American Eagle CRJ900 scrapes wing on landing

[WillFlyForCheese]

An American Eagle CRJ900 (operated by Mesa) scraped its wing while landing at McAllen International on Sept 29.

Regional Jet Scrapes Wing on Runway During Texas Landing | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth (http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Regional-Jet-Scrapes-Wing-on-Runway-During-Landing-330035481.html)


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQGv167UcAA48s7.png:large

Photo from Juan De La Garza twitter feed: https://twitter.com/JuanDeLaGarza1

[Airbubba]

From another forum, FO's landing, she had the 'dreaded 8 knot crosswind'. :eek:

Sounds pretty routine on the LiveAtc tape for Air Shuttle 5786 at about 1645Z.

Great photo Juan! :ok:

Usual disclaimers (but for the grace of God etc.), hope the damage is only cosmetic.

[Dimitrii]

I know, perspective, foreshortening, crown of the runway. . . But it really looks like they are lined up on the far edge of the runway.

[silvertate]

From another forum, FO's landing, she had the 'dreaded 8 knot crosswind'.




Been saying this for years, but if you give me 10 hours with each f/o in a Piper-cub, it would do more for safety than all the sims in the world. Honestly, I would give up airline flying and devote myself to this, if companies would pay the costs. But the airlines don't want to admit there is a problem, and don't want any more costs (perhaps until they find a new winglet or tail-scrape cost a few $ hundred thousand.... :ugh: )

ST

[captjns]

Better idea... Airlines should encourage more manual flight when conditions permit.

[ZFT]

silvertate

Been saying this for years, but if you give me 10 hours with each f/o in a Piper-cub, it would do more for safety than all the sims in the world

Really? Total rubbish

[wanabee777]

No question, the best "sticks" I ever had the pleasure to fly with were the pilots who cut their teeth on a J-3.

[FIRESYSOK]

Seen this before. 'Set it and forget it' is what I call it: New F/O lines it up and stops flying at around 100'. Wind change/drift not recognized and/or delayed response....overly-aggressive correction at the last second.

By-product of pilot mills and/or being taught by newly-minted CFIs who themselves don't have a firm grip on crosswind technique. Couple that with fast-moving, swept-wing jets and this is what happens.

I'm going to crush a few egos with this statement but it's true.

[Airbubba]

And before someone beats me to it, here are the secret codes, the landing was around 1645Z on runway 31:

KMFE 291753Z 02005KT 10SM CLR 33/21 A2986 RMK AO2 SLP110 T03330211 10333 20239 58000
KMFE 291653Z VRB04KT 10SM CLR 31/22 A2987 RMK AO2 SLP113 T03110217
KMFE 291553Z VRB03KT 10SM CLR 30/22 A2987 RMK AO2 SLP114 T03000222


Looks like the 8 knot crosswind may have been overstated.

[peekay4]

Been saying this for years, but if you give me 10 hours with each f/o in a Piper-cub, it would do more for safety than all the sims in the world.
The irony is that crosswind technique suitable for a high-wing Piper Cub may well cause a wing strike on low-wing airliners.

Larger aircraft are designed to make strong crosswind landings with some amount of crab. Otherwise the wing bank required to track centerline via side-slip will easily exceed the clearance geometry.

At < 8 kts however...

[golfyankeesierra]

Been saying this for years, but if you give me 10 hours with each f/o in a Piper-cub, it would do more for safety than all the sims in the world.
Wow hot shot ;), and what about if it was a wake (ideal windspeed to have it linger around the runway), how do you teach that in a Cub?

[vector4fun]

what about if it was a wake (ideal windspeed to have it linger around the runway), how do you teach that in a Cub?

Fly behind a buzzard? :}


Disclaimer, my first 8 "officially" logged hours were in a J-3. Wish I had one now.

[deptrai]

I'm with Airbubba here, "but for the grace of God". Cheers to FIRESYSOKS for editing out (something). And thanks to the manufacturers for building aircraft like tanks.

[Sorry Dog]

silvertate

Quote: Been saying this for years, but if you give me 10 hours with each f/o in a Piper-cub, it would do more for safety than all the sims in the world

Really? Total rubbish


Tough crowd today...

Don't see how a little manual flying experience in a Cub would hurt anything...

[Capt Claret]

But don't you know that the aeroplane lands smoother if one wheel is put down first! :rolleyes:

[golfyankeesierra]

Don't see how a little manual flying experience in a Cub would hurt anything...
Absolutely doesn't hurt a thing, but looking down on F/O's does!

And assuming that it was due to flying skills because it was it an F/O ,makes it even worse.

