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

LH Another Hard Landing A340-600 KIAH

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

LH Another Hard Landing A340-600 KIAH

Old 15th Mar 2008, 18:37
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: south england
Posts: 395
I have flown 320 and 330 for 8 years. The 320 was a lovely machine. The 330 was also a great pleasure to fly. The only thing being, the autothrust on the 330 was not so good in gusty conditions. Nothing that adding 5 kts to Vapp couldn't solve, just saved it from going into Vls then adding boot fulls of power, which was a pain to manually fly (however I would always recommend autothrust out when hand flying as it is fun, and why I started flying in the first place).

However, I now fly the 757, which is so much fun. Both have their pros and con's. The only thing I would say, is that a new captain on the 757, I do enjoy having feedback as to what the f/o is doing, as opposed to the airbus, where I would have to see what the aircraft is doing.

Load 15's can be given for many reasons, not just for heavy landings. I have had them for greasers, but it has been closure rates that have issued the load 15.

Last edited by gatbusdriver; 15th Mar 2008 at 18:40. Reason: just read previous post
gatbusdriver is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2008, 18:38
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 290
Chris Scott, Thanks very much for post.

Every time there is an incident with an Airbus, the Boeing willy wagging brigade comes out of the woodworks.

Never read so many ill informed posts about the Airbus FBW system as in the last couple of weeks. Very scary to see that a fair amount of these posts are from people who claim that they fly the Airbus!.

Flown the minibus and the bigbus for over 5 years now and it's a lovely machine to operate. Yes, it has its problems but if you are PROPERLY trained than you know how to deal with them.
CEJM is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2008, 20:28
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 34
so much bull***t, Strongresolv

Have you ever flown an Airbus ?

This is not the plane, but a failure of the pilot.

I have flown the complete Airbus family except the A380 and 300+310.

Now I have to fly a MD11.. and let me tell you what the statistics are with hard landings.

The MD11 out beats the Airbus 340/330 by far more then 100 to 1 !! ( not taking into account the number of a/c in each fleet ! )

There havenīt been any hard landings in the past 7 years at Lufthansa A340 fleet as of my knowledge ( and I am well informed ! ), now suddenly there has been a series on the A340 fleet. Training knows about it and is working on it. The problem has been localized to a certain pilot group on the A340 and training has been changed already.
I can not say more to it. By the way, the hard landing is triggered on all Airbus and MD11 and I guess also the Boeing a/c ( if they have it ) at Lufthansa. There is also a very rigid FODA readout on every flight at Lufthansa.

The airbus is by far the superior airplane compared to the MD11 and the Airbus is definitely much better to land then a MD11 for example or a Boeing airplane.

Donīt ever blame it on the Airbus or the FBW System.
I agree on not using the autothrust system in gusty conditions and personally I think a autothrust approach is to be done with caution and knowledge about the dangers of it.

So please donīt beat up the Airbus, if you do not know the plane. If you just know the plane from hearing, ask the guys flying it or the ones who flew it.

I am sad to read so much bulls**t from Strongresolv on this thread in an aviation specialist forum.

Be happy I do not have a delete button.
Engine3firehandle is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 09:09
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 174
Various responses and more general statements...

Ok, here are some of my thoughts...:

Joetom,
> Airbus must have lots of data by now
As a "landing" is an incredibly complex actvivity, I suppose they still are in the process of data gathering. Think about parameters such as CofG, LW, crab angles, rate of descent, wind conditions, bouncing, shock absorber properties etc.

>new gear (landing) will be fitted in the future to reduce all the hard landing checks.
A new gear is under development, correct. We will see if it helps in this issue.

> Has anyone got the data of rate of hard landings for the 346?
AI says the "hard landing rate" is about ten (!) times higher than on the classics.

Admiral346,
When you say that the A346 is easy to land, I must believe it (being an engineer). However: Your feeling may show a disconnect between the pilot sensations in the cockpit and what the landing gear has to sustain at landing (Iīll come back to this in the last paragraph).

Fundi-Ya-Ndege,
correct, with the exceptions: Auto-print-out of the report 15 is activated in the software (not via pin programming) to the best of my knowledge, and it is not part of the PFR (although printed after the flight).

Engine3firehandle,
It is definitely not true that Lufthansa hasnīt had any hard landings on the A340 in the past seven years.
The hard landing report is not yet automatically made visible on the whole Lufthansa Airbus fleet (i. e. auto print out not activated); I understand A333/A343 are such fleets at the moment.
FODA review: Well... Most of the time two weeks behind, and algorithms different to the airplaneīs software. Weīll see how this route will develop...

Now, on a more general view:
Airbus has entered a different playing field with the A346 concerning hard landings. They had to realize in the past years, that the previous decision mode (flight crew to decide hard landing yes/no) is prone to misinterpretation, possibly to the length of the aircraft and the associated dampening of any loads into the landing gear until it has arrived in the cockpit. Secondly, the landing gear itself is not as robust as on other aircraft types, when you see it in relation to the aircraft and the loads of course.
If you consider for a moment that above said is true (not MY thoughts, but Airbusīthoughts), you donīt have a different choice than to develop another means than the pilotsī butts to detect loads that sooner or later will impair the safety of the aircraft. And I am not only talking about static strength here, but also about effects that you would see in the fatigue properties of the steel!
The software is certainly not top notch at the moment and needs improvement. But I can see that AI has found something that worries them (flight crew indications not being 100% reliable), and they need to do something to prevent ... well... landing gear collapses sooner or later.

Cheers,
J.V.
jettison valve is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 11:19
  #25 (permalink)  
Green Guard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
"17013G20KT KIAH 142053Z 20010G17KT "

And then comes a scare from the Bus !

After seeing other LH Bus landing technique few weeks ago,

all that one can say is that:

For a lousy Dick the design problems and a scare
will come even from a pubic hair,
especially when gusty and thick
 
Old 16th Mar 2008, 12:32
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Front right seat
Posts: 274
17013G20 realy isn't a very strong wind at all. I'm not sure what i'm missing here. I have flown various types from B727-200 to A320 series to B747-400 and now A340-200/300 and 600. It's rather easy to see from above posts that the anti-Airbus brigade that they suffer from a blatant lack of knowledge. It's not worth trying to explain anything technical to them. The closed mind mentality will make it a pointless exercise. We would still be flying Sopworth Camels if it were up to some.

There is a great post on the Tech-Log forum which explains the G/S mini function on the airbus(Norman Stanley Fletcher is the auther). New Airbus drivers will do well to read through this.
divinehover is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 12:53
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Around the World
Posts: 142
The airbus is by far the superior airplane compared to the MD11 and the Airbus is definitely much better to land then a MD11 for example or a Boeing airplane.
I am sad to read so much bulls**t from you, too, Engine3firehandle
Burger Thing is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 13:03
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: far
Age: 69
Posts: 22
if you use high power like TOGA, the plane will enter in GO AROUND mode in any condition, and you PNF need extra work to take this plane from this mode,
Only if flaps lever is out of zero.
useless is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 13:41
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: middle of nowhere
Posts: 348
Engine3firehandle

Have you ever flown an Airbus ?
Yes

This is not the plane, but a failure of the pilot.
No, both! But that's MY opinion......

Now I have to fly a MD11.. and let me tell you what the statistics are with hard landings.
Great Cockpit the MD11, ain't it? And, i see, you're telling us already .....

The MD11 out beats the Airbus 340/330 by far more then 100 to 1 !!
Okey doke. Where is that statistic? If it's yours, then good enough.
It takes a pilot to land the MD11, agreed. But 100 to 1!! Ridiculous, - or you should quit aviation for good. I've flown both and my personal statistic is 0 to 0 (yeahhhhh, i'm proud of it). But i felt more in control in the MD11.
Gretchenfrage is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 14:19
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 1
It takes a pilot to land the MD11, agreed. But 100 to 1!! Ridiculous, - or you should quit aviation for good. I've flown both and my personal statistic is 0 to 0 (yeahhhhh, i'm proud of it). But i felt more in control in the MD11.
Well said, same for me!
fly4711 is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 14:45
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: DUBAI
Posts: 16
MD-11

Agreed. I also flew the Mad Dog and loved it; after all it is an airplane and I love all airplanes. Flew the others too and loved them for all their individual nuances. How boring would it be if they were all the same? Nothing new to look forward to.
CAT II is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 18:32
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Blighty (Nth. Downs)
Age: 73
Posts: 2,083
We don't know the incident W/V

Hi Chaps,

Forgive my intrusion into your fascinating MD11/A340 argument, but just want to point out that the moderate winds quoted in Green Guard's #25 are not for the probable day of the incident, so they are irrelevant.

When this Thread was started on the evening of the 14th, I dug out the strongest winds for the 13th and 14th, on the assumption that the hard landing had happened in the previous 36 hours. [I didn't have access to anything older.] I then posted them immediately (post #2).

As you can see from JuniorMan's #4, the incident seems to have taken place on or before Mar 11th.

Sorry not to be more helpful.
Chris Scott is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 23:21
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ***
Posts: 350
@jettison valve:

What I said was that I found the A346 the EASIEST to land out of all the busses I have been on, not just easy to land. It surely requires it's own technique to do it right, and my impression is purely subjective.

But one still feels, if a landing was hard or soft, despit of the length of it. It's called experience, and after having spent years on whatever you fly, you can judge it. You also get the Flight Attendants bitching at you on the way to the hotel.

Like I said before, I don't believe there is any design flaw at all responsible for hard landings on an A346. What might be an issue is doing tight turns on the ground, without the main gear assisting like on a 747, but that is a different story...

And the most difficult plane to land for me is tha CRJ200, light like a leaf being played by the autumn winds, negative pitch because of no slats and being flown way too fast... a challenge every time...

Nic
Admiral346 is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2008, 23:38
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 174
Admiral346,
Although your name is quite impressive , I nevertheless may object.
It has been clearly stated by Airbus that they see a disconnect between the pilotsī sensations and what the airframe / landing gear has to sustain.

This falls in line with line maintenance observations: The flight crew walks off the airplane after a "smooth" landing (from their point of view!); however, FODA has come along a few days or weeks later citing a hard landing. Plus, we know for a fact that (from a technical point of view justified) report 15s have "disappeared" from the cockpit; and DFDR data have indicated a hard landing iaw the AMM in the past, while the flight crew insists itīs been a "normal" landing.
The length of the fuselage certainly is a factor, as well as the rocking bogie concept that may mask some of the loads from the pilotsī "sensors".

So again: AI is worried about A346 hard landings, and I understand their concerns.

Tight turning radii and the 300M stell mess doesnīt help boosting my confidence in this landing gear.

Cheers,
J.V.
jettison valve is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2008, 00:04
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Valencia
Age: 44
Posts: 37
Iīm sorry if I hurt the feelings of the bus lovers.

But this is what I feel and see.

Chris Scott, I appreciate your coments. You were right on the bullseye, my beloved B757 was pashed out, and I started as B727 driver, so you may imagine what are my throughts about the bus.

Also, Iīm a A320 TRI against my will, I resigned since my appointment, but in this part of the world things works this way, and I have not other choice than continue or go to the unemployment office.

I recognize that some of the bus lovers have a lot of knowledge and tech info to defend the plane, but other have nothing, because they havent flown anything than the C172 and the A320. If you have tasted planes like the B727 and B757, you would know what Iīm talking about.

Iīm not talking shit, some of you feel my points of view like hits, because you only see the pros of your aircraft, without even want to look at the cons until is to late.

The Airbus is not the worlds worst aircraft, but is far from being one of the best. We, pilots, always want to feel like as we drive the best aircraft in the market. Now is the first time Iīm not feeling in this way. I feel that I am a Ford Fiesta driver. May be, this is happening to me because I come from the 727 and I fly a lot without the AP.
Iīm trying, but Iīm not finding the point to the bus. My beloved 757 and 727 were real sports cars.

Iīm sorry, but I become a pilot because I liked to fly, not managing the path of an aircraft.

Dont blame on me.

Last edited by Strongresolve; 17th Mar 2008 at 00:15.
Strongresolve is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2008, 03:23
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 32
And the most difficult plane to land for me is tha CRJ200, light like a leaf being played by the autumn winds, negative pitch because of no slats and being flown way too fast... a challenge every time...
Admiral346,

Forget what the book says about going to flight idle in the CRJ200 at 50 ft... Just prior to the 100 ft call, slam the thrust levers to flight idle, trim in the flare and it lands like a dream! However, I doubt you will leave the A340 for the CRJ...
Walker Texas Ranger is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2008, 03:32
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 67
Danger

Strongresolve

You are entitled to your opinion however, it is a great worry that you are a TRI on an aircraft that you obviously know very little about and from your comments have no wish to learn. How can you teach on the aircraft when you know so very little about it. Before joining my present company I flew the B757 and 767 and they were very nice aircraft. In my present company I fly the A330/340-300 and 340-600 as a TRI/E so I feel qualified to comment. I rarely comment on PPRuNe now as some of the comments and threads are sadly lacking in Professional Pilot comment.

The A/THR never will work like a conventional throttle, and if you use high power like TOGA, the plane will enter in GO AROUND mode in any condition, and you PNF need extra work to take this plane from this mode, and go back on CRUISE or CLB mode, performing unlogical actions in the MCDU, that in other aircraft are not necesary.
Amazing statement from a TRI. Heard of the little red button on the side-stick and the A/THR disconnect buttons. I could then go on to explain in great detail how to recover the various situations quickly however, once the A/P and A/THR are out YOU put the aircraft where YOU want it and re-engage modes.

Back to topic for all the "Airbus Bashers" it is not the aircraft that has a problem more a lack of understanding or dare I say it training / ability due lack of training on the handling pilot. What you cannot do in the final 2-300 feet is input large corrections in pitch / ROD as you will set yourself up for a hard landing. Remember the auto-trim? It stops at 100' so if you have set up this high ROD you will have insufficient pitch authority to reduce the ROD without trimming the tail-plane - not a good idea in the flare. Remember the Iberia A346 "crash" landing in Quito, high ROD set up (plus high altitude) in final stages to go for the touchdown point. As there is the problem you say, well try doing it in a 747 and you might find you have the same results - these are BIG aircraft and have inertia!! Comparing the A346 to a A320 / B757 or B727 is apples and oranges.

One of the major problems seems to be that some pilots actually believe that the "Airbus" will save them no matter how bad a pilot they are - wrong. It is an AIRCRAFT and you still have to fly the aircraft. Normally through the A/P but if the automatics are not doing what you want or expect disconnect and FLY the aircraft. Goes for a Boeing as well, I first heard "whats it doing now" on a Boeing flight deck!!!
electricjetjock is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2008, 09:06
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Does anybody know what really happened to the LH A346 in IAH and when?
Also, LH has just had a really bad landing in HAM (A320) damaging the winglet. Shouldn't there be a thorough discussion of limiting operations in strong winds. That may not apply to the Houston case, but certainly does to HAM and many other incidents...
FlyingMoritz is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2008, 09:30
  #39 (permalink)  
NWT
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 86
Some of the airlines I deal with have the automatic cockpit print out of the report 15, as well as an alert/print out (varies company to company) in their Maintenance control office (or whatever its called at that airline) that way if the report in the cockpit is not produced (printer failure etc) then it is still generated and maintenance are alerted. Don't forget that the reports are designed to be generated at below the max limits. The landing maybe have felt OK to the crew, but by looking at the report we can tell if the limits have been exceeded, ie depending on the roll angle etc. More often than not if the Maint control are on the ball, the report can be assessed before the aircraft arrives at the gate even, and this info passed to maintenance at the aircraft. I believe Airbus change some f/ctrl software/response etc to deal with the large number of hard landings. I am not anti airbus at all, but it is the -600 that I have done more heavy landing inspections on since they were introduced than I have on any other type in my 38 year career. This may be because it has the best recording/reporting system....?
NWT is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2008, 19:13
  #40 (permalink)  
F4F
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: on the Blue Planet
Posts: 255
Strongresolve thanks for sharing your opinion and experience about flying the Airbus.
As you will have discovered by now, open criticism of an aircraft brand, whichever it is, will be met by strong reactions of its supporters. I once had a go as well and let you be judge, just have a look under http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=300959

What about the reasons one may ask?
First, and it is of great pity to the community of real professional pilots, these Flight Deck Forums are infected by a majority of simmers, spotters, armchair pilots, wannabe to never be, PPLs and other aviation bugs. Unfounded, "make the post meter rise", ridiculous, unqualified posters use my time, your time and the moderator's time.
Second, as is more the case in this thread, what could be an open and honest communication is lost against aggressiveness of the superior type. Some answers posted here are by people that do know nothing else but the Bus. Did the direct entry CTC or whatever other school, fly the Bus as direct entry pilot from another airline such as SN or else. Xthousand hours Bus flying, never flew another craft but the C150 and Seneca, how can one analyze the pro and con of the Bus if you don't know else
Third, by reading the posts of a few of the Airbus supporters here makes me suspect them to be EADS employees


live 2 fly 2 live
F4F is offline  

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.