Cargolux 747 pod strike on landing then GA

[rog747]

Cargolux 747-400F pod strike on landing inbound from DXB, then does a GA at Luxembourg airport

Engine pod of a Boeing 747 strikes runway during landing forcing the crew to perform a go around

There are other Videos online that show the whole Approach to the landing, not just the final.

Cargolux B744 at Luxembourg on Apr 15th 2023, engine pod strike on landing (https://avherald.com/h?article=507e3a26&opt=0)

[BFSGrad]

Guessing this will be a "no comment" from Captain Joe?

[fdr]

Years ago, I investigated a pod scrape of a #3 engine on a B744F, and had to go into detail as to how it was possible for the engine to contact the ground within the pitch and roll limits of the FCTM static guidance material. In the end, the penny dropped that the wing is a flexible beam with bending and torsional responses to loads. In this video, we are seeing one of the most impressive displays of the wing response, there is 1st and 2nd order bending going on, and 1st order torsion at least occurring nodding the engine onto the ground. Interesting video.

It looks like the attitude dropped a little coming into what was anticipated to be ground effect, and that didn't get corrected, the flare was slightly late but not by much for normal weights, but this guy was heavy. I don't see any evidence of a major tail wind, and his attitude is about normal for the approach, so ge is not travelling excessively fast, but he has a good GS, so he is very heavy.

The rock n' roll is what gives the engine scrape, the touchdown attitude was in a reasonable pitch, but had just too much sink still. The data will be interesting, hard to see what the aileron and rudder inputs are just after touchdown, roll will probably be from control inputs not rebound.

"missed, by that much...!"

[Akrep]

As a contributing factor, rwy 06 in LUX has a pretty nasty upslope untill middle of the runway.
on the video it may look like a normal flare and nose position for the landing but that runway is comming up faster then usual.

From my experience landing on rwy 06 ,once the Radio altimeter start ls counting down from 30 feet onwards you have to flare as if you want to cause a tailstrike to have a normal touchdown 🫣

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x614/10457838_840ac96cae1f038aff2dda9dbe9f3d8f131c4bd0.jpg

[RichardJones]

Not sour grapes, but I applied to Cargilux years ago. Yes qualified on the aircraft they operated. They posted my cv in an envelope back to me. Wrong side of the track see.That was a real smartass response. Better than no response I guess. I'm not without faults but never have been PIC of an aircraft that has arrived in that state. If it had been a B707 they wouldn't have got away so lightly, with an arrival like that. Couldn't have happened to a better outfit.
flying skills are now well down the list of priorities.. A university degree seems to be of more importance than flying skills. They really cannot be taught in a classroom.
Crosswind skills near the ground of most pilots is pretty well non existant these days.
What does give cause for concern, more than anything with this incident is this. Why the mindset to do a go around? Yes they screwed it up and would have known things were serious. Why take a problem back into into the air?? Let us learn from this. The day we stop learning, is the day to give it up.

[tdracer]

As a contributing factor, rwy 06 in LUX has a pretty nasty upslope untill middle of the runway.
on the video it may look like a normal flare and nose position for the landing but that runway is comming up faster then usual.

From my experience landing on rwy 06 ,once the Radio altimeter start ls counting down from 30 feet onwards you have to flare as if you want to cause a tailstrike to have a normal touchdown 🫣


Roughly ten years ago, Cargolux had a really hard landing of a fairly new 747-8F - supposedly upwards of 2.5g. Did so much damage they considered scraping the aircraft (reportedly cost over $100 million to repair). I never heard the story behind it - but that funny upslope might explain why it happened...

[DaveReidUK]

Did so much damage they considered scraping the aircraft

That's where they went wrong ...

[midnight cruiser]

The jumbo has quite a strong pitch down moment on touchdown, when the spoilers come up. An experienced pilot quickly learns to catch it with elevator, but if not, the nose gear slams down very hard. That looks to have happened here - almost like they let go of the stick - and with a compressed nose oleo and downward wing flexing, it is less than 10° roll to the pod strike (much much better roll margin if the nose is up and wing supported by some lift). Agree with Richard here - fly the wing on the ground, not just in the air. Sub 50 feet handling skills have degraded over the years IMO.

[Equivocal]

Roughly ten years ago, Cargolux had a really hard landing of a fairly new 747-8F - supposedly upwards of 2.5g. Did so much damage they considered scraping the aircraft (reportedly cost over $100 million to repair). I never heard the story behind it - but that funny upslope might explain why it happened...ISTR that the aircraft involved in that event suffered the damage downroute somewhere and the bent back end was not noticed for quite a few days until an engineering inspection spotted it.

[ehwatezedoing]

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x671/342158699_1920233524989423_3748776828764742379_n_816c428c34d 2c6cceceaeba99426b668ce75b00f.jpeg
New Airworthiness Directives for Cargolux!

