Pod Scrape at LHR
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,525
Likes: 6
From: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
411A - you love fishing dont you.
Why not wait for the report. This was a pod scrape in Perth a while back. According to the report the handling pilot did eveything within his powers correctly, the aircraft ran out of roll control. Mother nature won.
Why not wait for the report. This was a pod scrape in Perth a while back. According to the report the handling pilot did eveything within his powers correctly, the aircraft ran out of roll control. Mother nature won.
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: Oxford, UK
Agree with PAXboy,
I PAX’d in late yesterday afternoon on a 737 to LGW, a good landing in the end, but lots of wind sheer and turbulence most of the way in. Bet the captain was also a little tense with the FO as PF.
Way over my x-wind limit.
I PAX’d in late yesterday afternoon on a 737 to LGW, a good landing in the end, but lots of wind sheer and turbulence most of the way in. Bet the captain was also a little tense with the FO as PF.
Way over my x-wind limit.
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: UK
Del Prado
I'm afraid you are wrong in some of what you say.
I've been flying all week and landing on 27L after 3pm.
Yesterday when we landed before 3pm it was on 27L along with everyone else.No-one was landing 27R yesterday afternoon when I was around. It should have been 27R (up to 3pm) under normal circumstances so something caused the change, I suspect it was the pod scrape.
When the wind is strong from the south west it is standard practise to use 27L for landing due to turbulence from hangers on approach to 27R. this incident had no bearing on de-alternation.
I've been flying all week and landing on 27L after 3pm.
Yesterday when we landed before 3pm it was on 27L along with everyone else.No-one was landing 27R yesterday afternoon when I was around. It should have been 27R (up to 3pm) under normal circumstances so something caused the change, I suspect it was the pod scrape.
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: UK
In BA FO's have 2/3rds the aircraft limits on all types.
There are no varying degrees, its 2/3rds for all from day 1, or you don't make the line.
Obviously the captain has to use his judgment as to the experience of the FO, but in theory its from day 1.
Incidentally I let my FO land it yesterday up to his limits with windshear and turbulence under 100'. Did a great job as I knew he would.
There are no varying degrees, its 2/3rds for all from day 1, or you don't make the line.
Obviously the captain has to use his judgment as to the experience of the FO, but in theory its from day 1.
Incidentally I let my FO land it yesterday up to his limits with windshear and turbulence under 100'. Did a great job as I knew he would.
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 762
Likes: 198
From: London
behind_the_second_midland,
sorry, I never seem to make myself clear on these boards so just to clarify,
You're right, in normal circumstances it should have been 27R before 3pm, 27L after. However in strong SW winds it is known that turbulence is created by the hangers and so 27L is always used when the crosswind is above a certain limit.(I won't quote the figures in case I get them wrong!)
Yesterday morning because of the wind 27L was the nominated landing runway, I believe the aircraft in question landed on the departure runway in accordance with the TEAM procedures used to tactically enhance the landing rate.
The landing runway was not decided because of the pod scrape but because of the existing crosswinds.
Ps. hope it wasn't a case of sod's law for you when the very day you get 27L , you end up parking at Terminal 1 ?
sorry, I never seem to make myself clear on these boards so just to clarify,
You're right, in normal circumstances it should have been 27R before 3pm, 27L after. However in strong SW winds it is known that turbulence is created by the hangers and so 27L is always used when the crosswind is above a certain limit.(I won't quote the figures in case I get them wrong!)
Yesterday morning because of the wind 27L was the nominated landing runway, I believe the aircraft in question landed on the departure runway in accordance with the TEAM procedures used to tactically enhance the landing rate.
The landing runway was not decided because of the pod scrape but because of the existing crosswinds.
Ps. hope it wasn't a case of sod's law for you when the very day you get 27L , you end up parking at Terminal 1 ?
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 115
From: UK
In my company the F/Os have exactly the same crosswind limit as me - 35 knots. It is usually better to let the youngsters get on with it. It is good for their confidence-building and they are mostly better at it than me!
Don't pay any attention to 411A. The miserable old curmudgeon comes from the L-1011 which was a wing down aeroplane and, as far as I am aware, he has zero time on the 747 landing in a 35-knot cross wind. The 747 is a "kick-off drift" aeroplane (for very obvious reasons).
Don't pay any attention to 411A. The miserable old curmudgeon comes from the L-1011 which was a wing down aeroplane and, as far as I am aware, he has zero time on the 747 landing in a 35-knot cross wind. The 747 is a "kick-off drift" aeroplane (for very obvious reasons).
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
From: The Deep South (Sussex)
I flew a variety of aircraft in a variety of crosswinds over the years and always tried to get in rather than have to divert.
I didn't scrape anything but must have been very close to it at times.
