Lufthansa cargo plane crash
What do you propose to do when those limits are exceeded?
Making auto-lands mandatory is not, in my opinion, a viable option. The x-wind limitations is just one example; excessive operational limits on legal destinations and alternates would be another. Besides, if an aircraft is classified as only being "safe" to land automatically, then there's something fundamentally wrong somewhere.
To my knowledge that is not the case of the MD-11, and no incident report has even suggested such a thing either. From what I've learned, all landing accidents and incidents so far has involved some level of pilot error; from incorrect handling to landing outside weather limits. In other words, if you fly it like the book says it's safe. It might have less of a margain for error, but that doesn't distract from the fact it's safe when operated by the book.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In other words, if you fly it like the book says it's safe. It might have less of a margain for error, but that doesn't distract from the fact it's safe when operated by the book.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...let me see...
yep MD 11 do not bounce. It brakes, gear, wing, pitches up, down, power, no power , auto throttle , nop, better not here, yep SOP says so mmm ups , what.. what ...GAME OVER. Why? Why SO MANY MD's? . ALL airplanes have the same scenarios, pilots( smart and stupid ones)at the controls, airports, weights , you name it and non of them have the same results the 11's. Less forgiven? That is not an affirmation any CAA or NTSB report would take as valid to justify and incident or accident.
Many have said that the development form DC 10 to MD11 felt short of expectations mainly because the horizontal stabilizer is to small or better said is the same as the one of the DC10. Was that the reason of the implementation of the augmentation, dont know what, system to make the airplane manageable for the pilot? Dunno. The fact is, ALL accidents are SO similar, structural brake up or loss of control during landing. What is the reason?
Hope someone finds out before we hear from a new one...
Many have said that the development form DC 10 to MD11 felt short of expectations mainly because the horizontal stabilizer is to small or better said is the same as the one of the DC10. Was that the reason of the implementation of the augmentation, dont know what, system to make the airplane manageable for the pilot? Dunno. The fact is, ALL accidents are SO similar, structural brake up or loss of control during landing. What is the reason?
Hope someone finds out before we hear from a new one...
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Both sides of 40W
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vonkluffen. You said it, some smart some stupid! The stabilizer bit, itīs 30% +- less than the DC10. And yes, manual landing s on this aircraft are done on a daily basis and in pretty adverse weather, wind, etc. So, is this A/C of a bad design or is it just circumstances that dictate the outcome of a landing or is it the handling pilot whom is at fault? I flew this A/C for some 5800hrs. No accidents or incidents related to landing or T/O. 1 engine shut-down( P&W 4060) and maybe a few close RAīs and a couple of bird strikes. For the rest I would say a nice plane to fly. Every beast has itīs different characteristics and has to be managed accordingly! The correct way is a matter of opinion but, the A/C itself, nothing wrong with it!! Just my humble opinion!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Europe
Age: 48
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finnair has flown this plane for a very long time without any issues. I remember reading a farewell article for the MD11 by some chief Finnair pilot (MD11 division) who was praising it very highly.
What were they doing right? Any ex MD11 Finnair pilots around?
What were they doing right? Any ex MD11 Finnair pilots around?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MHP your answer in not only 
humble but better informed than 
mine as well. I'm just trying to 
understand the phenomena. Hope you can give us further 
insights since you have more time on the frame than my grandma taking care of her :grandchildren. And let me tell you she does it 
great. I call that experience...
humble but better informed than mine as well. I'm just trying to understand the phenomena. Hope you can give us further insights since you have more time on the frame than my grandma taking care of her :grandchildren. And let me tell you she does it great. I call that experience...
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Both sides of 40W
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VONKLUFFEN. Difficult to answer! Training and experience donīt always go hand in hand. If, a well trained pilot does not have the experience under certain curumstances then, his or her reaction might just be the wrong option at that moment. Blaming the A/C is not the problem? As I said, most planes have diffrent caracteristics and as such, you will have to learn the right way to handle them and adapt accordingly. In general terms, under training a pilot should be able to iron out all these isues? Accidents can happen and will happen. Everyone of them has a cause, could be teck, weather,human error, etc. System faults have been related to some of them but, flight caracteristics (civil), few. The Sioux City accident showed up as a system (design) fault. But ,it flew and under the very able hands of an experienced crew was able to land, albeit a crash landing. But, demonstrated that the plane was noble enough to be flown in a very difficult situation. This crew I am sure, never practiced this scenario in a SIM. It was their experience and ability that got them through. This of course with the tragic outcome for a number of pax but, saved the lives of the majority. Hope this gives you some insight and more time with Granny!!!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If, a well trained pilot does not have the experience under certain curumstances then, his or her reaction might just be the wrong option at that moment
In general terms, under training a pilot should be able to iron out all these isues?
