Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Freight Dogs
Reload this Page >

DHL A300-600F suffers "nose up" at AUH

Wikiposts
Search
Freight Dogs Finally a forum for those midnight prowler types who utilise the unglamorous parts of airports that many of us never get to see. Freight Dogs is for pilots and crew who operate mostly without SLF.

DHL A300-600F suffers "nose up" at AUH

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 3rd Apr 2014, 22:43
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 65
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DHL A300-600F suffers "nose up" at AUH

Plane suffers "nose up" at Abu Dhabi airport - Transport - ArabianBusiness.com
stmedxb4 is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2014, 23:27
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 49
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's gonna be paperwork...
flyboyike is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 01:44
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess the handling agent forgot to put the tail support in......again !!
fruitloop is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 02:34
  #4 (permalink)  
Trash du Blanc
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Captain threw his wallet out the window....
Huck is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 03:47
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Some things never change.

DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 05:56
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hope that this careless little episode didn't damage my bulldozer parts, that were travelling in the rear of that aircraft.
onetrack is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 08:08
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 560
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the German newspaper photo report taken from the starboard side, the tail appears to be sitting on a vehicle.
Newforest2 is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 09:31
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: essex mole hole
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wot No Loadmaster!!!!!!!!

Mole Man
mole man is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 10:12
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Hervey Bay, Australia
Age: 78
Posts: 139
Received 15 Likes on 6 Posts
If the picture of the Sterling aircraft is OY-STH then it was a fairly common thing. When empty, it used to gradualy sit down on its' tail. Am not aware that any other of Sterling Caravelles were quite so tippy.
pppdrive is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 15:20
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unlike the above pictured the A300 is probably the most difficult to screw up, I have never seen that nose strut extended to an uncomfortable extent. The MD-11, any T-tail, the 747 are all critical aircraft to load, for different reasons.
grounded27 is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 17:37
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
expensive mistake, but for the cost of a Loadmaster eh?
WASALOADIE is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2014, 20:30
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: essex mole hole
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WASALODIE