In a 737 I hit the wake of a preceding A320 over the approach lights once. It banked 30 degrees. If you have that in the flare you're a sitting duck; you'l hit the runway as well, no matter how many hours..

[Capn Bloggs]

Larger aircraft are designed to make strong crosswind landings with some amount of crab. Otherwise the wing bank required to track centerline via side-slip will easily exceed the clearance geometry.
Not so on my "Boeing". The FCOM recommended crosswind landing technique changed a couple of years ago to the forward slip method:

Crosswind landings are best achieved when the airplane longitudinal axis
is aligned with the runway centerline. Landing with a crab angle at touchdown is not recommended. The maneuver recommended for crosswind landing requires cross-controlling, using the rudder to align the airplane fuselage with the runway, and aileron input sufficient to arrest crosswind-induced drift.

Below approximately 200 feet AGL, gradually apply rudder so as to align the longitudinal axis (heading) of the airplane with the runway centerline. Control lateral drift by applying aileron into the wind. (the upwind wing will be lower), while continuing to apply opposite rudder to maintain fuselage alignment with the centerline of the runway.
You'll therefore land with bank on. In a 30kt crosswind, the FSF says you'll need 8° AOB to stay straight; apart from being above the FDAP limit (!) any extra bank application for direction control might well result in...

[peekay4]

Interesting.

737NG FCTM has this wording:
*** Sideslip only (zero crab) landings are not recommended with crosswind components in excess of 17 knots at flap 15, 20 knots at flaps 30, or 23 knots at flaps 40. This recommendation ensures adequate ground clearance and is based on maintaining adequate control margin.

787 FCTM:
If the crew elects to fly the sideslip to touchdown, it may be necessary to add a crab during strong crosswinds. (See the landing crosswind guidelines table, this chapter). Main gear touchdown is made with the upwind wing low and crab angle applied.

With regards to the "other company", Airbus notes (http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/safety_library_items/AirbusSafetyLib_-FLT_OPS-LAND-SEQ05.pdf):
With higher crosswind (typically above 15 kt to 20 kt crosswind component), a safe crosswind landing requires:

A crabbed-approach, and
A partial decrab prior to touchdown, using a combination of bank angle and crab angle (achieved by applying cross-controls)


I don't know about the CRJ900 specifically but a lot of bizjets and regionals have very small bank angle margin at landing attitude and must use some crab on strong crosswinds.

While apparently there may be exceptions, in general I agree with FSF (http://flightsafety.org/files/alar_bn8-7-crosswind.pdf):
With a strong crosswind (typically above a 15-knot to 20-knot crosswind component), a safe crosswind landing requires a crabbed approach and a partial decrab prior to touchdown.

[bloom]

News coverage shows that the picture with the puff of smoke is not the only picture available. It looks like there is at least one picture before and at least one after the one that has a puff of smoke. There may be more, both before and after available if someone contacts the photographer.

Pitch up in the smoke picture looks excessive to me. Perhaps the right wing stalled, followed by the left wing resulting in a hard landing.

Someone needs to contact the photographer for any other pictures he has available

[Metro man]

MESA, contracted by legacy airlines to do their regional routes at rock bottom prices. Pilots living in caravans and on food stamps, what do you expect ?

[wanabee777]

B-52's excepted.

[RAT 5]

It's not the bank that concerns me so much, but rather the very high nose attitude. There may be reasons for the bank, e.g. wake as has been mentioned. But why the high nose? Was the reason for the large bank also causing some sink and thus a heavy handed pull back?
What experience did the captain have and were they 'covering the controls'? Mind you, this close to the ground it can be difficult to intervene.

[Stone_cold]

Dreptai :

Cheers to FIRESYSOKS for editing out the "female FO" part .

Yet you put it back in the thread . Real intelligent !!!!

[HeartyMeatballs]

Wow, so even with interconnected flight controls the captain still couldn't save the landing. I thought it was just Airbii where you couldn't help if the other one screws up the landing.

[ironbutt57]

on the Airbus you can help...by pushing the red button and taking over...done it more than once....

[Huck]

Pitch up in the smoke picture looks excessive to me. Perhaps the right wing stalled, followed by the left wing resulting in a hard landing.


Yep. Either wrong approach speed or they held it off too long. Either way it looks like a stall.....

[flyhardmo]

So that's how you bend a wing to make winglets.

[Sorry Dog]

MESA, contracted by legacy airlines to do their regional routes at rock bottom prices. Pilots living in caravans and on food stamps, what do you expect ?

