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

AF A330 severe hard landing ccs

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

AF A330 severe hard landing ccs

Old 2nd May 2011, 22:10
  #61 (permalink)  

Sun worshipper
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OK.
Do you mind giving the same details to AA and WN as I said in my earlier post ?
And don,'t you dare giving the 11/09/2001 crashes to an act of God as they were serious breaches of security.
Self inflicted, Concorde ?
To my knowledge, Continental isn't yet part of Air France.
Or am I mistaken?
And following your argument of putting the JFK CRJ as an AF Hull loss, I could also attribute thre Concorde death toll and hull loss to Continental.
What good for the goose is better for the gander, no ?
Why can't you just claim your anti-french attitude and own it, instead of this hypocritical " I have the objectiveness of stats" bull****.
2007 F-100 Pau ? wasn't it Regional ?
2003 CRJ Brest ? wasn't it Britair ?
If you want to play that game, I could take all the third level feeders of any US major, and you won't like the results, believe me.
I should go.
Imbeciles are boring. that's why I rarely post here any more.
Lemurian is offline  
Old 2nd May 2011, 23:55
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada / Switzerland
Posts: 521
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Lemurian
And don,'t you dare giving the 11/09/2001 crashes to an act of God as they were serious breaches of security...
How can you possibly compare the Sept 2001 hijackings to all of the AF accidents and incidents that have taken place since then?

Was AF security any better than US airline security at the same time?
V1... Ooops is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 00:53
  #63 (permalink)  

Sun worshipper
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why not ?
had their security procedures up to the standards they are now pushing, the hijackings wouldn't have taken place.
They were found lax and wanting.
(of course, nobody is going to say that, all was Al Q's fault).
The airlines are responsible for their airplanes, are they not ?
So, before you start bashing AirFrance, take a good look at what's on your side.
And maybe someone would agree that the security measures there at the time were worthy of a third world country.
Proof is that they now have a national outfit doing the job as the concerned people couldn't do it.
as AF security any better than US airline security at the same time?
I dare say yes, as we've had quite a bit more - and longer - experience of dealing with air security.
Lemurian is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 01:08
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: s england
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
lemurian

tell us about the AF 777 RTO in LOS or the AF 747 into a lagoon in a well known Pacifc island You cannot compare accidents with acts of terrorism.
sudden twang is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 06:43
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: FR
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What does it say in this a/c AMM? Does it say that, if no "load15" report was generated, then no inspection necessary? (Then of course, the engineer may still decide to go over some of the items, to be safe).
pax2908 is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 07:32
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: by the seaside
Age: 74
Posts: 558
Received 17 Likes on 13 Posts
lemurian
your posts are typical of many of the arrogant egotistic french pilots that I have met.
Before you fall off your Camembert as you did last year at one of my posts concerning french pilots - I am french but fortunately educated overseas.

I am also fortunate in that I have French/British/US/Swiss licenses.

Saying that I attended a SIV course given by a French paragliding school at Annecy at the weekend which was incredibly professional.

What the French are not good at is self criticism - they even believe that they have the best cuisine in the world and liberated Paris!

Air France suffers from a similar mentality that I have encountered in aviation in other countries.

We are the best.

It must be the best method because that is what I was taught.

Experience is everything.

Keep your mouth shut or we won't give you a command.

And the worst is that management is filled with likes from either the same squadron, school or old boys club (masons). Many of which I would not trust to park my car let alone to fly me.
blind pew is online now  
Old 3rd May 2011, 07:59
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: by the seaside
Age: 74
Posts: 558
Received 17 Likes on 13 Posts
What you guys should read is that AF have already recognized their problems and have commissioned a study by predominately anglo saxons.

Their findings were reported in January.

See the thread

http://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa-...y-inquiry.html

Common sense enfin!

It would be good if this model was adapted globally.
blind pew is online now  
Old 3rd May 2011, 08:18
  #68 (permalink)  

Sun worshipper
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Blind,
I was responding to the hundreds of posts rubbishing us.
And I have also quite a few pieces of garbage to throw inside your garden.
Arrogant, me ? what about them ?
What about the supercilious racialistic gems that are the gist of THIS THREAD in particuliar, so many that it's very difficult to know what it is about ?
-An initial hard landing, reported but not really taken into account ?
-A return for a stuck landing gear ?
-or the maintenance procedures ?
-... or something else ?

