FedEx 767 landing without left main gear extended

[Check Airman]

Accident: Fedex B763 at Los Angeles on Aug 19th 2020, left main gear did not extend (http://avherald.com/h?article=4db7c464&opt=0)

[Herod]

Nice job. Pat on the back.

[Airbubba]

They apparently tried manual gear extension, the main gear doors appeared to be open on landing.

As far as the cockpit rope evacuation, remember one of the FedEx MEM crashes where the crew was faulted for tossing out flight kits and Christmas presents before all the folks were out of the plane? Can't blame them for being anxious to get out with a report of flames trailing the plane on landing. Do the FedEx B-763's have door slides? Or inertial reels on the entry door?

[White Knight]

Well done and nicely stopped on the centreline:ok:

Personally, being the big uncoordinated Gumby (Monty Python fans will know this one:)) that I am I would definitely have tried the slide first! Those evacuation ropes really don't agree with me unless there's 1,500^ licking at my nether regions!

[tdracer]

Airbubba

Assuming these are the 'new build' 767Fs (i.e. not some STC conversion), yes the main door has a slide. But the regs say you need to assume half the exits are blocked, so you need at least two ways out - hence the ropes out the flight deck windows. No idea why they didn't go out the main door though...

[Airbubba]

You might want to check that, the UPS B-763's are not conversions and I'm told they don't have slides, they have inertia reels.

My guess is that they saw the glow of the sparks on the left side and didn't want to take the chance of evacuating into a wing fire or something.

[tdracer]

I figured it was a new build freighter. I've done flight tests on FedEx 767Fs and they most definitely had a slide on the main door.
Where are you hearing 'no slides'? As I noted before, the regs say you need (at least) two ways out.

[swh]

How many of the windows open ?

[rb14]

The reporter in the clip above mentioned that the sparks resulted from one of the engines that was scraping "on the pavement". Weird runway at LAX if it has a pavement. Who is it there for? Has it a zebra crossing as well?

Yeah, I know. Sorry.

[Airbubba]

I figured it was a new build freighter. I've done flight tests on FedEx 767Fs and they most definitely had a slide on the main door.

The new FedEx B-763's probably all have slides then as you said.

Where are you hearing 'no slides'? As I noted before, the regs say you need (at least) two ways out.

I meant that the UPS B-763's apparently don't have slides. Here's a picture of the entry door area in an article by B-763F driver Ken Hoke.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1080x1704/17_767_galley_entry_e1423021126870_large__1dee705104ae5ef4ef 0e7bb892180a65d9af5032.jpg

Flying in Cargo Class: The Anatomy of an Air Freighter - NYCAviationNYCAviation (http://www.nycaviation.com/2015/02/anatomy-freighter/38093)

[DaveReidUK]

Assuming these are the 'new build' 767Fs (i.e. not some STC conversion), yes the main door has a slide. But the regs say you need to assume half the exits are blocked, so you need at least two ways out - hence the ropes out the flight deck windows. No idea why they didn't go out the main door though...

Yes, built as a freighter in 2017.

This video of the approach and landing appears to shown both MLG doors open:

tyVKN_q34tM

One of the crew reportedly suffered a foot injury during the evacuation.

[DaveReidUK]

rb14

If the US reporter had meant what we Brits call a pavement, he'd have called it a sidewalk. :O

Across the Pond, pavement simply means a hard, paved surface. Like a runway, in fact. As in PCN (https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Pavement_Classification_Number_(PCN)).

[Broomstick Flier]

B767F jock here

I confirm that ours (all factory-built freighters) don't have an escape slide, the two options are inertial reels close to the main door, or the ropes at the cockpit windows. Maybe it is an option now and FedEx opted for it.

[Airbubba]

Thanks, that's what I thought.

[gearlever]

Why to EVAC via cockpit window ropes?
Was there a fire?

[JPJP]

Dear Yoda,

The inertial reels on the L1 door may not have worked as advertised due to the left wing down attitude. The left side of the jet is also closest to the (perceived) threat. Hence, the cockpit escape rope on the FO side was used.

[clark y]

I think a few of us are learning something new today. No slides on some large aircraft. I never would have guessed.
As for the idea of the inertial reel not working at door L1 due to left wing down, is it really that much closer to the ground than door R1?