In a landmark study, Flight Experience and the Likelihood of U.S. Naval Aircraft Mishaps (1992), researches found, that 'pilots with less than 500 flight hours in model (of aircraft) were at a significantly greater risk for pilot errormishap factors' (Yacovone et al. 1992). Interestingly, the study found no correlation between total flight hours and accident rates, indicating that aviatior transitioning to new aircraf are at increased risk as well as pilots who are checking out in ther first aircraft.
Tony Kern, Redefining Airmanship
Tony Kern, Redefining Airmanship
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Both sides of 40W
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Studi, Agree with the stats. But then if, we look at Russian built A/C you will find that the the hull losses are far higher than western A/C. Pilot or A/C? On the MD11, from the 7 hull loses 5 (hulls) had fatalities. The B720/707 series had a much higher percentage and a few other models had also higer accident rates. The issue, is this A/C unsafe or is pilot handling at fault or what?
In itsīdefence, I can only say that not only myself, but a very high percentage of MD11 pilots have landed this plane in some pretty adverse WX conditions. Auto lands great... manual with WX you will have to be on your toes. But, I suppose this true of all A/C. Still this plane in my humble opinion is a joy to fly. Not the best I have flown, but preformance wise and system wise, good. Not that many built and a lot in cargo config. Higher weights, yes, higher app/lndg speeds, yes higher AOA on approach yes. This does not make it more difficult to fly, just that you will have to be a bit more alert. Anyway the good old bird is not made anymore, letīs see what the final statīs are when itīs finaly retired?
In itsīdefence, I can only say that not only myself, but a very high percentage of MD11 pilots have landed this plane in some pretty adverse WX conditions. Auto lands great... manual with WX you will have to be on your toes. But, I suppose this true of all A/C. Still this plane in my humble opinion is a joy to fly. Not the best I have flown, but preformance wise and system wise, good. Not that many built and a lot in cargo config. Higher weights, yes, higher app/lndg speeds, yes higher AOA on approach yes. This does not make it more difficult to fly, just that you will have to be a bit more alert. Anyway the good old bird is not made anymore, letīs see what the final statīs are when itīs finaly retired?
Last edited by MPH; 24th Aug 2010 at 19:21.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cusco
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every beast has itīs different characteristics and has to be managed accordingly! The correct way is a matter of opinion but, the A/C itself, nothing wrong with it!! Just my humble opinion!!
So, training is for shure one part of the 'defence', but will not be able to 'iron out all the issues'. It seems that even the best and most thorough training will just help up to a certain extend - unfortunately. Experiance on type is needed
I have several thousands of MD-11 hours and all this talk of the aircraft needing an above average pilot to fly is pure nonsense. This aircraft has its unique characteristics, higher landing speeds, smaller tailplane etc....well, an average pilot adapts. If one transitions from DC-10 to the MD-11, you will understand the differnt handling characteristics and handling qualities. You adapt to that and learn to " feel " how the aircraft behaves on final approach, then prepare to adapt to its handling qualities. On hot, humid days on a high elevation airfield one has to really " feel " the aircraft and be prepared for high sink rates. Trying to fly the MD-11 like any of your previous aircrafts will be inviting disaster... it does not need an above average pilot, it needs an MD-11 pilot!
The same thing when I hear of people likening a B77 to a souped up B767...it is not, the high lift wing and triple bogey undercarriage presents different handling characteristics in strong gusty crosswinds on hot and humid days. Guys, know your aircraft. I knew mine and I survived. I am an average pilot and had my share of crunchers...but I survived.
The same thing when I hear of people likening a B77 to a souped up B767...it is not, the high lift wing and triple bogey undercarriage presents different handling characteristics in strong gusty crosswinds on hot and humid days. Guys, know your aircraft. I knew mine and I survived. I am an average pilot and had my share of crunchers...but I survived.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a year or two Boeing will roll out the 777 BCF (pax to freighter) conversion.
Then we'll have older, converted 777's flying around at max gross, on the back side of the clock.
Then we can make a true comparison....
Then we'll have older, converted 777's flying around at max gross, on the back side of the clock.
