B-KAG Engine strike at MAN

[spannersatcx]

buggaluggs, although a hard landing didn't happen within the parameters of the MM, it was 1.5g, 1.7g or more then hard landing checks required. MM also has dragged engine/pod inspections. Hard landing check has 2 phases, if anything is found on phase 1 then phase 2 is required, phase 1 is looking for damage on keel beam, panels, creases, popped reivets etc etc, flying control checks etc. Phase 2 involves gear removal and a lot more.

Dragged engine, Pylon fuse pins require checking, no 1 & 2 borescope inspections, depending on findings determines what is required next. To my knowledge the only damage found was the cowls (nose/fan/C-ducts on no4 Nose and Fan cowls on 1 & 2).

[skiesfull]

"normal deck angle on a 747 approach" -do you mean the aircraft attitude? If you do, it'll be between 2 and 3.5 degrees depending on the land flap position (either 25 or 30 degrees). Touchdown with approx. 10 degrees attitude will mean a tail-strike.
As for BA landing nose-wheel first at Perth - I think you must have been at the drinks trolley!

[oldjet744]

B747 Ground Contact Angles

I still can't picture how you can get a strike on an inboard engine.

With Flap 30 degrees, Gear Struts Compressed and assuming the Roll is about the outside tyre of the Wing Gear, at a typical pitch attitude on touchdown of approx 5 degrees Nose Up the inboard nacelle will contact the ground at a little less than 7 degrees roll angle (PW & GE engines) about 1/2 degree less for Rolls Royce Engines. Higher the pitch attitude on touchdown the lower the roll angle required for ground contact.

It's surprisingly easy to get there in challenging conditions.

I would have attached the chart but my posting skills fell short of inserting a jpeg image. If anyone can let me know how to do it I'll insert the chart.



Oldjet744

[forget]

skiesfull.

"normal deck angle on a 747 approach" -do you mean the aircraft attitude? If you do, it'll be between 2 and 3.5 degrees depending on the land flap position (either 25 or 30 degrees). Touchdown with approx. 10 degrees attitude will mean a tail-strike.

No. I meant Deck Angle. And I said approach - not ‘touchdown’.

As for BA landing nose-wheel first at Perth - I think you must have been at the drinks trolley!

skiesfull – you doubting my word? Now if someone from BA Tech Records will kindly confirm for me – a 747 heavy landing at Perth, around 2am on the 14th September 1986. (I know it's 20 years ago but they'll be there somewhere.) The aircraft left SIN late evening of 13th. (For you skiesfull, I’ve even gone to the trouble of checking an old passport!)

Now I’ll tell you what happened, and I remember it very clearly because it scared me!

At top of descent the Captain came on to say it ‘was such a beautiful night he could already see the lights of Perth’. Down we came, and down. Then I started to see houses and street lights and reckoned we were at 4 to 5,000. That was when I had my first thought that this wasn’t quite normal. I was spending half my life on 747s and I had a suspicion that we were very much nose down.

Down we came to 2,000 and still nose down. I kid you not - I was alone in a J class row and I even checked the hang of the curtains on a galley across from me just in case my ears/balance were stuffed.

No doubt about it – a pronounced nose down attitude and we were now about to cross the perimeter fence. I pushed my brief case further under the seat - and strapped in hard. The nose wheel (I was sitting not far behind it) hit with an almighty whack and we pitched up. A split second later, as we ‘rotated’ the mains hit and down came the ceiling panels – accompanied by lots of screaming from the back end.

Then it started to get amusing. We'd taxied in and, eventually, we de-planed through the front door, steps and onto the ramp. A middle aged American couple was ahead of me, and he was pretty upset about something. Turns out, as I listened-in, he was going to wait for the captain at the bottom of the steps to enquire just WTF he thought he was playing at. This should be worth waiting for I thought. Five minutes later down came the captain in shirt sleeves and, I can picture this now, wearing the biggest hat I’ve ever seen – Russian Admiral style.

Our American friend physically grabbed him, introduces himself as a 15,000 hour PanAm 747 captain and, as I said, asks him just WTF he thought he was playing at. His genuine fury was tempered with some curiosity as he didn't believe it possible to set up a 747 for an approach and then produce a nose wheel first landing. I’d have paid money to watch this! Our Admiral, very wisely kept silent for the bollocking and then wandered off - tail between legs.

Trust me. You can land a 747 nose wheel first. How? I don't know. But it can be done.

[ZAGORFLY]

Is she still employed?

I DO HOPE that this question i WILL EVER never reappear AGAIN here.
I know her with a profound love professionalism and respect for the Flying career. She started as ATC and she is one of the most of you that have done fine and the best to become a captain. Yes, after all better to lower your cross wind limits and go to the alternate instead trying to do your best all career to save fuel and money for you company and being slaughtered in PPprune...

Tough moment for you but if you have survived the command course you will do fine here too. Sorry ,Rosa.

