ONUR AIR A321 TAILSTRIKE -- AMS!

[ALLDAYDELI]

Another Netherlands incident.
Reports just in of an Onur Air (Turkey) A321 tail strike on a "difficult landing" at RTM or AMS this afternoon. Anyone have any detailed news on this?

[TopBunk]

AMSTERDAM SCHIPO - EHAM - AMS
METAR: EHAM 181555Z 04008KT 360V080 CAVOK 30/14 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHAM 181525Z 04007KT 020V090 CAVOK 31/13 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHAM 181455Z 04009KT 010V080 CAVOK 31/13 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHAM 181425Z 02008KT 340V050 CAVOK 31/13 Q1021 NOSIG=
EHAM 181355Z 03008KT 330V080 CAVOK 31/13 Q1021 NOSIG=
EHAM 181325Z 05007KT 360V110 CAVOK 31/12 Q1021 NOSIG=
EHAM 181255Z 05005KT CAVOK 31/12 Q1021 NOSIG=
EHAM 181225Z 07003KT CAVOK 31/13 Q1021 NOSIG=
EHAM 181155Z 05007KT CAVOK 30/13 Q1021 NOSIG=


ROTTERDAM - EHRD - RTM
METAR: EHRD 181555Z 05006KT 360V100 CAVOK 32/13 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHRD 181525Z 04007KT 360V090 CAVOK 32/13 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHRD 181455Z 07005KT 010V140 CAVOK 32/11 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHRD 181425Z VRB05KT CAVOK 32/12 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHRD 181355Z 13006KT 050V210 CAVOK 32/11 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHRD 181325Z 04006KT 010V090 CAVOK 32/11 Q1020 NOSIG=
EHRD 181255Z 10005KT 040V180 CAVOK 32/11 Q1021 NOSIG=
EHRD 181225Z 10007KT 050V150 CAVOK 31/10 Q1021 NOSIG=
EHRD 181155Z 12005KT 060V190 9999 NSC 31/12 Q1021 NOSIG=


Those howling gales get me every time......and as for those low cloud bases making for little time to spot the runway - they suck

[Max Angle]

Perhaps they had a tech. problem of some sort, give em' some slack till we know.

[Flying Torquewrench]

Happened in RTM.

[gwillie]

http://www.expatica.com/source/site_...g+at+Rotterdam

[Trim Runaway]

Hmm, Max Angle indeed....

[DownIn3Green]

Hmmm...

Another Airbus...

[TopBunk]

The original poster asked for any details - I thought the weather was relevant - in case you didn't get it, the rest was sarcasm.

Cut them some slack - absolutely

[electricjetjock]

Downin3Green

It will have nothing to do with it being an Airbus,in the final stages it is just like any other aircraft.

Have you ever flown an Airbus? I have flown the 757 and 767 and presently having a great time flying the 330 / 343 /346 and found / find all of them to be good aircraft. can we have some "grown up" comments rather than this silly Boeing v Airbus tosh.

If you are not doing an autoland it is down to the pilots to land with whatever system failures they may or may not have in the existing met conditions with the performance available.

[babemagnet]

it was nobodies fault it was the ASPHALT!

[Agaricus bisporus]

Surely the worrying thing is the Who, not the What?

Weren't Onur Air banned in the EU last year for serious operational deficiencies?

This won't help their case at all.

[xetroV]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

elec jock...come on we are allowed to have an opinion. over 20 yrs flying boeing and airbus....737/2/3/4/5, 747/2 , a330/2/3 a320/1........currently on a320/1.....give me a boeing anyday.

Very well, but what does this opinion have to do with the incident at hand? The comment "Another Airbus" suggests that a tailstrike during landing is an Airbus-specific problem, which is plainly untrue. It is a problem that's more pronounced for aircraft with long-fuselages like the 737-900, 777-300, DC-8-61, or A346, but we knew that already, didn't we?

-xetroV (flown A, B and McD and I love and hate 'em all).

[Earl]

Waiting on the reports from this one.
This company landed gear up in Medina KSA a few years past 2003 if my memory serves me correct, managed to get the aircraft back into the air after touchdown at Medina, they also taxied into a light pole on another aircraft while flying under contract for Saudia.
I dont know the airbus so I cannot comment on why the crew did not know the gear was not down and locked, must have been many failures or just warnings ignored as the first knowledge the crew had of this was by ATC by then it was too late.
Hopefully they have cleaned up the past problems.
Maybe this was not the operators fault, only time will tell.

[vapilot2004]

Very well, but what does this opinion have to do with the incident at hand? The comment "Another Airbus" suggests that a tailstrike during landing is an Airbus-specific problem, which is plainly untrue. It is a problem that's more pronounced for aircraft with long-fuselages like the 737-900, 777-300, DC-8-61, or A346, but we knew that already, didn't we?

-xetroV (flown A, B and McD and I love and hate 'em all).

This aircraft would have had to have a pitch angle greater than 15.5 or about 14 degrees oleo compressed. As I recall, once below 50' RA, the Airbus protection system enters flare mode which uses the current pitch attitude as a 'zero' reference for the flare and touchdown. Does the system use the pitch angle regardless of whether it is outside of the ground clearance limits ?

Regarding the now-missing quote, perhaps what the original poster was referring to is the Airbus flight envelope protection system and its (often wrongly) assumed ability to avoid a tailstrike during landing.

[A4]

From memory, A321 hits its tail at 9.7° with the oleo compressed - so it is easy to hit if you try to "grease it" or pull back to arrest a high rate of descent. Can be a problem if you fly both A320 and A321. Previous company SOP required PF to state a/c type on short final - just to remind yourself.

A4

[WindSheer]

Saw a lovely onur air a310 land at BRS last night. The sector is normally operated by an a321............

[WATABENCH]

Didnt Onur have one of FCA's old 321's G-OOAJ or G-OOAI? I'm sure one went to Onur and the other went to LTE, or am I just imagining things

[Avman]

Although Watabench I don't see the relevance to this tailstrike thread, none of Onur's A321 are ex FCA. AI & AJ went to LTE and Aigle Azur.

[captphil]

captphil

Saw the ONUR A321 land at LPL 3 days ago....really heavy landing.... nearly took the right eng pod out. Is the A320 family a twitchy sort of aircraft?

[Green Guard]

Obviously
captphil
belongs to a family of a twitchy sort of posters