My thoughts exactly. how is Spain

Mole Man
mole man is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2014, 04:32
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Ft. Collins, Colorado USA
Age: 90
Posts: 216
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
A RedeiDuk says, some things never change.
Back in the early 1950's we were still running out at Cargo at then KIDL to put tail posts under the DC-4. In a way it was harder to tip as the freight doors were aft so the load came off first at that end. There was also the sight of DC-4 taxiing out for takeoff with the rear post still in place to the enjoyment of other flight crew. And yes, the DC-4 could fly with a tail post in place without the crew being aware.
Even a Connie could tip though. It was not tail tender at all but you could do it if you really tried. RC0121 (radar Connie) came into our base for a conversion to ALRI. This meant gutting all the avionic gear from the cabin, the station consoles, etc. The aircraft was parked up to two enclosed engine dock sbut fortunately the engines were not into it. An avionic mechanic began industriously stripping black boxes and piling them by the rear door. These were the days of vacuum tubes so boxes were big and heavy. He got a respectable load by the rear door intending to get a forklift and pallet but on what proved to be his last trip aft with a box he found he was going downhill with the slope increasing fast. His neat stack of electronics went further aft in a big jumble making sure the aircraft would stay tipped.
A L-1049 Connie on its tail is spectacular the nose gear is miles up. The fuselage was between the two engine docks with not a heck of a lot of clearance. A belly band and crane carefully lifted the rear while observing the clearance between the fuselage sides and the engine dock building. No damage,
A DC-7C freighter was parked at the IAB and had to be taxied to cargo for offloading. It had been parked too tight and there was not enough room for the wing to swing around. The two mechanics elected to reverse out a bit and then come forward. They started back with me signaling and when they were far enough back for wingtip clearance I motioned them to come forward nd turn. Unthinkingly, they hit brkes first instead of just coming out of reverse and using forward pitch and power to arrest the rearward mmovement. I had a unique look of a DC-7C assuming the moment of rotation at takeoff. The nose wheel went well above me , not so high as a Connies and then came down rather abruptly as they added forward power. Don't know if the tailskid made contact.
The there was the DC-8-61 that came out of San Juan to KJFK. He called in-range and said he was having some longitudinal trim problems. I got in my truck to go to the gate to meet him and saw him taxiing in from the outer perimeter. His nose wheel was skipping off the ground and when he went over the bump caused by the service road it lifted off for several feet before coming back down. That gave me a clue and after it parked at the gate the rampie motioned for me. The door handle for the C1 belly door was broken off. The -61 had big belly door that opened inward and went down under the bag floor. Whe the airplane had arrived in SJU , the rampie turned the handle. The door tore out of his hand and shot down under the floor. The bungee cable providing a counterbalance to the weight of the door had broken. In the process, the door handle had sheared off. Maintenance down there muscled the door shut, got visegrips in the stub of the handle and locked it. The rampies, unable to load C1 bin, elected to put it all in C3 and C4 wihch are rather aft. The Captain of the flight was not amused, the DC-8, normally a rather placid beast had elected to fly itself off on takeoff and he had a lot of AND trim on the stabilizer during the flight. So that was only a near tail-tipper.
One that did was a B747-100 pax plane. We had leased this very early bird from Pan Am and it required frequent flap track inspections. The flaps were lowered, inspected and a sleepy midnight shifter went up the three flights to the cock[pit to raise the flaps.
He chose to use the lever with the round wheel-shaped knob on the panel rather than the air-foil shaped one on the pedestal. The gear pins were not installed. The wing gear of the B4 retract sideways and no hydraulic system had the power to scrub four main wheels with a jumbo on top sideways so the stayed put. The body gear which are aft however go up sort of like a flies legs. They retracted aided by the fact that an empty B4 is tail heavy. Some linkage got bent but up they came and the aircraft tipped back. It was not too fast so only minor damage to the tailskid. The nose gear coming off the ground tried to retract but a towbar on it made it had for the gear doors to close. I came in from home and consulted with the Pan Am folks. APU was happily chugging away which was good as the ground power receptacle was a mile over our heads. We transferred fuel from the wings to the center, got a fuel truck to pump more in the center, called in day shift and put them up in the aircraft u forward and as nice as you please it slowly came back to level. Deflating the body gear shocks we got them down with a little help fro crowbars, pinned them and re-inflated the oleos. All safe now Pan Am took it off to their hangar for repairs with much mocking laughter. Eveery time I had to deal with them they reminded me of it. And then they did it but in their big hangar. Got the rudder and I think the vertical fin got some damage too. Graveyard shift will do that to you.
The tail stand for the 747 freighter is very tall. At a later company we flew them for UPS. Their rampies were towing one and found it would not pass under the elevator. Interim repair and a ferry to replace it were required.
So tail-tipping and all that goes with it are an old problem.
tonytales is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2014, 06:33
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Europe
Age: 45
Posts: 625
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess the handling agent forgot to put the tail support in......again !!
I guess you don't know the A300 very well: It doesn't support a tail stand.

Have heard rumors DHL (EAT, actually) was shopping around for a loadmaster for this flight, but found the offers too expensive. Oops.
SMT Member is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2014, 07:41
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts


I'm sure most have seen this, but I love this image.

It HAS been happening for years
dirtyrat is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2014, 14:41
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SMT Member

I guess you don't know the A300 very well: It doesn't support a tail stand.
Ahh, you would be wrong. never seen one in use during or for the purpose of loading the aircraft. There is an aft tail stand point, commonly used after the aircraft has been jacked for stabilization. Suppose it could be used during loading.
grounded27 is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2014, 21:23
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
N717BH is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2014, 00:30
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tonytales
A RedeiDuk says, some things never change.
Back in the early 1950's ......
Love the old stories. Don't hesitate to put more on other threads.
JammedStab is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2014, 23:39
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
N717BH

And now I have! Looked it up in the AMM and it is good for about 11k lbs, suppose it only takes a fraction of a ounce to sit one on it's tail!
grounded27 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.