QF 448 MEL-SYD Pan Call Antiskid inop 19/4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: South Africa
Age: 57
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TD protection has been a safety feature on the brake system of jetliners for a long time. That contraction for touch down protection is in such common use that............
Short_Circuit's post about losing TD protection once anti-skid is not available really exposed something BIG. Hints anyone?
Short_Circuit's post about losing TD protection once anti-skid is not available really exposed something BIG. Hints anyone?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a Boeing "Touchdown protection" prevents the brakes being applied, until wheel spin up to within a few knots of IRU ground speed, by using the Anti Skid system.
Short_Circuit's post about losing TD protection once anti-skid is not available really exposed something BIG. Hints anyone?
I'll need some more hints maybe!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember a few years back - a 737 was dispatched anti-skid inop. The DDG indicated to use maximum manual braking.
If my memory serves me correctly - The 737 landed on 25 in Sydney. It had stopped by Charlie taxiway. I am not sure how long the tyres lasted before it was towed.
(The DDG obviously had an error in it which was subsequently amended!!)
If my memory serves me correctly - The 737 landed on 25 in Sydney. It had stopped by Charlie taxiway. I am not sure how long the tyres lasted before it was towed.
(The DDG obviously had an error in it which was subsequently amended!!)
Last edited by blueloo; 24th Apr 2012 at 08:41. Reason: Fixed, so that the Spelling nazis can move on to someone else.....
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, N.S.W. Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember a few years back - a 737 was dispatched anti-skid inop. The DDG indicated to use maximum manual breaking.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orstraylia
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They were told to apply 'breaking' so they broke it! 'Braking' may have been the intention.
maximum manual braking.
A few years back I flew regularly with an FO who counted English as a second or third language. His approach briefing often included his intention to make "a short field landing with maximum breakage..." Fortunately he never succeeded.....
Not sure what happened to my previous post but the question was why would you not declare a PAN if you thought that you had a blown tyre and that it might cause landing difficulties?
This thread is questioning why would you declare a PAN if the antiskid went inop, today a QF aircraft did not declare a PAN when they thought they had tyre problems but wanted the emergency services on standby(which automatically happens if you declare a PAN). Its irrelevant which airline it is but what would be the reason in not declaring a PAN if you think there might be landing problems and you want emergency services?
Is it the media interest or is it a fear of Flt Ops giving you a bollocking in this world of Just Culture?
This thread is questioning why would you declare a PAN if the antiskid went inop, today a QF aircraft did not declare a PAN when they thought they had tyre problems but wanted the emergency services on standby(which automatically happens if you declare a PAN). Its irrelevant which airline it is but what would be the reason in not declaring a PAN if you think there might be landing problems and you want emergency services?
Is it the media interest or is it a fear of Flt Ops giving you a bollocking in this world of Just Culture?
Your call boss but the original post was about why was a PAN call made, I was trying to generate discussion on why a PAN call was not made. No problems I will just start a different thread.
