Airbus - Spar Crack
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: SEA (or better PAE)
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, to summarize we do not know what is the real cause of this fitting cracking, right?
Since probably it was that hardest of all the hard landings seen for A320 one can assume that Airbus stress would be very cautious as to let the a/c go, even on a ferry flight!
Whoever is the (usual) repair facility for the operator it is still better to do it on the site, with Airbus fleet support guys on the spot.
These crack are ugly and I sincerely hope that A320 won't be as unlucky as CRJ 700 with its MLG trunion crack issues.
Cheers
Since probably it was that hardest of all the hard landings seen for A320 one can assume that Airbus stress would be very cautious as to let the a/c go, even on a ferry flight!
Whoever is the (usual) repair facility for the operator it is still better to do it on the site, with Airbus fleet support guys on the spot.
These crack are ugly and I sincerely hope that A320 won't be as unlucky as CRJ 700 with its MLG trunion crack issues.
Cheers
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Top Bunk
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smudge, With the greatest respect,after20+ years of flying airliners long and shorthaul I'm underwhelmed by this 'technological marvel'. I've seen more tech snags,systems failed on this type (320) in an very short period of time than on most other types I've flown.But more serious is the total failure to design a cockpit with any concept of ergomomics. Look at most of the accidents that have occured and perhaps you might see where I'm coming from. Cheers!
Last edited by 45989; 15th Dec 2006 at 08:15. Reason: grammar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Top Bunk
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well there's no contest bout Renaults!!! Its the flying ones that bother me! Have to agree though,regardless of who manufactured them, well maintained means less probs on a daily basis.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have GOT to be sh*tting me! Have you ever seen a 737 or 747 cockpit in comparison to an A320? The 'bus is a dream in comparison.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Alloway
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
early retirement
I love the Airbus A300-600, I got to retire early from the money I got to fly as a flight mech to bring them back to Riyadh from remote areas in the midde east.
I was not required to fly on Boeings as they never really has complete system failures like we had on the Bus. I agree with Smudge all A/C will be better off with TLC from all.
Keep them going boys!!!!
I was not required to fly on Boeings as they never really has complete system failures like we had on the Bus. I agree with Smudge all A/C will be better off with TLC from all.
Keep them going boys!!!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Merry old England
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FCA airbus; poss severe damage
There is an FCA airbus in the MYT hangar at manchester. The story is, its in for exploratory repairs after an extremely hard landing (over 12g was mentioned).
Any news on this, is it true, exagerated, bo****ks.
just being nosey.
DB,
Any news on this, is it true, exagerated, bo****ks.
just being nosey.
DB,
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: US/EU
Age: 71
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Charlotte and NYC
Age: 45
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12 G!!!!!
I understand the Rumorous nature of PPrune...but I would have thought that it would take less than that to break the airframe in pieces, yet obviously that did not happen here or this thread would have been two pages long already. Perhaps I under-estimated the strength. Does anyone know what the design parameters are for landing loads?
I understand the Rumorous nature of PPrune...but I would have thought that it would take less than that to break the airframe in pieces, yet obviously that did not happen here or this thread would have been two pages long already. Perhaps I under-estimated the strength. Does anyone know what the design parameters are for landing loads?
Last edited by FlyVMO; 17th Dec 2006 at 17:25. Reason: spelling
Psychophysiological entity
I'm not an airframes expert, but if the detector logs transitory shockwaves, they could easily pass 12g with no real damage. If the total mass of the aircraft had to be decelerated from some ugly rate of decent, then 12g would be...erm, a tad embarrassing.
It's all about how long the g force is sustained.
It's all about how long the g force is sustained.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes a thomas cook
Apparently very heavy landing ,then took off had gear indication warnings went to manchester had a sensor change-nil fix then found damage at the top of the leg.Damage quite severe.
Apparently very heavy landing ,then took off had gear indication warnings went to manchester had a sensor change-nil fix then found damage at the top of the leg.Damage quite severe.
Last edited by rubber jonny; 17th Dec 2006 at 18:52.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Merry old England
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SMUDGECAT, as an engineer I respect your opinion more than anyones when it comes to this thread. Have you heard anything more about this?
Heard more very recently from an employee that the aircraft could be an insurance write off. What LOOSERIVETS wrote seems to be true, an airframe engineer pal of mine has been quoted from another engineer pal (I know this sounds very 'freind of a friend' stuff; but I swear they are licensed engineers) that the airframe is potentially knackered beyond financial repair.
