Ramones,
It was a good and genuine question...
In some aircrafts it's a land asap Eg o the old 772 it wasn't always a return back. On the longer variants it was....
No idea about 340....

The QRH for the 772 says: "Plan to land at the nearest suitable airport" for both annunciated (ie displayed on EICAS) and unannunciated tailstrikes.

The A330 QRH says: "LAND ASAP" in the event of a tailstrike. I can't imagine the A340 being any different.

So V1 and Vr where missed what would of happened if they lost an engine at any stage after this?

There is no evidence that V1 and Vr were missed. That is pure conjecture based on some seriously porous information. I think that is the point the poor fellow in the quoted exchange was making.

I bow to your superior knowledge but one things for sure a 777 took off an incident happened it was at 200' on mode C going very fast over Deira and most of the info has come from within EK even the latest incident was being reported in India a few hours afterwards with a guy quoting the info was from EK.
So with your knowledge did they rotate at Vr?

There's a good podcast called AvTalk that's run by the guys at FR24.

The one where they discuss this incident makes it pretty clear that the aircraft rotated in a normal-ish place. The problem is that the publicly available data is sampled every 5 seconds. The data they store is much more detailed and includes other information such as what was set on the MCP etc.

Worth a listen

Buzzbox,

There used to be a Boeing (or EK Bulletin) regarding this, and that for a very long time! Valid on the 772 (not LR/F) and 773 (not ER).

You are correct that it does on the -200 LR and -200 Freighters nowadays, but on the older 777-200's which were being referred to, is was not always land ASAP for a tail strike. It's been years since I've flown those Rolls Royce powered planes and they may have updated the QRH for them in line with current models.

I flew the 777-200 in the early 2000s for an Asian carrier and still have a copy of the QRH from that time. It clearly states: "Plan to land at the nearest suitable airport."

People may be chasing their tail(strikes) here:

In ancient times on the 777-300 if a trailstrike was reported by the cabin crew or tower but no EICAS had occurred, the crew could pressurize and continue. In that same era on a 777-200 the report from the tower or the cabin crew meant that the aircraft had to return. This was down to geometry - it is not possible to strike the tail without a warning in the 300 but it was in the 200.

This was later changed to be more conservative for both models.

Hi, I'm a Reuters reporter interested in speaking with pilots about this incident and the aborted take-off this month.
You can reach me on [email protected] or [email protected].

"Poor fellow"? You mean EK 777 fleet technical pilot?
Is your nose really that brown?

His attempt to deny the event only confirmed that an event took place. In fact such event was significant enough to prompt the issue of a company notam to remind their crews to follow SOP.

We all know why SOPs are in place, so at some point during this flight the omission of SOP (or poor airmanship, SA, currency.. you name it) lead to an undesired aircraft state that needed to be addressed broadly to all 777 pilots.

Looking forward to read the investigation report, oh wait

Exactly as Dropp wrote.

Refer also to the latest 5G directive and the possible effects on the Tailskid system on the Tripple. If the caution is expected to be erroneous, one continues normal operation…Enough said.

Seriously yo? Most of QRH said “DO NOT PRESSURIZE THE AIRCRAFT, Caution! Continued pressurization of the airplane can cause further structural damage” unless you want to fly long haul at 10000 ft.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....84a48c509b.png

Thanks, indeed I stand corrected and the next post refreshed my memory of flying the -200 and -300 about tail strike with no eicas and being able to continue. But was changed later for commonality.

No matter how you slice it, the incompetence is breath-taking. Should we expect to hear more or has the EK machine succesfully buried this?

Good video, marred by the statement near the end that the crew should have returned because of the overspeed. That is non-sense.

She was an EK poster ( video) queen . What do you think has happened to her ? Hint - nothing!

Given the fact that she is no longer with us, what would you have preferred - execution?