[JPJP]

As for the idea of the inertial reel not working at door L1 due to left wing down, is it really that much closer to the ground than door R1?

That’s a good question. But it’s safe to assume they were talking extensively to Flight Ops during the hold. There is no R1 on the FedEx 76 freighter, so the alternative is L1 inertial reel or the escape ropes in the cockpit.

The inertial reel set up on the 74F involves a diaper harness and a jump. If you reach the ground before the deceleration, it would really suck. I assume the same level of suck would occur on a canted over 76.

Although; seeing one of the flight crew doing the snail crawl away from the jet, with the CFR guy in hot pursuit wasn’t funny either. Unless you’ve got a slightly sick sense of humor 🤞.

[clark y]

Second thing I've learnt today. No Right 1 door on the freighter.

Found the video below. Interesting watch. It's a looong way down from the roof.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2y5lNVbBeiU

[Airbubba]

LiveATC edited audio from SOCAL Approach, the final tower frequency of 127.85 apparently did not record.

Zip files which will open on most computers, not on most phones or tablets.

__________________________________________

The Part 2 file posted here earlier didn't have both sides of the ATC conversation about whether to land gear up, a better edit of the final vectors for the landing is posted below.

[Airbubba]

LA Tower discussing the low approaches with ground vehicles.

[BDAttitude]

One can oberve quite nicely from that vid, that this type of inertia reel does not block when passing locking speed - as the ones for high altitude workers do, as does your car seatbelt - but instead gives a constant rate of descend (depending on the weight attached). So no, the height difference would not have been a problem.

[Airbubba]

As far as the cockpit rope evacuation, remember one of the FedEx MEM crashes where the crew was faulted for tossing out flight kits and Christmas presents before all the folks were out of the plane? Can't blame them for being anxious to get out with a report of flames trailing the plane on landing.

The earlier mishap was FedEx 647 in 2003.

From the NTSB report:

Evaluation of a witness-provided videotape of the emergency evacuation showed that about 152 seconds passed between the time that the first and last occupant exited the burning airplane. During this time, the crewmembers did not evacuate the airplane in an uninterrupted flow. Although the captain and cockpit jumpseat nonrevenue pilot evacuated relatively quickly, the videotape showed delays between subsequent evacuating crewmembers. During these delays, the escape ropes were available but unused, and several pieces of baggage were thrown from the airplane. The elapsed time between successive crewmembers exiting the airplane was as much as 63 seconds. During postaccident interviews, several crewmembers reported that they were offloading bags while they waited in line to exit the airplane through the cockpit exits. During subsequent documentation of the cockpit, jumpseat, and cargo compartments, investigators found no crewmember baggage. It is evident that the delays were the result of the offloading of crewmembers personal bags and not because they were waiting for other crewmembers to exit or had difficulty using the cockpit egress system. The Safety Board concludes that most of the FedEx pilots on board the accident airplane showed poor judgment and exposed themselves to unnecessary risk when they delayed their evacuation from a burning airplane to salvage personal items.

After the accident, FedEx issued a bulletin to crewmembers that stated, During an emergency evacuation each crewmember and jumpseater will evacuate in the most expeditious manner possible. No one will take an unnecessary risk by taking time to salvage personal articles.

This is the FedEx 647 witness video:

https://youtu.be/OZ5l2keoF40

[Landflap]

Lovely job. Practice for this, in the sim, a lot , but these guys show us how to put all that training into calm, professional, use. Object lesson. Well done.

[esa-aardvark]

I heard (somewhere) that one or other of the crew broke his heel.
That is a quite a nasty injury, my father got it via Royal Air Force training.
Took ages to recover.

[Bergerie1]

I have used the 747 inertia reel and found it to be a very comfortable descent! Near constant speed the whole way down.

[Seat4A]

Didn't see this posted.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1084x886/1df_3d2575ab213cd106442e4e6ff4bf0b38d91e9b97.png


Photo from LAFD Talk on Twitter

Also video during daylight

https://twitter.com/AeronewsGlobal/status/1296109444082933761

[Alpine Flyer]

The bank looks a lot steeper on the frontal shot than on the other videos.

Does anyone actually train escape rope evacuations? We only had to try that once, many moons ago, from a much lower airplane, IIRC with a gymnastic mat placed on the floor (and a maintenance technician guarding the pitot tubes). It certainly didn't look elegant and I'd imagine it to be quite a challenge from a higher plane (and from any plane for someone who doesn't regularly use ropes and maybe with hands trembling after a hair-raising landing).

