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

A340 of Iberia skids off runway in Quito

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

A340 of Iberia skids off runway in Quito

Old 11th Nov 2007, 02:12
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,281
...No, as composite structure absorb so much more energy, that while their final appearance may be more damaged than aluminium / metals, their ability to protect life is far, far greater.
well with all things being equal...they never are..

so let's not go there in this thread
lomapaseo is online now  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 03:42
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: wales (new south)
Posts: 80
Hi RTFI,
The thrust reverse would only deploy on command from the throttle, i.e. independent of speed. On the pictures I've seen so far, looks like the T/R's were stowed. Maybe a tire burst distracted the crew from deploying the thrust reversers? Would (could??) a tire burst result in the crew being distracted from deploying the thrust reversers? Does a tire burst result in significant asymmetry to the A/C roll down the runway? Although hard (impossible) to know at this stage, was the burst reported on the nose or main landing gear??
I guess that was my way of saying that the thrust reversers dont seem to be deployed without turning this into a spotters thread
I wouldn't be surprised at seeing CFRP debris. I'd imagine most of the gear doors (& belly fairing??) are CFRP and would be expected considering the damage we've already seen to the main landing gear.
Regards,
P2C
Im not surprised at CFRP debries, or its failure mode (shattering) on unstressed sections just wondering if you would get the same effect on stressed sections.

Last edited by RogerTangoFoxtrotIndigo; 11th Nov 2007 at 09:18.
RogerTangoFoxtrotIndigo is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 03:50
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Does the damage pattern to the No 1 & 2 engine pods not suggest the engines hit the ground during the latter stage of the reversers being stowed? (ie mid way down the pod, as the reverser cowl has been dragged forward, it has hit the ground).

Doesn't really look like a high speed overrun either does it? Will be interesting to find out how close it was to being a close shave rather than a very expensive day at the office
MikeAlphaTangoTango is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 04:08
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 474
Another advertisement for EMAS......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enginee...rrestor_system
Shore Guy is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 05:51
  #25 (permalink)  
PPRuNe supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,679
Anyone experienced in this field, does it appear to be a landing on RW35? Possible tailwind at that time?
SEQU 092200Z 17008KT
Any estimates for a ground speed? Elevation 9228
Dream Land is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 06:06
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 60
Only one escape slide, right into the number 3 meat grinder? Jeez
Fatfish is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 07:33
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 28
They seem to be almost reluctant to leave. Wonder if there was something special on the menu for dinner?
Innaflap is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 08:44
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dubai
Posts: 141
Another A340-600 landed at Quito on 31st August 2007and burst a couple of tyres with the pax deplaned on the runway !!

Twice in a short space of time !!

http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ain?id=3595457

link to first incident and pics

Any other A340-600 operators flying into Quito ?
southern duel is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 10:46
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: EU Airspace. Elev: 39000ft.
Posts: 86
Any estimates for a ground speed? Elevation 9228
As the TAS increases +- 5kts for every 1000 ft; considering TAS=GS with 0 wind. (5*9)=45, so add the correction to a normal app speed; say 140 kts. This would result in a TAS=185 kts on final approach, add or subtract the wind and ull get the ground speed. So I would say pretty damm fast. Note: were talking of GS and TAS here, IAS would still be similar as other landing elevations.
bluefalcon is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 14:37
  #30 (permalink)  
28L
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 118
Bluefalcon,
I think that's a bit of an overguess. Isn't the ballpark formula to add around 1.5% per 1000ft? I.e. an IAS of 140kt would give a TAS of around 160kt at 9000ft. Ish!
28L is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 14:42
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Don't forget that with a temperature of 12C at 9000ft it's well above ISA. From my experiences into Mexico City I don't think 180kts TAS is too wide of the mark.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 14:51
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern Europe
Age: 41
Posts: 137
Carnage Matey! wrote:
Don't forget that with a temperature of 12C at 9000ft it's well above ISA. From my experiences into Mexico City I don't think 180kts TAS is too wide of the mark.
Well...

- 9.000 ft
- 12 C
- 1024 hPa
- 140 kts IAS

Right?

That equals:
- 164 kts TAS
- 10.345 ft of Density Altitude
The Bartender is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 16:08
  #33 (permalink)  
AlwaysOnFire
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: **** you PPRUNE!
Age: 20
Posts: 226
Latest rumor is that Iberia is banned from Ecuador until they sort out the
A346 accident.
alexmcfire is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 16:19
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: RH base 36R
Posts: 33
Depending on a/c type (and, therefore, approach speed), weight and the amount of head/tailwind (often a bit of tailwind on rwy 35), the groundspeed can be very close to 200kts in my experience.

MoodyBlue
MoodyBlue is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 16:43
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: CGN
Age: 49
Posts: 107
Latest rumor is that Iberia is banned from Ecuador until they sort out the
A346 accident.
Only partially correct - they have been banned from Quito but not from Ecuador in general. They may continue to fly to Guyaquil.

Source (in Spanish): http://www.univision.com/contentroot...t/7327430.html
kingair9 is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 17:09
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,451
Looking at the photos on the link Aeroskid provided:

www.skyscrapercity.com

It would appear that the tyres on the detached bogey show damage resulting from severe aquaplaning and/or antiskid failure, with the tread layers worn through to the point of failure. Hmmm...
FullWings is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 17:56
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: near EDDF
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by FullWings
...It would appear that the tyres on the detached bogey show damage resulting from severe aquaplaning and/or antiskid failure, with the tread layers worn through to the point of failure. Hmmm...
I donīt think that it was aquaplaning.
Aquaplaning (Hydroplaning) looks like:

I suppose it was a problem with anti skid (Braking Flats):

But i only guess....
IFixPlanes is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 18:08
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wiltshire uk
Age: 58
Posts: 84
Red face

This aircraft has significant damage to its carbon fibre hull and that's the bits we can see....


Notice the scarring to the inner hull not just the floppy panels around the wing torsion box and undercart area - which fly off very easily- especially in -flight as the A380 test team can atest to..

How on earth are the repair team going to get the thing mended to the state it can fly to France for heavy fixing?

And I agrre, those tyres indicate locked wheels not aquaplaning
Slats One is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 18:35
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: EU Airspace. Elev: 39000ft.
Posts: 86
28L wrote:
I think that's a bit of an overguess. Isn't the ballpark formula to add around 1.5% per 1000ft? I.e. an IAS of 140kt would give a TAS of around 160kt at 9000ft. Ish!
ok,, then you mean that when you fly say at 39000, .78 mach, an IAS of 240 kts, your TAS is going to be 380 TAS? Where and What do you fly?
I dont have the exact formulas here and it depends on many factors including density and pressure altitude, but without braking into formulas and using a simple rule of thumb of 5kts per 1000 ft u get pretty close. Im not talking of exact figures here. I also have a good friend flying the A330 to Quito atleast twice a month and he has confirmed me that TAS 180 kts is more like it.
Cheers.
bluefalcon is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2007, 21:01
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by FullWings
...It would appear that the tyres on the detached bogey show damage resulting from severe aquaplaning and/or antiskid failure, with the tread layers worn through to the point of failure. Hmmm...

I donīt think that it was aquaplaning.
Aquaplaning (Hydroplaning) looks like:

I suppose it was a problem with anti skid (Braking Flats):

But i only guess....
Good pictures in your post showing the difference. However in this event the damage to the tires does not look like either one.... so the investigation continues
lomapaseo is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright Đ 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.