Air China Cargo drops TE flap approaching ATL

[poorjohn]

What was it that triggered the original thread being moved out to pasture? "Atlanta TV station reports..."?. AvHerald reports in part Police reported the 20 feet long piece belonged to the right wing of the China Airlines. The flaps section, that separated from the wing, broke in two parts, impacted the fuselage causing substantial damage to the fuselage, too, and fell to the ground.I'd have to guess (but profess ignorance) that the failure occured on or soon after deployment, and loss of the surface created a serious pucker effect in the cockpit. Good thing "impacted the fuselage" didn't include any of the flying surfaces at the back end.

[mach2.6]

I found my original post moved to the North America section of PPrune. Probably because 1) 747s only operate in North America 2) a 747-400BCF did not recently crash in Bagram 3) ATL is a regional airport; no international flights operate there 4) graffiti on the side of the allegedly involved aircraft says "China Airlines Cargo", when in fact this was actually an asset of China GROVE Cargo, operation from China Grove Texas, about 10 NM East of San Antonio, TX. :ok:

[The Fat Controller]

Wrong Airline !!!!

It was China Airlines, not Air China.

Accident: China Airlines B744 at Atlanta on May 19th 2013, flap separated from wing (http://avherald.com/h?article=462a8794&opt=0)

[Michael Cushing]

Mach2.6,

That was very well done. If necessary, I have a plumber's friend to help you remove your tongue from your cheek. Thank you!

[poorjohn]

I took the operator's identification from a discussion in the blog that follows AvHerald's own posting.

In any case, aerodynamic parts falling off a 744, especially when there's a chance of secondary damage to the airframe, seems like a matter worth a bit more discussion.

The blog included comments like I know its not good to speculate but as I understand it, flap track corrosion is a common finding during heavy checks and it is a pretty in depth repair to replace one. and The fore flap failed and bounced off the fuselage. A fore flap track was left in the the fuselage, as in hole through fuselage. This has happened before.. No way to judge the qualifications of the posters, of course.

Hopefully the community quiet is due to recognition that this is a one-off oopsie of no real consequence, although 'no real (potential) consequence' is hard to get wrapped up into my thinking.

[fly4bux777]

Sounds like a flap overspeed, or fatigue from numerous overspeeds. TE flaps don't always "blow up"... Sometimes they "blow off"

[Dan Winterland]

Bits falling off 747 flap systems are far from uncommon. It's quite often the last section which is lowered when the flaps are selected from 25 to 30 which is why several operators specify flap 25 landings for normal operations. Usaullt, the first thing the crew knows about it is when the ground engineers tell them after shutdown!

[bcgallacher]

At one time it was a fairly common occurrence for 747s to shed flaps.BA had a mid flap fall off a 747 on the approach at Prestwick while training -the story I heard was it landed in the sea close to a couple of anglers in a dingy who promptly hitched a rope to it and towed it ashore.They then returned it to the training base at the Orangefield - presumably on their dingy trailer. Perhaps someone with first hand knowledge of the incident could confirm or deny the story - I heard it second hand.

[RAD_ALT_ALIVE]

JerkJohn,

(Ooops...sorry, but clearly close enough is good enough)

Excuse me if I quote you (kind of) until you have the decency to name the correct airline (or more correctly, to not name an airline not involved in the incident). I'll use your very own post to convey my frustration...


What was it that triggered the original thread mentioning a wrong airline? "Poor John reports..."?. AvHerald reports in part
Quote:
Police reported the 20 feet long piece belonged to the right wing of the China Airlines. The flaps section, that separated from the wing, broke in two parts, impacted the fuselage causing substantial damage to the fuselage, too, and fell to the ground.
I'd have to guess (but confirm my ignorance for all to see and mock) that my failure occurred on or soon after I commenced school, and the loss of the ability to read and quote created a serious pucker effect on this site. Good thing Air China didn't have anything to do with the incident.

You say (in reply to the first 'heads-up' that you'd mucked up), "I took the operator's identification from a discussion in the blog that follows AvHerald's own posting."

Are you serious?!?! You yourself inserted a quote that clearly mentioned China Airlines. C H I N A A I R L I N E S. How does that translate into Air China? Do you even know the difference between the two?


I think that just about covers it.

Now if you'd do the right thing and change the title, or add a reply acknowledging it, then I'll delete this rant.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[lomapaseo]

I have to admit that while I understand some mix ups among all of us (not just the press) in airline names, that the original poster and/or the site moderators should immediately correct a thread title when it is confirmed that someone or an airline has been mis-identified. What gets discussed in the thread itself is of less concern since it's rarely taken as absolute.

Since I still don't know who's right or wrong in this thread I shant take sides.