[Havingwings4ever]

Yep, during type training on 74 classic and 400 and md11, the diaper on the 74 is a pain in the ... but the descent is very controlled, worked as advertised. And you have the slide on the upperdeck, just give it a good kick ...

[Commander Taco]

There were five reels installed on the B747 Classic. I remember one captain telling us that there were none for us. If needed, he’d have one in each hand, one foot in each of the other two and the fifth between his teeth. Just to be sure of a soft landing.

[mightyauster]

Hmmm.... I wonder if this aeroplane had a brake change prior to this flight....:}

[TheOddOne]

The reporter in the clip above mentioned that the sparks resulted from one of the engines that was scraping "on the pavement". Weird runway at LAX if it has a pavement. Who is it there for? Has it a zebra crossing as well?

For a change, here's a reporter using correct terminology. In the United Kingdom, we refer to the hard surfaces used by aircraft at aerodromes as 'pavement', certainly in my 31 years in Ops at major UK airports. It's ICAO-speak, too.

It's also insightful that the reporter considered the potential damage to the pavement and the consequent debris that might ensue. Perhaps he's an old Airfield Ops hand.
Every pod scrape and wheel rim gouging not only creates damage and FOD at the time but breaks the sealed surface allowing erosion and stone hazard until the runway is resurfaced. Routine runway inspections really have to concentrate on these areas. The most useful bit of kit in an Operations vehicle is a dust pan and brush...

[TheOddOne]

A few thoughts on aircraft recovery.

1. Fuel. Before recovery, it's a good idea to get as much fuel off as possible to reduce lifting effort required. Even at the end of a flight, I'd expect there to be several tonnes remaining. I'd doubt if LAX has any more bowsers available than large UK airports, i.e. none as all refuelling is done through on-stand hydrants. Even when a bowser of sufficient capacity is available, the fuel comeing off is considered contaminated and unless the airline agrees for it to be put in another of its own aircraft, disposal is problematic. Expect at least 24 hours for this to be arranged.
2. Removal of load. Really tricky, probably near-impossible with fuselage at an angle, to get equipment on. Also, likely requires power to aircraft to operate doors, powered floor etc (does the 767F have powered floor?)
3. Lifting the wing. The best method is airbags. Hopefully the various airports on the West coast have got together to pool some kit, it's not worth each airport having their own. The last lift of this nature I know a lot about was the Virgin A340 at Heathrow. The lift here was seriously hampered by the geometry of the domed runway pavement. Each time they attempted a jack, the angles would change with the danger of the whole thing slipping off. That recovery took nearly 3 days. Don't even think about strops and cranes. It's difficult to impossible to strop a fuselage without buckling it.
4. Repairs in situ to enable towing. Under-wing props are massive things, even getting one or two on-site is a big undertaking. Then there's the problem of getting a level surface (see above) and securing the site for safe working under the wing.
5. Assessing damage in situ before towing. Engines are held on by very few fastenings and are easily compromised - check out DC10 loss of engine on departure, O'Hare 1979. Nasty business if the pod falls off during the tow!

6. Actually, might be number 1, thinking about it. Getting someone to agree to do all this work in expectation of getting paid. Do FedEx have a comprehensive maintenance agreement with anyone at LAX? Do they have the resources to do the work? Will they insist on shipping in their own people and kit from elsewhere? It can be a nightmare getting these agreements in place. The airport authority have a vested interest in getting the wreck off their property although as the reporter said, it's quiet at the moment so not the same pressure as in normal times.

I guess now the initial drama and excitement have died down, we'll not hear too much about the detail of the recovery. Pity, this old Airfield Ops hand would like to see how they tackle this one.

[LessThanSte]

For a change, here's a reporter using correct terminology. In the United Kingdom, we refer to the hard surfaces used by aircraft at aerodromes as 'pavement', certainly in my 31 years in Ops at major UK airports. It's ICAO-speak, too.


It's also what those in the roads sector and engineering in general refer to the road surface as. E.g. we have Pavement Management Systems and similar asset management tools, which deals with the entire paved area rather than just the occasional bit of what laymen would call a pavement. Which, incidentally, are actually called footways.

