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

China Airlines 744F tail strike

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

China Airlines 744F tail strike

Old 28th Mar 2010, 05:13
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 20
China Airlines 744F tail strike

China Airlines B744 at Anchorage on Mar 4th 2010, severe tail strike on takeoff, airplane continues across Pacific

A China Airlines Boeing 747-400 freighter, registration B-18723 performing freight flight CI-11 from Anchorage,AK (USA) to Taipei (Taiwan) with 3 crew, struck its tail onto the departure runway in Anchorage at about 03:39L (12:39Z), but continued to Taipei, where the airplane landed safely.

The NTSB reported on Mar 23rd 2010, that the airplane received substantial damage in the tail strike and classified the occurrence an accident. Taiwan's Aviation Safety Council is investigating, the NTSB have assigned an accredited representative.

domani is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 08:12
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,271
China Airlines...747s....tailstrikes. I hope this one is repaired in accordance to the structural repair manual. Was it not a poor repair to a tailstrike that caused a structural brake up to one of their 747s in 2002? - some 12 years after the initial incident?

I agree though, there are serious implications to continuing after a tailstrike has been discovered/reported. You have to ask the question why?
Callsign Kilo is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 08:23
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 1,349
Tailstrikes & Repairs

Don't know about a China Airlines aircraft structural failure after improper rear pressure bulkhead repair following a tailscrape, however a Japan Airlines B747 (12Aug1985) did with loss of all hydraulics following destruction of part of the vertical stab. All aboard but 4 pax perished. China Airlines are based in Taiwan and have had their share of incidents. The same year one of their B747SP's suffered major structural damage after stalling at FL410 and descended out of control to below 10,000 before conrol was regained. Significant portions of the horizontal stabilizer (left and right) were shed and one of the body gear was forced open as well as both wings being bent 2" up. This all happened due to trying to maintain FL410 on three engines.

Last edited by Old Fella; 28th Mar 2010 at 09:44. Reason: extra info
Old Fella is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 08:25
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 312
Total lack of airmanship, total lack of a professional attitude.

They were lucky and proberly influenced by how much cheaper the aircraft will be to repair in China.

If one keeps putting ones head in the mouth of the tiger, one cannot be surprised when it get chomped off.

Regards

Col
herkman is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 08:35
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 72
Posts: 193
Systematic bashing

Why first replies on a new thread must systematically be an indictment ?

Is the 747-400F equiped with a tail strike sensor ? (older 747 I knew weren't). Is it not possible that the crew was unaware of the strike ?
DJ77 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 08:37
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 61
Don't know about a China Airlines aircraft structural failure after improper rear pressure bulkhead repair following a tailscrape
China Airlines Flight 611 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

YouTube - Air Crash Investigation Shattered In Seconds
TWN PPL is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 08:48
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 742
DJ77,

From what I've heard, the crew were VERY aware of the incident, since ATC witnessed it and let them know in no uncertain terms.

This, from two mates of mine who fly for China Airlines but just can't wait to escape, once their contracts are up.
Pontius is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 09:05
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: timbuktu
Posts: 1
They're from Taiwan

They were lucky and proberly influenced by how much cheaper the aircraft will be to repair in China.
Actually, China Airlines is a Taiwanese airline, known for having one of the worst safety records in Asia (though it has improved greatly in the last decade).

Last edited by marchino61; 28th Mar 2010 at 09:16. Reason: Added that safety has improved
marchino61 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 09:17
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 72
Posts: 193
Pontius:
the crew were VERY aware of the incident
Thanks for clalrifying this point. It was not so obvious before your post.

In such a large plane, especially a cargo plane, surprisingly severe problems can develop in the rear and remain unnoticed in the FD, unless you have some intel coming in.
DJ77 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 09:55
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 1,349
China Airlines B747 breakup

DJ77. Thanks for the links re the China Airlines aircraft breaking up. It seems it was as a result of an incorrect repair, just as was the Japan Airlines B747. Apologies DJ77, it was TWN PPL who gave the links. Old age is a worry.