[RingwaySam]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=514945&nseq=0

This one bounced and whent nose first. I'll ask my mate if he still has a slideshow/sequence of this landing.

[inciter]

Since when has operating an aircraft competently well within its approved operating limits has become a risk?

[atlast]

Ringway Sam

That's a photo and a half right there! Phew!
I've never heard of anyone landing the 74 nose first but I guess it could happen; to the fly-er-ons more than the flarers.
Now, the Convair 240! That was a wheel barrow!

[Dan Winterland]

When we used to land our Classic freighters empty with about 12 tonnes of fuel on board with flap 30, the landing attitude was very flat and it's entirely feasible to land nose leg first. For that reason, flap 25 was often the choice.

[forget]

Well thank you Dan! I've mentioned this over the years, and been ridiculed. 'Not possible to set up a 747 and get a nose wheel first landing' they'd all say. This aircraft had a very light pax load, and would be well down on fuel (but where's the nearest diversion for Perth?) so this could be the answer. Wrong flap.

Or it may have been the captain; an optical illusion caused by the big hat.

[A37575]

Invite for tea and bikkies soon?

[skiesfull]

Humble apologies, FORGET. I can understand a 'wheelbarrow' landing following a bounce or skip, but would have thought a nose first touchdown would have produced serious damage (oxygen masks and ceiling panels do not count!). I am more surprised that I started my 747 course shortly after and do not remember any 'scuttlebutt' about the incident, especially from the F/E's who always delighted in relaying stories about pilot's f*****g up the landing!
- still do not understand the term "deck angle" can you explain?
As for a design flaw, the -400 has more active ailerons than the 'classics'. A pitch of 2 degrees nose-up with approx 7 degrees roll angle will cause inboard and outboard engine contact (P&W) -RR and GE have slightly different values.
One hopes that the pilot will receive further cross-wind landing technique training and no further discipline measures.

[MidgetBoy]

Within operating limits or not, gusting winds or not, the captain should be able to judge whether or not she can do that landing with her skill. Whether or not it will gust, she has to be careful.

[forget]

skiesfull. Thank you for the apology but no need, – this is Prune. You asked me, what is Deck Angle. Simple I thought, I’ll do a Google on ‘Define Deck Angle’, find a Boeing definition, and copy and paste.

Not so simple! I can’t find a single definition. As I understood it, and this could well blow my street cred - it’s Pitch Attitude plus Angle of Attack. So, your aiming point/touchdown point on approach is viewed not through Pitch angle alone, but a combination of the two. I’m struggling with this, but if I’m way out, and in my defence, I never did get paid for flying.

PS. The Perth 747 in question: I’d be very surprised if it didn’t pick up some crinkles around the nose wheel. Maybe you can find someone in Tech Records and find out if it ferried empty after Perth.

Dan W. A small project for you. Define Deck Angle.

[NOR116,20]

Deck angle?

For clarification some definitions:


Chord line
Infinitely long line drawn through the trailing edge and leading edge of airfoil (wing)

Angle of incidence
Angle between longitudinal axis and the chord line of the wing

Angle of attack
Angle between the relative wind and the chord line of the wing

Pitch attitude
The angle between longitudinal axis and the horizon

I understand forgets posting that there was a negative pitch attitude throughout the approach shortly until touchdown. Comparing the normal pitch attitude of a B744 being 2 – 3 degrees in a stabilized approach a negative pitch attitude will generate such an excessive rate of descent and, if not timely changed to a correct pitch attitude making a normal landing impossible.
Some years ago I watched a TU154 approaching St. Petersburg. Though pitch attitude was not negative its rate of descent was so excessive that it hardly bounced on the main gear then went airborne again approximately 2 meters high to hit the runway on its nose gear then. Strangely enough nothing broke and nothing fall apart.

I’m asking myself what kind of piloting this is about.

[NOR116,20]

Something to add to my previous posting:
Having 10 years experience on this a/c type I do not believe that only a hard or bounced landing even if it is excessive will cause 3 pod strikes on a B744.
For the Manchester incident I assume an unwanted bank angle due to crosswind and gust conditions (maybe similar to the LH incident in HAM) leading to pod strike on the one wing followed by overreaction banking to opposite direction, maybe in combination with a hard landing.
However, it’s just my assumption rather than to blame anyone.

[spannersatcx]

how about wind shear at approx 100', as that's what happened I'm told?

[skiesfull]

I'm with NOR116.2 's theory, having seen both outboards touch during cross-wind training in the sim - over controlling the ailerons. Windshear at 100ft may well have caused the hard landing, but I'm guessing the aircraft did not touch down 'straight-and-level', otherwise the inboard would not have touched. Obviously very difficult conditions, and one hopes that the crew will undergo further training and then be able to put the incident behind them.

[MAN777]

B-KAG Now found shelter inside the old BA hangar.

[ZAGORFLY]

Any picture of the damages?