I expect that they are people that are passionate about flying and love it enough to try do it for a living even though pay and quality of life sucks....or why else would anybody choose a profession with such dismal payoff prospects for the time and money invested to start.

Personally I think that people that choose a profession out of enjoyment tend to be more competent than those that choose a profession based on economic reasons.

Of course all of the above is in generality and there can always be outlying examples... same as the original statement. With that said... I still find it sad when one disparages junior people in their own profession when they in fact were probably in the same position once upon a time.

[wanabee777]

I still find it sad when one disparages junior people in their own profession when they in fact were probably in the same position once upon a time.

No disparaging here, but someone, at the very least, is going to get some time off for retraining.

[ATPMBA]

How about Southwest's landing at LGA a while ago?

New hires need 1,000 TPIC and a B737 type rating to get hired there.


Or Korean B777 at SFO.

[deptrai]

Yet you put it back in the thread . Real intelligent !!!!

To please you, I edited it out. Now you would need to remove it from your post, if you want it gone :) I did get a bit miffed reading the issue I referred to. I felt the comment was rather uncalled for and unprofessional. It seemed to imply a broad generalization based on anecdotal evidence, a blast from the past which is not helpful for the aviation industry at all. I've yet to see an accident report stating (...) as a factor. [/rant over]

[Samba Anaconda]

F/O and skipper...expat or local. Why nobody asking? Latino, African or Asian? Cat got the tongues?

[No Fly Zone]

Talk about the right place and time; one of the best pix I've seen in a long time.
Now, about the flying??? I know nothing of this AC type. I'm quit sure that a minimal 8Kt x-wind won't 'blow' the AC into this attitude unless the driver gives it a lot of help. Apparently the FO was PF. I'd guess that she had NO IDEA WTF she as doing. The report on this incident and well as the gear-up landing in Germany will make very interesting reading.

[con-pilot]

Interesting.

737NG FCTM has this wording:


787 FCTM:


With regards to the "other company", Airbus notes (http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/safety_library_items/AirbusSafetyLib_-FLT_OPS-LAND-SEQ05.pdf):


I don't know about the CRJ900 specifically but a lot of bizjets and regionals have very small bank angle margin at landing attitude and must use some crab on strong crosswinds.

While apparently there may be exceptions, in general I agree with FSF (http://flightsafety.org/files/alar_bn8-7-crosswind.pdf):

Cannot speak for RJs or Airbus, however, that is what it reads for Falcon 50s/900s and the Boeing 727.

So it is not just you that knows this basic cross wind procedure for many aircraft, including Boeings and some corporate jet aircraft.

The bank angel limitation on the Falcons was due to wingtip clearance from the runway (including turf runway), the 727 was for the above, BTY the 707 was for the outboard engines clearance. No turf runway approval for the 707 as far as I know.

[con-pilot]

Talk about the right place and time; one of the best pix I've seen in a long time.
Now, about the flying??? I know nothing of this AC type. I'm quit sure that a minimal 8Kt x-wind won't 'blow' the AC into this attitude unless the driver gives it a lot of help. Apparently the FO was PF. I'd guess that she had NO IDEA WTF she as doing. The report on this incident and well as the gear-up landing in Germany will make very interesting reading.

If you are going to insinuate something about a certain type of pilot, whether if you are inferring to 'female' or 'low paid' or not, have the common courtesy to post a link to the accident you inferred to.

This is not the "Jet Blast" forum.

[wanabee777]

From USA Today:

Plane spotter catches moment when wing of landing regional jet scrapes runway (http://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2015/09/30/wing-of-american-eagle-regional-jet-scrapes-runway-during-texas-landing/73075784/)

[silvertate]

The FCOM recommended crosswind landing technique changed a couple of years ago to the forward slip method:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Boeing
The maneuver recommended for crosswind landing requires cross-controlling, using the rudder to align the airplane fuselage with the runway, and aileron input sufficient to arrest crosswind-induced drift.

Below approximately 200 feet AGL, gradually apply rudder so as to align the longitudinal axis (heading) of the airplane with the runway centerline.


Interesting. Personally, I don't like the Chinese crosswind method (Whun Wing Lo). I was taught this and can do it, but in gusty conditions you can get confused as to what is roll to counteract yaw and what is roll to counteract turbulence. I find that students get equally confused.

Best to leave the crab until the last 20 ft, kick straight and counterbalance with roll. It is simple, better for the tyres, better for the undercarriage, more comfortable for the pax, and is less likely to end in a skid. I have seen odd reactions to the instant yaw caused by ploking it on with full crab, resulting in PIO peddling, which is not recommended.