Last edited by Old Fella; 29th Mar 2010 at 03:12.
Old Fella is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 12:53
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 72
Posts: 193
Old Fella:
DJ77. Thanks for the links re the China Airlines aircraft breaking up.
Was not me.
However I agree with your remarks. Engineers usually become very nervous and suspicious if they discover a scratch on the rear pressure bulkhead.
DJ77 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 13:29
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: london
Posts: 59
Some things never change,what an outfit.
sunbird123 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 13:47
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canadian Shield
Posts: 536
The same year one of their B747SP's suffered major structural damage after stalling at FL410 and descended out of control to below 10,000 before conrol was regained. Significant portions of the horizontal stabilizer (left and right) were shed and one of the body gear was forced open as well as both wings being bent 2" up. This all happened due to trying to maintain FL410 on three engines.
Recall speaking to the 747SP crew at CYQT in 2005 when its private owners jumped across the border to avoid US grounding / seizure. Apparently it went supersonic in its dive with China Airlines. Despite repairs the a/c 'never flew straight again'.

In its last guise it was labelled 'Global Peace Ambassador' for some US religious sect. Last I heard, it was flown (VFR!) from Canada to Mexico for more repairs.

Anyone know if it is still out there???
er340790 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 13:51
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,623
Pontius
just can't wait to escape, once their contracts are up
Are you implying that contractors are virtual prisoners who can't break their contract or otherwise just walk off the job? I doubt that any airline anywhere would be ripping off your shirt to drag you into the cockpit to make you fly.
GlueBall is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 14:49
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 26
I think China Airlines may have penalty for breaking a contract signed? I was told it could be a bank bond or something to that effect.
Back to the topic, am truly wondering the present work atmosphere in CAL has any implication on this tailstrike incident. Many blokes ( local or foreign ) are apparently seeking alternative employment. If they don't watch this, something more seriously may just be round the corner.
cpt777 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 15:16
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The lion city
Posts: 368
Crew was not aware of the tail strike

In an interview, the 3 pilots never realized that they had a tail strike, therefore the flight was continued to Taipei.

Mistakes can happened to anyone of "US" and we all just do our job as methodically as possibe and keeping in line with SOP. But mistakes do happen! Looked at EK 340-500 in MEL last year..

If any pilots that felt their life are threaten, shouldnt you just walk away from the job rather than put your life in it for the duratio of the contract??
etops777 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 20:07
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,271
An Interview reveals the crew didn't realise they had a tail strike yet conflicting reports reveal that Anchorage ATC witnessed the event and reported it to the crew. Considering it may have been a fully laden freighter, then give benefit of the doubt to the crew. No pax or cc to witness any unusual noises or sensations on rotation. Cargo can't report anything unusual! However if they were informed by ATC then they should all be handed the Taiwanese equivalent of the P45! There is no excuse for that kind of sh1t....cargo aircraft or not!
Callsign Kilo is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2010, 22:30
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,861
With the very real possibility that crews can fail to realise they have had a tailstrike it does seem to be time that all Jet transport Aircraft be fiited with a Tailstrike sensor.


As on other types this sensor should be designed to detect a minor 'touch' or a serious strike with appropriate warnings for each.


This could allow the crew to make an educated decision to continue or make an immediate return.
stilton is online now  
Old 29th Mar 2010, 00:33
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Romeo 14
Posts: 49
FWIW,,,,, CI-011 would be a PAX!!!!! flight. CI 011 and 012 are the TPE-ANC-JFK and back route. CI cargo flights are 4 digit flight numbers all begining in 5. ex CI-5XXX,,Dynasty 5384.
Yet a little research shows B-18723 to be a 744F,, interesting.
--heracles

Last edited by Heracles; 29th Mar 2010 at 01:04. Reason: spelling
Heracles is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2010, 07:11
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Sin City
Posts: 279
Is the 747-400F equiped with a tail strike sensor ? (older 747 I knew weren't). Is it not possible that the crew was unaware of the strike ?
Nope, the 744s are not fitted wif a tail strike sensor. The 773s, 737 and 763s have tail strike sensors. Not sure about 748 though. Just wondering, is it possible to "feel" a tail strike from the cockpit ?
leewan 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 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.