Lufthansa MD-11 Mexico City

[Huck]

Uh oh, VCV have all the NDT equipment, they are able to determine whether the aircraft is worthy of return to service. Not a good sign.

Judging by the photograph, we'll buy it. I guarantee. We converted two more this year already....

[Contingency]

Some years ago I was riding home from a trip overseas in an MD11. The trip was uneventful until the landing. It was a late afternoon arrival in winter after an eight hour flight. The sun was low on the horizon, the ceiling and visibility were unlimited and the temperature was probably around zero Celsius. A great day for flying because even the oldest airplanes seem to perform well.

I was sitting in the passenger cabin in a window seat in the first few rows. No wind was evident, at least not a crosswind. Conditions were smooth on the descent and approach. I had a copy of the flight plan on my lap and I was looking at my digital wrist watch counting down the seconds to see how close our landing time would be to the planned trip time. It's something I do to occupy the time. I was probably unusually attentive at that stage of the flight because of my unofficial log keeping. As we came over the approach lights I noticed that the aircraft was pretty much level - at least that was my impression from looking out the side window. We continued down the runway in what seemed to be unusually flat attitude. As we approached what I began to think was "too far down this runway," I was expecting that the bottom was just going to drop out of the airplane at any moment with a hard landing but we just coasted and coasted and coasted in this level attitude. Just at the point when I thought that "someone has to do something because this does not feel quite right," the nose of the aircraft just dropped out of the sky heading straight for the runway. The aircraft did not drop, the main gear did not drop, the nose wheel just dropped. Being up front and looking out the side window it was very evident that we were pitching down while only metres off the runway. I don't think that the pilot deliberately pitched the nose down but who am I to say. It felt like the tail stopped flying but the wing was still working and the aircraft just rotated nose down with a centre of rotation through the wing. I was convinced that we were landing nose-wheel first for whatever reason. But then before the nose wheel hit the ground, someone took control of the airplane and we launched out of there like a C130 on JATO. The airplane literally leaped off the ground thanks to the cold temperature and mostly depleted fuel supply I guess. The second landing was completely normal in all respects and reminiscent of what I had experienced on dozens of previous flights. Whoever took control to salvage the situation that day was definitely in charge of that aircraft on the go-around. Years after the fact, watching the video of the FEDEX MD11 touching down nose first in Narita, I wonder what really happened that day.

[411A]

....for most A320 pilots getting a MD11 rating would be a silly choice career-wise

Agreed...they would more than likely scare the cr*p out of the instructor/check pilot during base/line training...

OTOH, I can think of one A320 pilot that would really like to get his hands on some bigger iron (MD-11 would be a nice fit)...he is very adapt and willing to learn.
He wouldn't have to go very far afield either....he already works for LH.

[Doors to Automatic]

Contingency - was an announcement made to explain this unusual landing and why you went around?

[DBate]

Rest assured, for most A320 pilots getting a MD11 rating would be a silly choice career-wise.

and

Agreed...they would more than likely scare the cr*p out of the instructor/check pilot during base/line training...

Well, I made that 'silly' choice. And looking back, I have to say that I would make that exact same choice over and over again. And I did not have ANY problems during base/line training - even though I came from the A320. In my oppinion switching types - and espeacially manufacturers - is a good thing to do when you have the possibility. You earn some new insights on different philosophies and thus broaden your horizon.

'Gretchenfrage' said something very true - it all comes down to proper training. And it is not only the training you receive when converting to the MD11, but also the one you received throughout your carreer; starting in flight school, and then further on to your first 'real' typerating. It is the fundament for your flying skills.

Of course those skills need to be used on the line. It is far to easy (on any type, be it A or B) to let the Autopilot do the work. But that is basically up to oneself. Personally I made it a habbit during my time on the A320 to fly at least every 2nd approach raw data. Sure enough, your companys SOPs need to grant you that right (one other thing that might lead to a degredation of flying skills nowadays).

So basically proper training is the key!

Uh oh, VCV have all the NDT equipment, they are able to determine whether the aircraft is worthy of return to service. Not a good sign.

