Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qlink Dash 8 tail scrape Roma

Old 13th Dec 2013, 11:12
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,830
We have 250hr cadets flying right hand seat in an A330 and cripple 7 doing the business all over the world through rain, hail and snow. So I can not believe that a cadet in a Dash 8 would have too much of a problem.
These aircraft are two pilot right? Wouldn't the experienced Captain see things going astray and take over?
Perhaps the training department needs to look at intervention training as well as its line training. If you train people properly it doesn't matter how many hours they have.


the Don
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 11:37
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The Beech or the Office.
Age: 9
Posts: 331
Thumbs up

Don,

That is not an apples for apples comparison I'm afraid. Let's not get into the discussion of how hard jets are to fly compared to high performance turbo props. I've flown both and can tell you from where I sit, the TP is more difficult; but that's me.

These 200-300 hr cadets on 330s and 777s are flying ILS to ILS on full automatics from gear up to taxi in. You only have to see how well these folk manage on a CAVOK day without an ILS to couple up to to see the results. SFO ring a bell. Mark 1 eyeball flying is not their forte.

Flying 4-5 sector days with circling approaches into shortish strips OCTA in regional Oz is demanding flying. I did it for 13 years in a previous life.

Anyway, we weren't there. But there is always 2 sides to every story.

There for the grace of God and all that
Normasars is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 13:41
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,830
Norm,


We are not talking SPIFR in a Metro, we are talking right hand seat in a Dash 8. What a great place to learn job.
For the record I have flown with 200hr cadets as they circled a 330 into OPKC and SEY. I have also flown with them when they fly the 330/340 on the visual Riviera approach in Nice. You don't need a million hours to do this stuff, you just need to be trained properly.


The Don
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 13:47
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Land of the rising sun
Posts: 43
The Airbus is almost incompetent free designed. Don't compare the A330 to a Dash 8. It really highlights how bias you are. Wages do dictate where the smart end up. Many of us got into this business to finally be in a position to care for a family, whilst doing what we love. If you are a cadet, that is fine! It ain't what should be debated. 1500 hours FO. It is sad though such an uneducated statement is made. Remember, cadetships were designed to attract the smartest of candidates. Not to a) sit in the right seat of a Q400 or any aircraft for that matter. An SO position on a long haul carrier is more suitable. Any cadet that gets on here ranting about how good you are, really just shows how
brainwashed you have become in your own self! Unbelievable.
yadot is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 14:07
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 60
The Airbus is almost incompetent free designed.

I suspect there are some AF passenger families that might beg to differ…
8888 is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 14:41
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austria
Posts: 653
So...

Are any details known on the incident at hand yet? Was it during takeoff or landing? And what about the weather?

The few things that are out until now leave me with a big question mark over my head. It seems that YROM has a 1500m runway, so landing would most likely be done with flaps 35. This in turn makes a tailstrike during flare rather unlikely, as the negative pitch during approach with this setting would rather seem conductive to a nose gear landing. Takeoff on the other hand... from my experience, the -400 is not really prone to overrotation, and on a 1500m runway the approaching runway end should still be far enough away not to scare even a low-time colleague into yanking the nose up too rapidly on rotation.
Tu.114 is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 15:10
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,830
Yadot,

I was letting norm know that all 200hr cadets don't just fly ILS to ILS as he suggested. And if you read my post again I never said I was a cadet. I am not biased at all. Just talking from experience of many years flying pistons turboprops and jets. I would also suggest that the right hand seat of a dash 8 is the perfect place for a cadet, and that the jump seat doing long haul would be the worse place. Four to five sectors a day is where you learn the trade, not seat warming mid Pacific.

The don.
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 19:16
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 233
PX run a Cadet system for their DH8 operation in a much more hostile environment than Aus and it seems to work ok.

Maybe the success of that program has something to do with the experience level of those sitting in the left seat
Square Bear is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 19:24
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 133*50 23*50
Posts: 148
Still seems odd to me that a metro with no passengers demands more experience than a q400 full of punters.....
Mail-man is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2013, 22:20
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DSS-46 (Canberra Region)
Posts: 734
Well, we've gone from a tail strike to women pilot bashing, and now cadet bashing (yet again).