Then we can make a true comparison....
Saying that Autolands will cure the problem is wrong for many reasons.
Of course if the winds exceed autoland limits, what do you do, or what if your Autoland is not working that day / night /
It also assumes that Autoland is infallible. It was not with me one day.
Approaching our destination we discovered the Airport weather required us to
perform a monitored approach with Autoland. Although the visibility was good enough for us to be able to see the runway at Alert height.
This runway does have a downslope when arriving from the direction we were but is approved for CAT111B.
The Approach was flown well, on Autopilot, after becoming visual we could see the runway clearly. The flare was initiated and the power went to idle.
The aircraft then continued to float at, I estimate 1-2 feet above the runway as the runway 'fell away' with the downslope for much longer than I was comfortable with and did not appear it was going to touch down within the landing zone.
I disconnected the Autopilot and gently pushed over placing the mains firmly on the runway, with max reverse and medium braking stopping was not a problem.
My point is, but for human intervention the Aircraft would have happily held that 1-2 feet above the runway until there was none left.
I suggest, that while for the most part Autoland is very useful it is not perfect and I am sure many other Pilots have had to 'intervene' with it over the years when things don't go as planned.
You don't hear about those interventions though.
Of course if the winds exceed autoland limits, what do you do, or what if your Autoland is not working that day / night /
It also assumes that Autoland is infallible. It was not with me one day.
Approaching our destination we discovered the Airport weather required us to
perform a monitored approach with Autoland. Although the visibility was good enough for us to be able to see the runway at Alert height.
This runway does have a downslope when arriving from the direction we were but is approved for CAT111B.
The Approach was flown well, on Autopilot, after becoming visual we could see the runway clearly. The flare was initiated and the power went to idle.
The aircraft then continued to float at, I estimate 1-2 feet above the runway as the runway 'fell away' with the downslope for much longer than I was comfortable with and did not appear it was going to touch down within the landing zone.
I disconnected the Autopilot and gently pushed over placing the mains firmly on the runway, with max reverse and medium braking stopping was not a problem.
My point is, but for human intervention the Aircraft would have happily held that 1-2 feet above the runway until there was none left.
I suggest, that while for the most part Autoland is very useful it is not perfect and I am sure many other Pilots have had to 'intervene' with it over the years when things don't go as planned.
You don't hear about those interventions though.
Last edited by stilton; 25th Aug 2010 at 03:54.
Good point Iceman and no, the slope was not that steep, however the Aircraft in question (B757) has a very high lift wing and will keep flying a lot longer than most.
While it may have touched down eventually, at the rate it was going it would not have been in time to stop before the end of the runway.
While it may have touched down eventually, at the rate it was going it would not have been in time to stop before the end of the runway.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sand pit
Age: 54
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I have a lot of time in MD11 pax aircraft with max landing weights at 458000 lbs and also in Freighter configuration at 491500 lbs.
I think most MD11 pilots will happily land this at max weight vs doing a freighter ferry flight at say 280,000 lbs. With all the mass and momentum it is a pretty true airplane although you definitely have higher speeds and sink rates. When light it is a handful and much harder to get a good landing.
I dont claim to be an aerodynamic expert but for whatever reason the position of spoilers in relation to wing the plane (DC-10 as well) has a noticeable pitch up on landing.....Most of the time we are programed to try and push over and get the nose down, which is the exact opposite of what should be done in an actual bounce.
Like any aircraft after a bounce maintain somewhat of the same landing attitude and possibly add power to control descent if needed.
Most of the MD-11 serious accidents all originated from a bounce---thereafter the wing was unloaded with a large push over....the airplane doesnt seem to like that.
I think most MD11 pilots will happily land this at max weight vs doing a freighter ferry flight at say 280,000 lbs. With all the mass and momentum it is a pretty true airplane although you definitely have higher speeds and sink rates. When light it is a handful and much harder to get a good landing.
I dont claim to be an aerodynamic expert but for whatever reason the position of spoilers in relation to wing the plane (DC-10 as well) has a noticeable pitch up on landing.....Most of the time we are programed to try and push over and get the nose down, which is the exact opposite of what should be done in an actual bounce.
Like any aircraft after a bounce maintain somewhat of the same landing attitude and possibly add power to control descent if needed.
Most of the MD-11 serious accidents all originated from a bounce---thereafter the wing was unloaded with a large push over....the airplane doesnt seem to like that.