And with regards to ground clearance, I have banked the 737 to enormous angles, and never hit anything. What feels like a huge angle of bank, is not really that bad if you look from the outside. Doubt if you will ever get much beyond 5o, without feeling seasick.

Oh, and yes, I have mentioned this for at least two decades. I was taught to land in a variety of very difficult tail-draggers of all types and sizes, and so my landing technique was honed quite well. And I was somewhat shocked to find in jet aviation that x-wind landing was the last and least important box to tick.

[RAT 5]

It much depends on type. B737 I used a hybrid technique: this was due to airframe limitations and handling characteristics. B757/767 with LOOOOng undercarriage I preferred side-slip for the last 200'. Bootiful.

[peekay4]

Well, at 30 kts crosswind and 132 kts approach speed you need around 9 degrees bank angle if no crab.

Assuming a 5 degree landing attitude, some 737 classics will smack parts on the ground at around 10.5 degrees bank.

That means just a 1.5 degree margin.

Also if the flare is held for too long, it's not unusual for the pitch attitude to rise 2-3 degrees further. That will diminish the roll margin to zero.

[RAT 5]

Yes but; we can talk about angles all night long. Look at the attitude in the photo: now consider yourself on the inside sitting in the hot seat on RHS. Looking outside of the front window it must have been exciting and probably looked worse than from three outside. What were the control inputs?

[testpanel]

[QUOTE]Well, at 30 kts crosswind and 132 kts approach speed you need around 9 degrees bank angle if no crab.
/QUOTE]

well, winds were variable 3 or 4 kts:ugh::ugh:

Incident: Mesa CRJ9 at McAllen on Sep 29th 2015, wing tip strike on landing (http://avherald.com/h?article=48d1e994&opt=0)

[peekay4]

Yes but; we can talk about angles all night long. Look at the attitude in the photo: now consider yourself on the inside sitting in the hot seat on RHS. Looking outside of the front window it must have been exciting and probably looked worse than from three outside. What were the control inputs?
That's what I'm saying... if flare is held for too long, then as the aircraft sinks the pitch attitude can increase 2-3 degrees from normal (to 7-8 degrees ANU) and geometrically reduces the roll clearance.

Note that the seemingly extreme pitch attitude in the original picture could be an "optical illusion", because the camera wasn't held straight & level. Not saying that it is, just that it could be.

Look what happens if we straighten out the picture and measure the fuselage angle vs. the ground:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/org.barkah.misc/crj900-angle.jpg

Now the camera-lens-aircraft geometry is uncertain and I'm not CSI... so the 7.2 degrees could be way off... but one possible hint is to look at the tail section: there's still quite a bit of clearance from the tail to the ground. So maybe the pitch attitude isn't as extreme as the original picture suggests.

Of course pictures do lie so we really can only speculate until the FDR data comes out... :)

[flyingchanges]

there's still quite a bit of clearance from the tail to the ground


Because the other MLG is still probably 4' off the ground...

[RatherBeFlying]

Likely the photographer used a long lens which will foreshorten the apparent wingspan. Note also that the photo was taken from well above the fence so that we are looking a bit down on the wing planform which leads to the perception of even more roll angle.

[silvertate]

Assuming a 5 degree landing attitude, some 737 classics will smack parts on the ground at around 10.5 degrees bank.



I think the margins are better than that.

The following graph gives bank angle for x-wind 30 kt. If we take 140 kts approach, leaving 3 degrees of residual crab, and not fully banking by two degrees,** you only need six degrees of roll to cope with a 30 kt x-wind. And the 737-700 gives a very generous 14 degrees of roll before the flap track or (unlikely) the nacelle touches. And surprisingly, the -800 gives a degree more roll ability, because the approach speeds are higher.

(** The last thing you want is to be slipping into the upwind wheel, as that will result in an alarming gear-twang. Much better to allow a very slight drift downwind, and let the gear touch in 'trailing link' style. So slightly less than full roll is always desirable.)

http://s675.photobucket.com/component/Download-File?file=%2Falbums%2Fvv118%2FIGhhGI%2Falarx_windVref_plusba nk.jpg

[peekay4]

@silvertate The quotation was:

Assuming a 5 degree landing attitude, some 737 classics will smack parts on the ground at around 10.5 degrees bank.

The -700/-800 aren't classics. :) On the -400 if landing with a flare attitude of 5 degrees nose up, I believe the Flap Track Fairing will hit ground at around 10.5 degree roll angle.

And you can see from your chart, assuming the ~132 kts vref with zero crab angle at 30 knots you need to be at point "A" which is just shy of 9 degrees bank. Very tight margin!