No wonder the industry's in the state it's in

Let's get back on topic.
Tidbinbilla is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 01:13
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 535
So jpilot, what's your real solution, more of the same???
SN
Soup Nazi is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 04:59
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 66
Posts: 270
It would be pretty interesting to see QF's data on these tail strikes, and exactly how many there have been in total. There are a plethora of possible root causes.
Is there actually a pattern emerging?
Any change in procedures?
Any change in procedural training?
Any change to standards?
Is weather or location a factor?
Changes in rostering - fatigue?
Operational pressure?

The ATSB report will no doubt be interesting. And there is never only 1 contributing factor.
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 09:20
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 148
I guess you definitely won't be getting those jets in any hurry,,,,,,, if ever.
Stink Finger is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 21:32
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Hey stink finger,

Maybe you should refer to this......

How Qantaslink bent a jet with a 3.6g hard landing | Plane Talking

Seems cobham have issues too.
mustangranch is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 21:41
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 148
Hello Mustang,

Already having an aircraft on an AOC and banging one up is very different to banging more than one up, that you are presently operating and going to CASA hat in hand and asking to operate bigger.

Cheers
Stink Finger is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 22:04
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 119
To be fair the the Q400 is notorious for tail strikes. Read any operators SOP's and you will see numerous call outs and advice to avoid them. On a flap 15 landing you can quite often be approaching at 2/3 degrees nose up, if not slightly more depending on weight, and considering 6 degrees is the point at which the manual says you are likely to be risking a strike it's not a great deal to play with in the flare. Especially when you try for a greaser and just keep squeezing back, not a good idea at all! Hence why you see many pilots actually adding a little bit of power in the flare to just cushion the "landing". I'd be very surprised if anyone who flies it, regardless of experience, hasn't had at least one pitch reminder during a F15 flare.


The Q400 is a fantastic aircraft, with a fair bit of automation, but be under no illusion, it's not a jump in, press some buttons and fly away aircraft, you have to watch it like a hawk and constantly fly it, not manage it, or it will bite you on the arse.

Unfortunately that probably distracts from cadet bashing, but alas.
drivez is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 22:10
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,431
While I don't support the view that Sunstate are not capable of operating jets, its a bit rich to drag out 4 year old (approaching) one off heavy landing, in an attempt to discredit another operator to support the opposite view.
QF/Jetstar/Virgin/Tiger/Alliance and Airnorth (How many have I missed) have all had their turn in the spot light.

A single tail scrape is not a huge issue. If they are continual and ongoing, well that might attract some attention.
RENURPP is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 22:19
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 75
So jpilot, what's your real solution, more of the same???
SN
I can't speak for jpilotj, but I don't think anyone here is going to find a solution for a problem deep seeded in an airline's training and possibly recruitment process here on PPPRuNe, especially without any hard facts. So bit of a tall order to ask of it don't you think Soup Nazi?

I think what jpilotj was getting at was that the blame can't be immediately directed straight at QLink's trainee program. FACT: the training pilot that banged the tail had just under 1000hrs. While that's not a huge amount, it's more than a lot more than what people suggest when someone brings up a trainee.
LongLats is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 22:25
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Renurpp,

Im sorry if I have offended you in any way. It was merely one of many incidents that immediately come to mind. Yes for sure I could have reeled off many others.

Point being is we aren't perfect and we don't know all the facts. As many have said the Q400 is very difficult to land, and if it is flap 15, you have no play in attitude for sink rate.

I think it is best we all stop pointing the finger and blaming people, and start working together to make our industry safer.

I hope for everyones sake, we all keep flying what we enjoy doing and keep getting paid enough to be happy.

Hope those concerned on the tail strikes are ok.
mustangranch is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2013, 22:33
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 136
Adding power helps with the sink rate as long as you close them straight away afterwards.
AviatoR21 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.