Korean Air's Next Accident?
 

I heard an interesting story the other day, which I believe may have some truth. Some local (Korean) pilots are starting the takeoff roll on the Boeing 777 fleet, with the flaps up in a misguided attempt to save fuel, then setting them on the takeoff roll at 80 knots or so. Naturally, the takeoff configuration warning is blaring until the flaps reach their requested position. I cannot belive this could be allowed to happen, so can anyone confirm or deny this?? By my calculations, Korean have killed 697 passengers and crew in 10 accidents since 1983. This practice, if true, may be the cause of the next one.

Surely not, Colonel - all the other reasons for a config. warning would be masked - I can't think any crew worth their salt would operate like that - would they?

That's what makes it so dangerous, and that is why I am asking!!

There is a rumour at the moment that in the last few weeks KAL departed to the the north at Nadi, Fiji. Instead of turning left as per SID they climbed straight ahead missing the hills by an extremely narrow margin. Maybe someone out there knows more.

Hey guys, straight from the horses concerned...."forgot" the flaps, and it was not on a 777, 'twas a 747-400.

Look out below, here comes Korean.:eek: :eek:

On second thought, this was a few months ago.....could be there is/are more of this nonsense...good grief !!!

Would it really save a significant amount of fuel?

I wish I could feel a hundred percent sure that it wasn't true. Jeez.

Are Delta and Air France aware of these 'practises'?-I thought Delta's safety auditors were happy things had changed for the better at KE, and thus code-sharing could begin again?

Shame, cabin service right up there with the best...

Cheers

'scuse me askin, but.....
 

If the crew waited until 80kts before setting t/o flaps, would the flaps actually deploy to the t/o setting in time for rotation?

I've only ever watched the videos, but it seemed a very few seconds from '80kts' to 'rotate'..... :eek:

I flew on easy 737 last year as SLF, and it seemed to be quite a few secs for flaps to deploy on approach......

Do I have this right? :confused:

I should be VERY careful about taking this seriously!

Delta safety auditor...mmmmm....pot calling the kettle black...like ALPO calling somebody a scab......

As drag increases with the square of the speed, the savings of not deploying flaps until 80 kt. would be negligeable. How much? Forgot how to do the integral a looong time ago.

And when deploying the flaps, you would be sucking air, hydraulics, electricity from the engines at a rather delicate time:rolleyes:

The floatplane drivers do this all the time with an Armstrong lever, but it would seem to lose in the translation to a 777.

Yeah, that's it, they did it on purpose! To, ah, save drag! Yeah, that's it....

Ironbutt...you got that one right!!!!:D

I think this may be old news.

A KAL 747-400 captain did continue a takeoff roll after selecting flaps 'on the go' almost a year ago.

The fellow rotated and got airborne just as flaps reached takeoff range - caught by the QAR download some days later.

Haven't heard a similar story involving a 777 - any knowledgeable comment?

Just for info....

I believe this or something like it is standard for some gliders. Not
to save fuel (in the tug) but to improve roll control during the initial take off run.

Not sure about the -400 (never am!), but how do they get past the flight control checks item on the before take-off list?
On the Classics, no flaps means no outboard ailerons!
Not to mention, of course, both the danger of the t/o warning horn NOT silencing when the flaps finally reach their selected position, ie, some other problem being masked by the 'accepted' horn.
And, the case of either a split flap or asmymetric flap happening during extension, with absolutely no time to contemplate either.
Even with a very heavy load, the flaps would not have time to extend to even the 10deg position in the time available, both outboard ADP's would be running, and the FE would have to split his instrument scan even further, not even daring to consider the consequences of leading edge malfunctions!
The whole thing is totally absurd in the extreme, these are not professional operators or airmen, just cowboys with no common sense!
Cheers (I think)

FD, it is telling that your post assumes that the rumour is correct. It also makes a very insulting accusation against all KAL pilots.

That the rumour is so incredible and an explanation is available (flaps forgotten, T/O roll continued with the flaps running) is certainly worrying, but that does not excuse the tone of your post.

Would you care to amend it?

Col Klink:

Jeesh.... I find that story really hard to believe. Really hope you got it wrong there!

What'll they think of next - extending the gear at 100' to minimums on approach?

GEEZ, last time I checked, flaps were considered high lift devices :rolleyes:

I am sure there are other ways of saving fuel on take-off, how about packs off? or flex?

or how about........

...leave two engines off during the roll, and flick on the hp cocks at 80kts, by the time they have spooled up it would be at VR and they will be off and away.

I should not post this as they might take it seriously.

Happy flying all!!!