The plane was scheduled to be parked at VCV anyway two weeks after the incident. The plan still is to have it reactivated at the end of next year or in 2011 - depending on the market situation. So as mentioned before, it will get a provisional repair at MEX to grant a ferry flight to VCV. Then a repair team from Boeing will do the rest.

Regards,
DBate

[Contingency]

..... was an announcement made to explain this unusual landing and why you went around?

There was a short statement but all I understood because of the poor audio quality was the word "wind."

[CONF iture]

Originally Posted by Gretchenfrage

By the way, in a very, very old thread I have described my plane I would design, and guess what? It would be equipped with a sidestick, one however featuring feedback from AP and collegue. Small but decisive difference trainingwise.

+1 !

Decisive difference for the training but also for the everyday operation.

[stilton]

Control feedback is vital as are moving autothrottles.

[WrldWide]

contol feedback IS vital as is moving auto throttles. The only airplane I have flown in the last 14 years is the MD11, averaging 50-60 landings per year. There have been alot of good comments and some not very good comments with regard to the stability and hard landing issue. The aircraft is fine if you fly it per the manufacturers specifications. Out side of that, with any manufacturers airframe, one becomes a test pilot.

There are other threads on this forum that refer to other aircraft types having hard landings, not sure why there is such focus on the MD11. All aircraft can have a hard landing.

The MD11 is a flyers airplane, even though the engineers tried to make it a monitored airplane.

BTW, the only time I use autopilot/autothrottle below 10k is if it is CAT II or III and requires coupled approach. I feel like every other approach is a chance to stay proficient.
Cheers.

[Pugilistic Animus]

It's not the type in most cases it's the pilot,

honestly, I've always wanted to evaluate[never touched an 'MD' product though], specifically, the MD-11,... but a badly handled Airbus is just as nasty as a badly handled 707 or for that matter a badly handled Cub

you can't whisper sweet nothings in an aircraft's ear and Hope for the best you have to know what your doing, just as 411A always so wrongly says

I guess it all depends if you want to go on autopilot or manually -Proceeding Direct to the cemetery

PA

[Huck]

the only time I use autopilot/autothrottle below 10k is if it is CAT II or III and requires coupled approach. I feel like every other approach is a chance to stay proficient.

That's the secret.

No reason not to, except laziness. Unless it's a complicated approach or a high-density/high terrain environment.

[DozyWannabe]

It would be equipped with a sidestick, one however featuring feedback from AP and collegue. Small but decisive difference trainingwise.

+1 !

Control feedback is vital as are moving autothrottles.

contol feedback IS vital as is moving auto throttles

Four legs good, two legs baa-aaa-d.

And always the same three or four people.

*le sigh*.

There's a reason force feedback can be a bad idea, and we've been over it before. Remember the cross-wired sidestick that provided bank angle in reverse? Now - imagine what would have happened if the co-pilot had tried to take over (as he did in the real life incident), but the force-feedback was wrenching the stick the opposite way? Moving autothrottles are no panacea either, as three late Turkish pilots discovered on that 733 recently.

PA is right - it's about the pilot, not the type.

[Gretchenfrage]

And always the same three or four people

Mocking the authors doesn't make the design flaw go away.

Feedback is a integral part of human's interface. Taking it away for pilots displays a lack of understanding of human basics.

Just an add on: The initial set up on the MD11 was never as screwed up as it ended. Due to a lot of handling problems of pilots (yes, even the first generation had its problems ....) the engineers started implementing many inhibitors and limitors on pilot inputs, especially during the landing phase. This works in the same misguided way as a no-feedback on the bus and starts getting widespread throughout all manufacturors. It takes away the "real feel/feedback/correction possibility" of the pilots and hands it over to computers.

Personally I think that the fix is either in a less flawed design of the aircraft, or in much better training of pilots. But cutting down on the latter and implementing even more automatics, inhibitions etc. etc. goes the wrong (cheaper) way. Even more when in almost every mishap the pilots are then still finally blamed.