[deja vu]

Why no slide, is it weight saving or disarming before ground crews pop the door.? The rope out the window is barely better than nothing I guess but would hate to be lying injured under a burning aircraft.

[Airbubba]

I've updated the LiveATC audio I posted above with a better edit of the vectors for the emergency landing. The original Part 2 file did not have the correct edited ATC audio.

[TheOddOne]

Has the aircraft been recovered? Tried googling for any info - non found. Love to see time-lapse video or similar

[DaveReidUK]

25R currently in use for departures.

[Capt Quentin McHale]

mightyauster,

Where are you going with this? I am intrigued.

[TURIN]

Capt Quentin McHale

My guess is that he/she is referring to the brake reaction rod not being installed correctly.

[Capt Quentin McHale]

TURIN,

I see where you're coming from, I thought of that scenario and brake hydraulic line reconnection etc also. Hopefully mightyauster may have another angle, so to speak.

[Feathers McGraw]

It was a brake rod breaking that caused the G-VSKY main u/c hang-up.

[Fair_Weather_Flyer]

I did watch the YouTube video with ATC transcripts. They did a great landing but I'm not sure if the whole thing was well handled. They did a series of flybys which is against the QRH, guidance note. The gear lights and EICAS would have confirmed the gear unsafe and nothing the tower could say would prove otherwise. They were trying to call the technical pilot and maintenance. It's not like they could get up there and fix the plane.

They did get the plane on the ground with a nice landing but for me, the rest was painful.

[Spooky 2]

I see nothing in the B767 QRH that even remotely looks like what you have posted. Perhaps your airline has this language, but not the FAA/ FedEx. Bottom line is they did a nice job and your pathetic comments do not reflect well on your knowledge or experience in the 767 regarding a gear up landing.

[Airbubba]

They did a great landing but I'm not sure if the whole thing was well handled. They did a series of flybys which is against the QRH, guidance note. The gear lights and EICAS would have confirmed the gear unsafe and nothing the tower could say would otherwise? They were trying to call the technical pilot and maintenance. It's not like they could get up there and fix the plane.

The current training is that you contact the company and enlist the aid of SME's, Subject Matter Experts when you have a technical problem. They possibly recommended the flybys and g maneuvers. Why wouldn't you want to try to see if the gear was partially down or all the way up? You want to burn off the extra fuel anyway, right? What is the QRH guidance note that forbids a flyby? There are no uplocks on the main gear on a 767 as I recall, the gear sits on the doors when the actuators are unpressurized.

On the other hand, some of the old school tricks like trying to do a hard bounce and go to dislodge the stuck gear have not ended well in some cases.

Here's the VASAviation video on the incident, he does a very good job as usual with the graphics and audio editing.

https://youtu.be/8EyUmeeu7B8

[Fair_Weather_Flyer]

Thank you for your input Airbubba. The FedEx QRH is different to the one I have. Mine has a note at the top of the partial or all gear up QRH checklist stating that low approaches to confirm gear status must not be performed.

So, given there is no such note in FedEx the crew acted in accordance with the QRH checklist. But, what do you think they gained by doing the low approaches and the calls to maintenance and the technical pilot? Is that note at the top of my airlines checklist a wise thing?

As for calling SME's, the airlines that I worked for have stated that they do not want you to do this. Do you remember the Alaska Airlines, crash where they called maintenance who told them to work the jackscrew to unjam the stabiliser? My employers have just wanted you to identify the problem, run the checklist and use the decision making tool (GRADE, PIOSEE etc).

That said, the pilots do seem have acted in accordance to their training and company doctrine and landed well. let's see what the NTSB make of it.

[Check Airman]

So, given there is no such note in FedEx the crew acted in accordance with the QRH checklist. But, what do you think they gained by doing the low approaches and the calls to maintenance and the technical pilot?


What would it hurt them to do so? I’ve had a similar problem (in a GA plane). Right then, you want as much information as you can get.

[Fair_Weather_Flyer]

What if the tower guy said that the gear appeared to be down? Would you just ignore the cockpit indications on the gear lights and EICAS and try to land normally? If they tell you that the gear is not extended, then they are not telling you anything you don't know from cockpit indications. What the tower sees is completely irrelevant as far as the Boeing checklists go and can only create confusion so the flyby is pointless.

