VS tailstrike at VHHH
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mhhhhhh that sounds all too technical to me, Airbus or Scarebus? Thanks God I still fly a "Bobby", yes it is true that even a Bobby can have a Tailstrike with the lengh of 63 or 73 Meter. Winds at VHHH are sometimes a challenge itself to Crew`s and it is easy to get cought by one. Luck is as well involved! Do you know what I mean?!?!?! Lucky I am in my days off and not the one who where there at the time. Important that nobody got hurt, a few scratches at the Skid-pod I hope. Be more carefull with guessing, Aviation is not a place for Lottery and Gambling. It is a factloving comunity and when the DFDR is analyzed then you may find some answers to questions.
Fly safe and land happy
NG
Fly safe and land happy
NG
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ETOPS773..."The A340-600 is very long aircraft, and like the 777-300, is very prone to these type of events."
...only when improper rotation or flare techniques not commensurate with weather conditions are applied.
...only when improper rotation or flare techniques not commensurate with weather conditions are applied.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Copper Mountain
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by glhcarl
I thought Airbus's "envelope protection" prevented this type of incident?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There you go glhcarl! It's been over 7 years since I flew the A330 and over 9 years since I flew the A320 but you get the picture! Basically there are no protections when you rotate.
I remember it as Direct Law as when you move the stick around you get a cross on the PFD, for the control check to show direct control input, until you get airborne. Yes it can be a Scarebus if you get too complcated with it. Keep it simple and it is just an Airbus!
I remember it as Direct Law as when you move the stick around you get a cross on the PFD, for the control check to show direct control input, until you get airborne. Yes it can be a Scarebus if you get too complcated with it. Keep it simple and it is just an Airbus!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: hongkong
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt. A,
You said that with LIDAR sending info to the WTWS at CLK there will be winshear warnings right 'down' to the runway.
This is absolutely correct but what is not generally realised is that the LIDAR cannot see windshear OVER the runway itself.
Presently the LIDAR is positioned alongside the tower and 'looks' up the approach path and departure route (straight out) but it's geometry does not allow it to look at the airflow over the runway.
Therefore in this case (tailstrike) the LIDAR would not have seen the windshear and sent inputs to the WTWS if it was present.
I understand the the Observatory has asked for funding for another LIDAR set to allow more coverage over the runways.
You said that with LIDAR sending info to the WTWS at CLK there will be winshear warnings right 'down' to the runway.
This is absolutely correct but what is not generally realised is that the LIDAR cannot see windshear OVER the runway itself.
Presently the LIDAR is positioned alongside the tower and 'looks' up the approach path and departure route (straight out) but it's geometry does not allow it to look at the airflow over the runway.
Therefore in this case (tailstrike) the LIDAR would not have seen the windshear and sent inputs to the WTWS if it was present.
I understand the the Observatory has asked for funding for another LIDAR set to allow more coverage over the runways.
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's patently obvious that the vast majority of those commenting here have no idea of what they speak. Even those of you who actually do (or claim to) have Airbus experience have not flown the A340-600, as demonstrated by your lack of knowledge of this aircraft and its systems.
And what possible relevance is the transition from Normal to Flare Law on landing to an incident that apparently occurred on Take Off?
Please withold your comments unless you have something useful or intelligent to add. I have seen little on this thread that fits either of those categories.
Scroggs (an A340-600 driver)
And what possible relevance is the transition from Normal to Flare Law on landing to an incident that apparently occurred on Take Off?
Please withold your comments unless you have something useful or intelligent to add. I have seen little on this thread that fits either of those categories.
Scroggs (an A340-600 driver)
ejj or any HK hands,
CLK ATC used to issue windshear warnings as: Max shear and distance from touchdown of first encounter.
e.g. Something like "20kn loss at 5nm final"
Which actually meant first encounter would be at 5nm and somewhere between there and touchdown the 20kn loss would take place i.e. the 20kn loss would not necessarily be at 5nm.
The phraseology could be misleading to occasional visitors and I wonder, for the benefit of readers, if you can say if this is still the case.
CLK ATC used to issue windshear warnings as: Max shear and distance from touchdown of first encounter.
e.g. Something like "20kn loss at 5nm final"
Which actually meant first encounter would be at 5nm and somewhere between there and touchdown the 20kn loss would take place i.e. the 20kn loss would not necessarily be at 5nm.
The phraseology could be misleading to occasional visitors and I wonder, for the benefit of readers, if you can say if this is still the case.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: far east
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Basil
ejj or any HK hands,
CLK ATC used to issue windshear warnings as: Max shear and distance from touchdown of first encounter.
e.g. Something like "20kn loss at 5nm final"
Which actually meant first encounter would be at 5nm and somewhere between there and touchdown the 20kn loss would take place i.e. the 20kn loss would not necessarily be at 5nm.
The phraseology could be misleading to occasional visitors and I wonder, for the benefit of readers, if you can say if this is still the case.
CLK ATC used to issue windshear warnings as: Max shear and distance from touchdown of first encounter.
e.g. Something like "20kn loss at 5nm final"
Which actually meant first encounter would be at 5nm and somewhere between there and touchdown the 20kn loss would take place i.e. the 20kn loss would not necessarily be at 5nm.
The phraseology could be misleading to occasional visitors and I wonder, for the benefit of readers, if you can say if this is still the case.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Here and there....currently here.
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
3 Posts
Originally Posted by PAXboy
Following such an event - is an immediate return the only course of action?
Anyone know if this alleged tail-strike occurred on take off or landing? VS201 originates in Sydney
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HI guys, not the most pleasant experience, I can imagine.
We do fly in to VHHH and there's a lot of useful info written in the JEP already. If you pay attention you certainly can have a mental picture of what to expect. I'm currently on the 330 fleet and would be interested in comments of 346 skippers about the take off and landing techniques. Is that the same like 330? I've been told there's some kind of protection against over rotation built in. Is that somewhat true?
Thanks.
We do fly in to VHHH and there's a lot of useful info written in the JEP already. If you pay attention you certainly can have a mental picture of what to expect. I'm currently on the 330 fleet and would be interested in comments of 346 skippers about the take off and landing techniques. Is that the same like 330? I've been told there's some kind of protection against over rotation built in. Is that somewhat true?
Thanks.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
capt rat not yet they hav'nt spilled the dosh. also maybe an airbus job it's that bad
Alternate law does not come in until computers go down and certainly only until airborne.
Does this mean wooly jumper's will be protected by constant pressure extension checks on the main landing gear like the fragrant harbour guy's have been with their tail strike.
Alternate law does not come in until computers go down and certainly only until airborne.
Does this mean wooly jumper's will be protected by constant pressure extension checks on the main landing gear like the fragrant harbour guy's have been with their tail strike.