(I liked your analogy to the Farm. Pigs were evidently never designed to walk upright. Computers initially to help humans, but evidently not to overrule them. Both trials are bound to faiurel in my oppinion)

[DozyWannabe]

Seriously - that's one of the most basic misunderstandings out there (though admittedly the Ziegler faction at AI didn't help much in that case). The computer does not, ever, overrule the human - it has protections that are there to stop the aircraft from getting into dangerous situations (spiral dives, stalls etc) - but the pilot is in control *at all times* if he or she wants to be. Case in point - Capt. Sullenberger was the one decorated for bravery when he ditched his A320 in the Hudson, not the flight control computer (which frankly would have looked daft with a medal round it).

As has been said many times, there are arguments for and against force-feedback in these situations and I think those with entrenced viewpoints will be reluctant to let go of them. But while automation has brought in some new dangers, the number of old dangers they helped alleviate more than makes up for that IMO.

And as I have said before, for a site that regularly bashes journos for inaccuracy, it's amazing how many cling to the journalistic inaccuracy about the A32/3/4/80 computers "taking over" from pilots and being the first step in making pilots obsolete. Sensationalism at it's worst at the time, let alone now.

We're definitely edging off-topic here though - we were at "MD-11, somewhat unforgiving in handling on landing" if I recall correctly.

[jmaximo]

Not for beginners...

It is indeed a wonderful plane to fly, and nobody could still beat MD11's cockpit and MCP.
But, as a friend of mine used to say, "not for beginners"

[Gretchenfrage]

Seriously - that's one of the most basic misunderstandings out there (though admittedly the Ziegler faction at AI didn't help much in that case). The computer does not, ever, overrule the human - it has protections that are there to stop the aircraft from getting into dangerous situations (spiral dives, stalls etc) - but the pilot is in control *at all times* if he or she wants to be.

Well, tell that the Qantas pilots who switched off the AP and pulled on the sidestick to avoid the aircraft to nosedive. Result? Zilch. The computer continued to be fooled by sensors and did not follow the pilots input.
There might be instances where protections saved lives, but undoubtedly there have been instances where they deteriorated the situation. If someone wants to quantify and compare the effects, good luck, because I only trust statistics I have falsified myself.
Personally I reiterate that it is evolution in the wrong direction if you take away the ultimate control of the one that has his butt on the line and his honor and career at some ignorant lawyers/judges mercy. As long as I am called pilot in command, leave me in command and then I will stand for it.

@jmaximo:
I agree the MD11 was great.
When we transferred from the maddog to the T7, we all said to be surprised to be thrown back to middle age cokpit-management wise.
The answer from Boeing was:
Maybe, but we gave you a wing!!
True as well.

[DozyWannabe]

Gretchenfrage:

I hear what you're saying, but there are two 752s on the bottom of our two largest oceans that are testament to the fact that humans can be as easily fooled by faulty or poor sensor readings as computers can. A component flaw does not necessarily imply a failure in the systems design.

[Slickster]

Moving autothrottles are no panacea either, as three late Turkish pilots discovered on that 733 recently.

Yeah, apart from the fact the fact that the autothrottle had disengaged, thus was not moving; something one would have hoped one of the three might have noticed, if they were following SOP, and had their hand on the thrust levers.

Nothing is a panacea; I've seen someone try and land gear up with the warning horn going off! See numerous threads on safety/training being eroded.

[WrldWide]

The LH pilots that landed in MEX are the only ones that know what happened in those final moments. Can we now wait until the data comes out to say what happened. This whole A v B, joystick v yoke thing,old school v new school, is very tiring and does not progress any of us to an understanding of what happened.

Every airframe that has been certified has at some point had a, or series of, "hard Landing' that took that ship out of service, ie: total loss. What will be the excuse when the 777 or 380 has a hard landing? Actually, I can assure you that the t7 has had some hard landings that are worthy of a write up but it has not made the news.

Take a chill,
WW

[DozyWannabe]

But the T7 hasn't recently suffered a hard landing that ended in tragedy, whereas the MD-11 has. I'm not knocking the design, which in some cases going on anecdotal evidence is pretty good - but it lacks some basic engineering protections (especially the main gear landing attachment) that no other modern design suffers.