View Full Version : Airbus tailscrape at BRS?
adams
18th Jun 2003, 00:24
I saw a Skyservice A320 surrounded by onlookers on a remote stand at Bristol yesterday. The ramp agent told me it was awaiting maintenance following a tailscrape. Anyone know any details?
Wee Weasley Welshman
18th Jun 2003, 02:53
I've often wondered about tailscrapes on BRS runway 09. As all users will know it is level, then goes downhill, then levels off. A lot of the jet traffic frequently rotates just at the point that the runway downslope levels off.
In my minds eye I can see the tail moving down towards a sloping up runway section whilst the mains are just on the level runway section.
On the other hand it seems improbable that it actually works like that in reality to any significant degree.
Apologies for wandering the thread off to into the realms of tech log.
WWW
I seem to remember a previous tailscrape at Bristol. If my memory serves me correctly too much aileron on a crosswind take off allows the lift dumper to raise on rotation followed by the aircraft settling back on the ground.
I will let someone else look up the report.
codeco
18th Jun 2003, 03:37
The aircraft involved was C-GTDK, the Skyservice unit operating onbehalf of MyTravel Airways this summer. The scrape occured on landing as flight MYT718 CFU-BRS at around 3pm local. It's now parked up on the whiskey apron awaiting attention.
We had a TCX 757 come in to operate the next flight DK should have done BRS-REU-BRS, which had to go into BCN as Reus was closed by that time and got a MYT 320 G-CRPH (I think) down from Liverpool this morning to do the BRS-TFS-BRS-ALC-BRS sectors which are running with a four hour delay.
Regards.
Localiser Green
18th Jun 2003, 18:16
The previous Airbus tailscrape @ BRS was an Air 2000 A320 in June 1998, caused by a lateral sidestick deflection sufficient to deploy the roll spoilers which of course both decrease lift and increase nose-up pitch.
Airbus FCOM SOPs already warned of the potential problem, and the importance of initiating rotation with zero sidestick roll demand, but AMM SOPs did not and were updated as a result of the investigation.
Report Here (http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/bulletin/dec98/gooab.htm)