Heard more very recently from an employee that the aircraft could be an insurance write off. What LOOSERIVETS wrote seems to be true, an airframe engineer pal of mine has been quoted from another engineer pal (I know this sounds very 'freind of a friend' stuff; but I swear they are licensed engineers) that the airframe is potentially knackered beyond financial repair.
I'm not an airframes expert, but if the detector logs transitory shockwaves, they could easily pass 12g with no real damage. If the total mass of the aircraft had to be decelerated from some ugly rate of decent, then 12g would be...erm, a tad embarrassing.
It's all about how long the g force is sustained.
It's all about how long the g force is sustained.
It was 3.5g
A320 Hard Landing
Had a search here to see if there was already a topic about this on PPrune but couldn't find a thread so forgive me if it is old hat.
I understand there is a Thomas Cook A320 in the MYT hangar at MAN that had suffered a hard landing. I heard that there were an awful lot of popped rivets and that it had been in the equivalent of a drop from a hundred feet. I understand it is basically a right off but Airbus have got their crash team re-building it so it doesn't become another Airbus hull loss statistic.
Any one got any more info and also how it happened? Any Piccies?
I understand there is a Thomas Cook A320 in the MYT hangar at MAN that had suffered a hard landing. I heard that there were an awful lot of popped rivets and that it had been in the equivalent of a drop from a hundred feet. I understand it is basically a right off but Airbus have got their crash team re-building it so it doesn't become another Airbus hull loss statistic.
Any one got any more info and also how it happened? Any Piccies?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Box Hill or Bust
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks
Thanks for the thread link guys. A hard landing at BRS they say. Funny that. You could have the same topic added to the thread about BRS.
It always amazes me that what is quite obviously a right off and uneconomic to repair, does gets repaired to keep the statistics sweet.
Still wondering if anyone knows what/why/how it happened? I know the Airbus "Golden Rules" and if necessary treat it like an ordinary airplane, but it isn't. The instinctive thing to do on a Boeing/normal airplane if one suddenly has a high vs above the runway at low alt, say 30ft is to hold the attitude and add power because thats what makes normal airplanes go up and down. On the Airbus, the instinct is to pull back on the stick, not to shove the levers out of the climb gate. The auto thrust will catch up and add power to keep the speed while at this point shouting "retard, retard" at you. Meanwhile, especially in an A321, you have had another tail scrape. I do of course stress that according to Airbus their tail scrape rate is as expected! What does that mean?
Anyway, to keep on topic, thats why I wondered if anyone knew a bit more of what happened.
It always amazes me that what is quite obviously a right off and uneconomic to repair, does gets repaired to keep the statistics sweet.
Still wondering if anyone knows what/why/how it happened? I know the Airbus "Golden Rules" and if necessary treat it like an ordinary airplane, but it isn't. The instinctive thing to do on a Boeing/normal airplane if one suddenly has a high vs above the runway at low alt, say 30ft is to hold the attitude and add power because thats what makes normal airplanes go up and down. On the Airbus, the instinct is to pull back on the stick, not to shove the levers out of the climb gate. The auto thrust will catch up and add power to keep the speed while at this point shouting "retard, retard" at you. Meanwhile, especially in an A321, you have had another tail scrape. I do of course stress that according to Airbus their tail scrape rate is as expected! What does that mean?
Anyway, to keep on topic, thats why I wondered if anyone knew a bit more of what happened.
''It always amazes me that what is quite obviously a right off and uneconomic to repair, does gets repaired to keep the statistics sweet.''
Care to show us where it says airbus repair to 'keep the statistics sweet'?
How do you know its BER? Are you a structures engineer?
The reason I query you're assessment is that I've spent some time in engineering and spares supply, and was suprised recently when my brother, a repair designer and structural engineer took me to see an aircraft.
One engine was shock loaded, outer wings bent rippling on all sorts of panels. The aircraft looked fit for breaking, from my experience I thought its a write off. Apparently not, there was sufficient residual value in the airframe, and hours on it to make a repair, whilst shockingly expensive, the better option. I suspect thats whats happening here.
Care to show us where it says airbus repair to 'keep the statistics sweet'?
How do you know its BER? Are you a structures engineer?
The reason I query you're assessment is that I've spent some time in engineering and spares supply, and was suprised recently when my brother, a repair designer and structural engineer took me to see an aircraft.
One engine was shock loaded, outer wings bent rippling on all sorts of panels. The aircraft looked fit for breaking, from my experience I thought its a write off. Apparently not, there was sufficient residual value in the airframe, and hours on it to make a repair, whilst shockingly expensive, the better option. I suspect thats whats happening here.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Queensland, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts