The TNT B737 EMA/Birmingham incident thread
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern Turkey
Age: 82
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jmc-man
I have also heard that a part or all of the left gear was in East Midlands, with the rest of the aircraft on the runway in Birmingham.
JMC-man
JMC-man
rts
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to Central News they couldn't land at STN due to fog, so it diverted to EMA but couldn't land there for some reason not specified but realised that they had a probelm with the gear, so diverted to BHX.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LGG
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Avman
As a matter of interest, don't cargo a/c have slides?
TND has a slide front right but not front left, twenty year old ex US Airways.
Aircraft going from LGG-STN, div to EMA when the gear was lowered it seemed that part of the right gear fell off, it was diverted to BHX because the possibility that part of the gear was on the runway and also the wx.
Well done to the crew for keeping it on the runway
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: EGNX country
Age: 68
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bits at EMA
I'm led to believe that the aircraft overshot EMA but left a wheel on the runway - along with minor damage to the runway surface ??? Good trick if you can do it.
I marvel that 'they' manage to have both STN and LTN carrying out runway work over the same months. You would have thought a little planning, communication and forethought might have been deployed to avoid this.
I imagine that a flight ecountering multiple diversions and a gear problem resulting in bending the airframe would be dauntingly stressful. Whatever the outcome I hope the crew enjoy a beer and a good nights sleep tonight.
Cheers
WWW
I imagine that a flight ecountering multiple diversions and a gear problem resulting in bending the airframe would be dauntingly stressful. Whatever the outcome I hope the crew enjoy a beer and a good nights sleep tonight.
Cheers
WWW
Moon Walker
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: the Moon
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got this of a belgium aviation forum (Luchtzak.be)
A/c was due for landing at EMA. During CatIII approach, autopilot was disengaged on short final. A/c slammed into runway, thereby ripping off RH LDG. The gear then slammed into the inboard flaps and aft fuselage.
Go-around initiated and after being airborne again, crew requested emergency landing at BHX due to weather conditions.
Neil
A/c was due for landing at EMA. During CatIII approach, autopilot was disengaged on short final. A/c slammed into runway, thereby ripping off RH LDG. The gear then slammed into the inboard flaps and aft fuselage.
Go-around initiated and after being airborne again, crew requested emergency landing at BHX due to weather conditions.
Neil
Originally Posted by Mike Jenvey
As far as I know, the only "European" airport that can foam a runway is Zurich. Istanbul also has the facility. Normally about 45 mins notice needed.
So, it's down to the RFF to lay down some foam/liquid if required.
So, it's down to the RFF to lay down some foam/liquid if required.
Foam laying vehicle (see "Titan" vehicle at page 21)
MD-87 EC-GRL Iberia, March 20th, 1999
Not sure about Zurich.
As far as I know, another European airport with foam laying capability is Athens:
Foam laying vehicle
B737-200 SX-BCF Olympic, September 20th, 1999
Runway foaming is discouraged on airports which are not specifically equipped. This FAA CERTALERT explains why (see paragraph 3).
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...a/cert0204.rtf
Whilst these things do not happen often - such incidents do cause large amounts of chaos which affect many thousands of people. Someone I flew with some time ago speculated whether somewhere such as Manston could be designated as a Master Diversion Airfield (as it once was in its RAF days) -
fully equipped for diversions for aircraft with technical problems which could affect runway use for some considerable time. Bearing in mind Manston's position the cost of such a facility could be borne by UK/France/Belgium/Holland - certainly the runway is long enough and the airfield could continue to be used for normal operations as required subject to its diversion status. OK - its all down to money I know but the simple logic seems sound to me.
fully equipped for diversions for aircraft with technical problems which could affect runway use for some considerable time. Bearing in mind Manston's position the cost of such a facility could be borne by UK/France/Belgium/Holland - certainly the runway is long enough and the airfield could continue to be used for normal operations as required subject to its diversion status. OK - its all down to money I know but the simple logic seems sound to me.
Thanks for the respective info guys. Beamer, that's all very well, but under the alleged cicumstances reported during their g/a at EMA, I guess the crew wanted to get down asap. BHX was only a few minutes away.
Originally Posted by Mike Jenvey
From RAF documents, only Zurich, Istanbul/Ataturk, Lusaka & Dhaka/Zia are listed as having dedicated runway foam capabilities. However, as aerolearner says, the Athens truck is very clearly labelled as a runway foam laying vehicle & the Geneva one looks very similar!!
Edit - I spoke with my company's handlings agents at both airports, the one at Geneva spoke directly with the RFF; they confirmed that runway foam was operational at Geneva/Istanbul. You learn something new everyday!!
Edit - I spoke with my company's handlings agents at both airports, the one at Geneva spoke directly with the RFF; they confirmed that runway foam was operational at Geneva/Istanbul. You learn something new everyday!!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
A bit more information... We reported the undercarriage to EMA tower (wheel tyre and strut). They were quite surprised. The undercarriage was in the grass between the Alpha taxiway and the runwa,y about 300m from TDZ - we were actually quite reluctant to tell ATC as we assumed that they knew already - but prudently we did.
The vis was about 350m rwy 27 and 250m rwy 09 at EMA at around 0540z, so any runway inspection may have missed the u/c in the grass. As we sit higher up we got a good view of the u/c.
This had been bugging us all day and on return to EMA for the 4th sector we had a good look at the grass with definite tyre marks in the grass - i.e. indicating that the aircraft had landed left of the runway before going around. The mayday reported gear and flap problems so I'll leave the flap problems to your imagination/knowledge of similar accidents...
Hope this info helps and that I've not made too many assumptions in the circumstances. Good luck to the pilots involved, hope they are ok.
RA
A bit more information... We reported the undercarriage to EMA tower (wheel tyre and strut). They were quite surprised. The undercarriage was in the grass between the Alpha taxiway and the runwa,y about 300m from TDZ - we were actually quite reluctant to tell ATC as we assumed that they knew already - but prudently we did.
The vis was about 350m rwy 27 and 250m rwy 09 at EMA at around 0540z, so any runway inspection may have missed the u/c in the grass. As we sit higher up we got a good view of the u/c.
This had been bugging us all day and on return to EMA for the 4th sector we had a good look at the grass with definite tyre marks in the grass - i.e. indicating that the aircraft had landed left of the runway before going around. The mayday reported gear and flap problems so I'll leave the flap problems to your imagination/knowledge of similar accidents...
Hope this info helps and that I've not made too many assumptions in the circumstances. Good luck to the pilots involved, hope they are ok.
RA
Banzai Eagle:
"Hopefully not a 13 hr night as there may be trouble if so".
It is highly unlikely but exactly why would that be a problem then? You are of course totally familiar with Belgian FTLs?
"Hopefully not a 13 hr night as there may be trouble if so".
It is highly unlikely but exactly why would that be a problem then? You are of course totally familiar with Belgian FTLs?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Stockport
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brings back memories of the DC-8 at Stansted that hit another aircraft back in 70`/80`s and diverted to Manchester with a large gash in the wing and part of the flaps missing ( from memory )
When you looked at the damage you wondered how it ever made it to Manchester
Can anyone remember this and fill in the gaps for me
G-I-B
When you looked at the damage you wondered how it ever made it to Manchester
Can anyone remember this and fill in the gaps for me
G-I-B
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is going from memory, but my recollection of the DC8 incident is a Philipines registered DC8 doing a low go around at Stansted in early morning fog, clipping the tail of a Flying Tigers DC8, and diverting to Manchester. I think it was around 1982/3. A look round the net didn't find anything, but looking in the DC-8 database I found, I think that the offending aircraft was RP-C830 of Intercontinental. It was certainly a surprise to a young spotter who pedalled out one morning and saw it at Manchester - seems a lifetime ago when you just went on spec, and not because a message on the web had flagged something worth seeing!