Air China 747 - ORD

[Shore Guy]

IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: CCA9016 Make/Model: B747 Description: B-747
Date: 06/13/2003 Time: 0813

Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Minor

LOCATION
City: CHICAGO State: IL Country: US

DESCRIPTION
AIR CHINA CCA9016, B747-200 ACFT, STRUCK #1 ENGINE ON LANDING RUNWAY 14L,
OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES ARE UNKNOWN, CHICAGO, IL

INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk: Y
# Pass: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk: Y
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:

WEATHER: ORD METAR 0631Z U CALM 3/4SM RWY 14R RVR 2600V5500 BR BKN001 OVC007 14/14

OTHER DATA
Activity: Business Phase: Landing Operation: Air Carrier

Departed: UNK Dep Date: Dep. Time:
Destination: KORD Flt Plan: IFR Wx Briefing: U
Last Radio Cont: ORD ILS 14L OUTER MARKER
Last Clearance: RUNWAY 14L CLRD TO LAND

FAA FSDO: WEST CHICAGO, IL (GL03) Entry date: 06/17/2003

[UKflyer]

i could understand it if it was windy!

[Shore Guy]

UK and all,

Yeah, that was my point in posting. Looks like some last minute manuevering on a low vis approach. .....Yikes...

For any 747-200 drivers out there....what bank angle results in a pod strike?

[sleeper]

8 degrees AOB , and depending on pitch attitude

[jungly]

Yikes indeed...my point would be: China Airlines Again! :rolleyes:

[Noctivaga]

Shore Guy, I'm not trying to be pedantic, and I have no particular love for China Airlines, but in all fairness you should note that there is a world of difference between Air China and China Airlines. This particular event, scary as it might be in all the ramifications, was Air China, not our Taiwanese friends at China Airlines. As for it being a scary event, yes indeed. Makes one wonder....

[Globaliser]

Noctivaga, absolutely right about it being Air China (China) and not China Airlines (Taiwan), though I think your comment was probably directed at jungly not Shore Guy.

But Air China hasn't had a happy relationship with ORD's runways of late. Remember this (http://aviation-safety.net/database/1999/990401-1.htm)?

[akerosid]

I remember that incident and yes, it was a close run thing (in 1999), but two incidents in four years doesn't really amount to an unhappy history, does it?

As for Air China, it seems to be a pretty safe carrier; it's worst accident was the 767 at Busan within the last two years, but other than that, it's not too bad. Apart from injured pride and a big scratch on the underside of the engine, this doesn't seem to be a terribly serious incident. Malaysia had this happened to a 744 at old Kai Tak and even Qantas had a pod scrape in the recent past. A rap across the knuckes perhaps, but not a firing offence.

[Notso Fantastic]

I think probably every large operator of 747s has had a pod scrape or two. Not serious, and never a serious incident taken on its own.

[D.Lamination]

Air China at Kai Tak - A tribute to the Boeing Commercial Airplane Co.
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-6/244395/Airchina.jpg
:uhoh:

[Shore Guy]

All,
Just to clarify, the reason for my initial post was not to start a new China/Far East airline bash.....I just thought the circumstances of this pod strike were a bit unusual and worthy of posting and subsequent discussion.

Most pod strikes occur during a manuevering approach and/or crosswind situation. This one occurred on a low vis ILS approach with calm winds at night. One can only imagine the last second manuever that resulted in a pod strike.

Anyone out there from ORD area who has any more info on the extent of damage and info? pics? Who handles maintenance for Air China at ORD? A search of the Chicago news sources showed nothing more on the event.

[non sched]

I witnessed a pod strike on a KC-135 once and it was primarily a result of a very low approach speed, a very high angle of attack and what I believed to be a stall right above the runway as the wings were rocking. Scary as hell.:ouch:

[Globaliser]

akerosid: two incidents in four years doesn't really amount to an unhappy history, does it?True, more like embarrassing coincidence. But I should remember to dig out that "tongue-in-cheek" smiley next time.