[fdr]

The jumbo has quite a strong pitch down moment on touchdown, when the spoilers come up. An experienced pilot quickly learns to catch it with elevator, but if not, the nose gear slams down very hard.

Not always the case, a very low sink rate at touchdown will result in a pitch up with the spoiler rise.

The runway slope is designed to hurt planes, particularly cargo aircraft.

[DIBO]

The data will be interesting, hard to see what the aileron and rudder inputs are just after touchdown, roll will probably be from control inputs not rebound.that's why I'm surprised nobody commented on the left roll/aileron input during the scraping
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ft2aF3nXsAErQyP?format=jpg&name=900x900
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/841x619/ft2af3nxsaerqyp_0012565e8b9a06328490973bb3edd3c2e41b1aa9.jpg

[helispotter]

that's why I'm surprised nobody commented on the left roll/aileron input during the scraping…


But looks like left wing was starting to rise just before touchdown so perhaps pilot(s) were compensating for that. What happens to pilot roll control inputs just when the main undercarriage hits the deck?… the jolt probably doesn’t help them!

It doesn’t seem to have been stated explicitly here yet, but link in first post indicates that both #1 and #2 contacted runway.

I am no pilot, but I can understand first reaction would be to do a go around rather than being a mess beyond the end of the runway. Would be hard for brain to process possibility of engine damage in split second they had to make that choice.

[20driver]

I'm not a commercial pilot and not commenting on the pilots choices.
What is the training consensus to a strike or a bounce on landing? The AC DC-8 in Toronto would have been better off sinking back to the ground. In that case the aircraft had a very serious bounce.
I can't see the logic for going round unless you are so far down the runway you are going to over run into something nasty. I get the startle effect and the desire to get away.

[RichardJones]

I'm not a commercial pilot and not commenting on the pilots choices.
What is the training consensus to a strike or a bounce on landing? The AC DC-8 in Toronto would have been better off sinking back to the ground. In that case the aircraft had a very serious bounce.
I can't see the logic for going round unless you are so far down the runway you are going to over run into something nasty. I get the startle effect and the desire to get away.

Put it this way. If those 2 port engines were say 3 feet lower than they were, initiating a GA in that case could have been catastrophic. Basically a 2 engined GA without warning. That is a very possible scenario in this case. Maybe the nose or a main gear could be raised but not extended, on the second attempt. Possible. Yes 20/20 hindsite I know.
It doesn't matter who the handling pilot was, the P.I.C. must take the responsibility. Responsibility cannot be delegated, ever.
I have witnessed "Captains" blaming the first officer in a few major screw ups. In my time. This discusted me to the core."If the Cap fits, wear it"!

[helispotter]

There are a pair of more successful landings of Cargolux 747’s at Luxembourg airport in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCGytitIIJE

Is it just my perception or did the one that had the incident have less flap extension than these two did?

[midnight cruiser]

Not always the case, a very low sink rate at touchdown will result in a pitch up with the spoiler rise.. Yes, I vaguely remember the landing nose down could occasionally be a bit of a pitch up moment, especially with one of the hydraulics out. (It's been a while for me). But newbies very often let the nose slam on (more than other types I went on to) until they get used to it. Reminds me of the BOAC chief pilot who wondered how the hell two pods got wiped on the 707 ... on opposite sides!!!

[Zar_1]

I'm not a commercial pilot and not commenting on the pilots choices.
What is the training consensus to a strike or a bounce on landing? The AC DC-8 in Toronto would have been better off sinking back to the ground. In that case the aircraft had a very serious bounce.
I can't see the logic for going round unless you are so far down the runway you are going to over run into something nasty. I get the startle effect and the desire to get away.

Hmm, this is definitely IMO a case where you gotta think practically too, depending on a tonne of different factors... whether you think you have damaged your engines, how much runway is left, how much kinetic energy is left in your aircraft...

[DaveReidUK]

I am no pilot, but I can understand first reaction would be to do a go around rather than being a mess beyond the end of the runway.

Given the time it would take for those CF6's to spool up, have we ruled out the possibility that the GA had already been initiated before the pod strike ?

[1southernman]

Given the time it would take for those CF6's to spool up, have we ruled out the possibility that the GA had already been initiated before the pod strike ?
From the beginning I have thought the GA could've begun before the strike or similtaneously...At least the decision to do it..It takes a bit to get the "motor" (pun) response going to move the levers...

[fdr]

Yes, I vaguely remember the landing nose down could occasionally be a bit of a pitch up moment, especially with one of the hydraulics out. (It's been a while for me). But newbies very often let the nose slam on (more than other types I went on to) until they get used to it. Reminds me of the BOAC chief pilot who wondered how the hell two pods got wiped on the 707 ... on opposite sides!!!

An A340-300 managed the same in AMS some time back, the dreaded 7kt crosswind.

The B74 could have a goodly pitch up with hydraulics failures that inhibited inboard spoiler rise, as will most aircraft.