Trust the unsafe gear warnings, attempt the emergency gear extension and if unsuccessful carry out the partial or all gear up landing checklist and land. I'm sure that this is what they ultimately did but the flybys just slowed the process down.

[Spooky 2]

Fair_Weather_Flyer

I suspect, but don't know that the language in your QRH was driven by the UAL DC8 accident many years ago where they ran out fuel after trouble shooting a gear problem. They landed a few miles short of the intended runway killing a significant number of pax and crew. It was used as an example for the need of CRM, that up to that time was non existent on many flight decks here in the US. Believe it or not, the QRH is not an FAA approved document, so the operator has considerable leeway in its presentation.

[Smilin_Ed]

Can you really have too much information? They had the fuel to go around several times. I'd want everything available.

[ACMS]

Perhaps, but most modern Jets have a TPIS which tells you if the wheels are inflated or not, indeed we even have external cameras that can see the gear in the daylight.....Flybys may not be necessary or prudent.

[CaptainMongo]

Check Airman,

I don’t know what FedExs’s manuals state and this is not a comment on their actions. This is my opinion.

My outfit doesn’t prohibit fly bys but does strongly discourage them. I agree. The tower operator isn’t a pilot (most likely) isn’t an A and P (most likely) and isn’t a trained to provide input to an aircraft flying by with an anomaly and ultimately will not provide, as far as I am concerned, actionable information.
I’ve also never flown nor practiced in the simulator a flyby in a commercial aircraft. I’ve also never landed partial gear nor practiced it in the sim, but a flyby would be optional, landed partial gear wouldn’t.

[Occy]

not sure what fed ex manuals say but our company says the following about unsafe gear indications:

”It is unlikely that a low flypast of the control tower will add much to the information derived from the Cockpit indications. A low flypast should only be undertaken when there is good reason to believe that knowledge of the state of the landing gear, wheels, tyres etc. can be improved by such a manoeuvre.”

Not sure that some guy who’s not a pilot or an engineer with a pair of binoculars looking at the underside of my 130T jet in the dark moving at 150 knots is going to be able to add much useful information.

“They look like they’re down from here”. How that gonna change what you do?

[Airbubba]

This incident will be covered in an upcoming issue of the FedEx ALPA Training Committee publication. The publication's name is '...Gear Up!'

[Uplinker]

If the manufacturer says that a fly-by is not advisable, then so be it.

Not sure that some guy who’s not a pilot or an engineer with a pair of binoculars looking at the underside of my 130T jet in the dark moving at 150 knots is going to be able to add much useful information.
Dark is a fair point. But otherwise; even a non-pilot could say "I can see three legs sticking down". Or more importantly: "I can only see the front leg and one of the back legs". Or, "One of the landing legs is at an angle".

“They look like they’re down from here”. How that gonna change what you do?

It won't, but if they said "I can only see two legs hanging down", you would at least know what to expect, and which way the aircraft will fall.

[ManaAdaSystem]

Fair_Weather_Flyer

You forgot the part about: Consider burning off fuel to reduce landing weight. If you have fuel, there is no hurry getting the aircraft down.
These guys did a good joob. Stop trying to discredit them.

[DaveReidUK]

Uplinker

Are you suggesting that, without a flyby, the crew won't know which engine is going to scrape along the runway until the sparks start to fly ?

[Uplinker]

:rolleyes: I am not the one advocating fly-bys, but if for example you had no gear indications at all - up or down - then if someone on the ground could eyeball it through binocs, well, what have you got to lose? (as long as you could fly by safely).

[ACMS]

ok, how likely is that to happen on a modern Jet with 2 proximity sensors per gear?

[pineteam]

https://youtu.be/RgnkY4xzaZE

Without a fly by, would the pilots have guessed that the nose gear was stuck side way?
Nothing wrong with it IMHO. That would be actually the fun part! :E

[megan]

Lets not forget the recent 767 that waited for a fighter to come up and do a gear inspection before landing.
Used to fly an aircraft that at times had trouble getting the gear to lock in the up position, recycling used to do the job, but to find which gear was the problem pull the gear control CB and the leg giving the issue would extend, tower on a fly by could then tell which one and a quick turn around by maintenance resulted. Gear indication only had three greens and one red, so you couldn't tell which might be causing grief.