Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

VS tailstrike at VHHH

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

VS tailstrike at VHHH

Old 15th Jul 2006, 17:20
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cliffs
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
VS tailstrike at VHHH

Just heard from a friend that Virgin flight to London had a tailstrike at Hong Kong airport.

Anyone knows more about this incident?
flyer_spotter is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 19:29
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
VS201 HKG-LHR STA 05:25, ETA 20:45.
traveller5 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 19:37
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought Airbus's "envelope protection" prevented this type of incident?
glhcarl is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 19:48
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The wind seems to have been very gusty at the time - it could happen to anyone really..

RE: Envelope protection systems, the computers can only do so much to protect the aircraft before mother nature thwarts its efforts. The A340-600 is very long aircraft, and like the 777-300, is very prone to these type of events
ETOPS773 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 20:15
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To my limited knowledge most of these events are caused by wrong T/O performance calculations/flap settings.
hetfield is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 21:06
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hetfield, The crew will be delighted to hear that you've pinned down the cause so quickly.
forget is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 22:07
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hetfield
To my limited knowledge most of these events are caused by wrong T/O performance calculations/flap settings.
Also improper rotation techniques during gusty cross-wind conditions too. Careful attention is required for long fuselage type aircraft.
captjns is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 22:11
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Of course, Hong Kong is a lovely place too isn't it? It has never had any instances of shifting winds causing severe turbulence or flight incidents has it?

It is more than likely that environmental factors played some part IMHO.

I just cannot see three or maybe four PAIRS of eyes from an operating crew making and allowing a gross error to occur easily and to not be spotted.

Let's wait see.
stansdead is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 23:01
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CLK can be a sod for windshear and all sorts of weird stuff.The windshear warning system didn't warn you of mechanical shear off the airport platform.It just warned of shear from thunderstorms etc.
Very bad place to put an airport,but HK didn't have a lot of choice.
Ex HK ATC...
throw a dyce is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 23:26
  #10 (permalink)  
Just another number
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
throw a dyce

The WTWS has always included terrain induced alerts, but the integration of the LIDAR-based alerts into the WTWS now give terrain induced windshear alerts right down to the runways.

www.weather.gov.hk/publica/reprint/r566.pdf

Airclues

Last edited by Captain Airclues; 15th Jul 2006 at 23:38.
Captain Airclues is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2006, 23:51
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
>>I just cannot see three or maybe four PAIRS of eyes from an operating crew making and allowing a gross error to occur easily and to not be spotted.<<

That's what the USAF thought too, until proved quite wrong by the recent C-5 accident at Dover AFB.
Or, for that matter, the B747 MK accident in Canada.

It's called...not paying strict attention to what you are doing.
411A is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 08:20
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@forget
@captjns

Sorry, it's not my opinion to blame the crew involved in this particular incident. Sure, windshear could also have been a factor like many others e.g. wrong loadsheet/trim-setting etc.
hetfield is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 09:10
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: EGCC
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
e.g. wrong loadsheet/trim-setting etc.
indeed, the old days of flying little props, an incident happened precisely because of incorrect load sheet handed to flight deck at last minute, through the hatch. The aircraft ended with slight tail scrape damage. On examination the incorrect aircraft had been designated to the load sheet.

TVIR40 is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 09:16
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: far east
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hetfield
To my limited knowledge most of these events are caused by wrong T/O performance calculations/flap settings.
Don't forget landing gear strut under inflation can also be a cause. Its happened before. Best to wait and see I would venture.
preset is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 09:48
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by glhcarl
I thought Airbus's "envelope protection" prevented this type of incident?
For your info: when the aircraft is on the ground the flight control computers are in Direct Law. I seem to remember that the aircraft had to reach a radar altitude of 10 feet before the computers go in to Normal Law, with the protections that you refer to. It is 10 feet for landing when the computers go in to Direct Law.

Therefore on rotate the computers would be in Direct Law and the pilot can freely over-rotate as with any other aircraft.
Flap 5 is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 12:27
  #16 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,145
Received 62 Likes on 50 Posts
Following such an event - is an immediate return the only course of action?
PAXboy is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 13:39
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Generally, it depends whether the aircraft has a tail skid or not and how hard it was smashed down on to the runway. 343 and 345 does not have a tail skid, not sure if 346 does. If no tail skid then the aircraft should not be pressurized if a tail scrape has occured. If you don't return then it depends on how far you are happy to fly at 10,000ft.
ShockWave is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 14:42
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Flap 5
For your info: when the aircraft is on the ground the flight control computers are in Direct Law. I seem to remember that the aircraft had to reach a radar altitude of 10 feet before the computers go in to Normal Law, with the protections that you refer to. It is 10 feet for landing when the computers go in to Direct Law.

Therefore on rotate the computers would be in Direct Law and the pilot can freely over-rotate as with any other aircraft.
If what you say is true (and it may be as I know nothing about Airbus except what I have read) how can there Autoland system work?
glhcarl is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 14:46
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On the 320 the aircraft takes off in Direct law and then blends into normal law by about 150 RA. On landing the aircraft is in normal law all the way down unless system failures have caused the control laws to be degraded. In normal law the angle of attack protections only are disabled below 100RA to allow you to land. Autolands can only be conducted in normal law.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2006, 16:28
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,787
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
It's not normal law on landing during the final stages. At 50' the auto trim ceases and the pitch law is modified to flare law. The system memorises the attitude at 50' and this attitude becomes the reference for pitch control. As the aircraft descends through abouy 30', the system reduces the pitch attitude at a predetermined rate of 2 degrees down in 8 seconds.
Dan Winterland is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.