in touch with the real world.

Events have happened to all mechanical devices since that poor devil got minced by the first ever train. Each time something nasty happens we all say how horrid lets make sure it doesn't happen again. Then we learnt that the best way is to take into account near misses and use them as a warning of what the next stage will be. To demand and presumably hope to achieve no events ever is silly.

An aspect of this discussion which seems to be lacking is that some aircraft models are inherently closer to tail strikes than others, perhaps a321 and 737/800. This will skew a comparison of the figures between airlines.

On the 737/400 we had a tailskid with wear dimples, when it was worn so as to erode all of the dimples time to change it. Most of the aircraft had some wear marks on the tailskids so most of them had come very close to a tail strike.

I never saw a tail strike on a 300 or 500

JW411
26th Apr 2013, 16:49
You are absolutely correct; it is quite mischievous to try and compare an Airbus 319 with a Boeing 738 when it comes to tailstrikes. I would imagine that it would be almost impossible to have a tailstrike in an A319.

One of the classics for tailstrikes was the DC-8-61 or the DC-8-63. Rotation took place in two quite separate events.

To introduce a bit of levity to the situation, I once asked one of my DC-8 mates which was the nicest one to fly. Without hesitation he said that the DC-8-62 (normal length fuselage) was the nicest.

What about the DC-8-63?

"Hell; it was like flying a dog with worms!"

Says it all really.

Sunnyjohn
26th Apr 2013, 19:15
I'll pose a few questions. If you worked for RYR is meaningless unless you asked (and someone was actually daft enough to answer) the same questions of all airlines.

Piltdown Man
26th Apr 2013, 21:29
I can answer for my own airline:

1. That's life. But if you were still unclear about what you should have done, you could ask for and would be given additional (non-jeopardy) training.
2. It would be left to the Captain to deal with. There would be no come-back.
3. We'd work with the agent to prevent re-occurrence and you would be paid.
4. Very supportive and would even suggest that you take time off.
5. You would have the opportunity to discuss the events and then if necessary, additional training.

Do we have a good reporting culture? At the moment it's reasonable (excellent by comparison with other airlines) and it's getting better. And yes, we have a Just Culture.