From the safety of retirement I have every sympathy for the guy that did nick a pod at LHR. I trust that his company will accept that pilots do their best in these conditions.
The alternative is to divert anytime the gusts look even slightly above the limit (say just once in the last fifteen minutes).
No one wants that.
I didn't scrape anything but must have been very close to it at times.
From the safety of retirement I have every sympathy for the guy that did nick a pod at LHR. I trust that his company will accept that pilots do their best in these conditions.
The alternative is to divert anytime the gusts look even slightly above the limit (say just once in the last fifteen minutes).
No one wants that.
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: Oxford, UK
Doors to Automatic
As I think was clear in my post I had no problems, but I hate other people driving me in a car and if I had been the captain yesterday I'd be trying not to show the white knuckles when my No 2 was flying – but I’d let him do it as I know about delegation, confidence boostingetc etc (I could never be a FI!).
Unfortunately my little a/c (shared) has a 13 Knt demonstrated X-wind limit which rather put the kybosh on my planned trip today but it was fun landing at the home base at 2/3 the normal speed over the ground.
As I think was clear in my post I had no problems, but I hate other people driving me in a car and if I had been the captain yesterday I'd be trying not to show the white knuckles when my No 2 was flying – but I’d let him do it as I know about delegation, confidence boostingetc etc (I could never be a FI!).
Unfortunately my little a/c (shared) has a 13 Knt demonstrated X-wind limit which rather put the kybosh on my planned trip today but it was fun landing at the home base at 2/3 the normal speed over the ground.
Last edited by egbt; 4th November 2005 at 20:25.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: europe
The morning in question was interesting, I caught sight of the 747 at about 2 miles on final 27R. The aircraft had a significant amount of drift on, as it appeared from my position, perhaps (15-20) degrees.
It was quite early in the morning and the holding point on RW27R ( the departure RW) had several aircraft in situ unable to depart due to SIG WX to the north of the field.
The 744 continued its approach and appeared stable all the way.
The ROD was checked and the drift kicked off beautifully, but the mains went on fairly solidly followed almost immediately by the nose.
To my horror I caught sight of the no 1 pod make contact with the ground. The aircraft continued along the runway and vacated out of my view. A couple of a/c reported the incident over the R/T.
I have been to LHR on more than one occasion.
On the day in question (Thur Nov 3). The turbulence on approach gave rise to conditions that the typical short haul operator might encounter on only a couple of occasions a year.
Tower reported wind and GPS wind just 100' above the RW were significantly different.
On a later approach to LHR wind display at 200' gave the wind as 200/36 when the tower was reporting 210/19.
Have no doubt about the conditions the crew experienced...
From my front row seat the a/c was stable throughout the approach...But hey there but for the grace...go we all.
It was quite early in the morning and the holding point on RW27R ( the departure RW) had several aircraft in situ unable to depart due to SIG WX to the north of the field.
The 744 continued its approach and appeared stable all the way.
The ROD was checked and the drift kicked off beautifully, but the mains went on fairly solidly followed almost immediately by the nose.
To my horror I caught sight of the no 1 pod make contact with the ground. The aircraft continued along the runway and vacated out of my view. A couple of a/c reported the incident over the R/T.
I have been to LHR on more than one occasion.
On the day in question (Thur Nov 3). The turbulence on approach gave rise to conditions that the typical short haul operator might encounter on only a couple of occasions a year.
Tower reported wind and GPS wind just 100' above the RW were significantly different.
On a later approach to LHR wind display at 200' gave the wind as 200/36 when the tower was reporting 210/19.
Have no doubt about the conditions the crew experienced...
From my front row seat the a/c was stable throughout the approach...But hey there but for the grace...go we all.
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: London
Del Prado,
The incident you mention was very different in that it wasn't turbulence off the hangers, but the fact that it encountered a gust exceeding the limits of the aircraft as it came out the lee of terminal 3. (and yes the wind was in limits when they landed)
wasn't there a similar incident a couple of years back when an aircraft (same type) ended up on the grass?
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,581
Likes: 0
From: flyover country USA
I once rode in back of a TriStar into AMS - there was teethjarring turbulence (note to self: great alliteration!) all the way down the approach to about the last 100' - whereupon the F/E finally found the "Cancel Turbulence" knob and we touched down smooth as glass.
Never witnessed this phenomenon before or since.
Never witnessed this phenomenon before or since.
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 150
Likes: 2
From: East of eden
Off the topic slightly..and my apologies if this issue has been raised before. But why do some pilots (I see it all the time in military pilots of non UK origin) transition way out to the wing down cross contol technique? Uncomfortable for SLF . So kick it off and plant it says I! It appears this is what they did and the gods where just not with them. Wonder what a wing down , boot full of right rudder approach would have been like in the same situation.