From especially the country that really shouldn't try giving lessons on maintenance (seem to remember a -10 losing en engine, or maybe I'm dreaming ) or some really outlandish repairs on an another -10 reverser, causing the loss of another aircraft, or some extraordinary airliner flying technique with the rudder, really great !
And I haven't seen your do-gooder self defending the guys at Annecy or wherever.
So please, spare me your sanctimonious sermon and get a look at what you are, in reality : A bunch of biggots who should know better, if they really are the professionals they claim to be.
And we certainly do not want them.
And the worst is that management is filled with likes from either the same squadron, school or old boys club (masons). Many of which I would not trust to park my car let alone to fly me.
And now the absolute worst : French freemasons conspiracy ! inside the airline cause important safety issues!!!
Why don't you get a real life ?
You cannot compare accidents with acts of terrorism.
Why not ? It's about, if I understand this thread correctly, how many people were killed flying a given airline, how often they lose aircraft... and , very sorry to say it, but some countries are in a very different league.
tell us about the AF 777 RTO in LOS or the AF 747 into a lagoon
Let's the 747. Came from a totally unknown 744 idiosyncracy ( the root is idiot, you might notice ) whereas with one flight director on, you had an auto go-around at MDA. I have a feeling that the honours are shared between the crew and good old Boeing in this case. and yes, that crew was slightly dysfonctioning... but still...
As a matter of fact, a few posters tried to put things into the correct perspective :
Quote:
A few facts :
1° Hard landing at CCS reported by crew
2° No report 15 generated ( neither automatically nor available in the system).
3° Two ground engineers perform an independant inspection according to information 1 and 2.
4° The F/O performs a throrough preflight according to info 1°
5° Incident with flight CCS-CDG
6° Next day, at power up of the aircraft a report 15 for the leg CDG-CCS is emitted and available.
A few more facts on point # 5 :
- after take off : landing gear did NOT retract ;
- aircraft remained in "ground mode" : no pressurisation ; outflow valves fully open etc...

In this specific case I fail to see anything wrong with "CRM" or "pilot handling".
Neither do I, actually.
I think that these posters were slightly , very slightly ignored.
Why not ? French bashing is the favourite sport in this forum.

Hey, Joe, you forgot to give us some comments on the absolute world record holder for runway excursions.
Till you do, bye bye !
Lemurian is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 09:57
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: by the seaside
Age: 74
Posts: 558
Received 17 Likes on 13 Posts
Lemurian
Typical french response.

You didn't read my post properly as per last year.

I never mentioned French freemasons.

If you would care to do some research then read the biography of the author of handling the big jets. Followed by the guest list at the papa india inquiry followed by the GAPAN membership list.

I only worked for three flag carriers all of which were run by a special group of individuals.

As to the DC 10 engine problem it was a common worldwide problem - my european employer found SIX damaged pylons/ bolts but you won't read about it anywhere.

Enlever vos œillères!
blind pew is online now  
Old 3rd May 2011, 10:36
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands
Age: 41
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remember this one??

http://www.pprune.org/spectators-bal...7-bristol.html

First choice 767 made a very hard landing at BRS... Saw it parked there a couple of times when I flew into BRS myself...
zomerkoning is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 13:00
  #71 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The love-hate relation again. When I see this kind of debate I like to remind everyone that despite 700 years or so of wars against one another, the favorite first destianation for the French is London, and France is the beloved destination of many Brits.

There are things you should never mention , as John Cleese once said in a different context : " never mention the war..."

Now Lemurian is right on many points unfortunately, but like with John Cleese he should not mention certain things like 9/11 and other bits.

What Lemurian and many (if not most) of my Countrymen fail to realise , is that AF has a real and deep safety culture problem , that this problem is now on the media highlight, and that as a result every smalest incident will come up in the spotlight. Attacking the media is not the answer. Attacking the culture issue would be .
AF and the staff that work for it should not be constantly on the defensive, but rather on the safety offensive. "Waiting for the bad period to go away " as one of them said recently is appalling and would indicate they have not yet realised the seriousness of their situation..

That is the issue. Nothing to do with who won the race in Dunkerque .
ATC Watcher is online now  
Old 3rd May 2011, 13:17
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Blighty (Nth. Downs)
Age: 77
Posts: 2,107
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Moderation

The circumstances that led to this incident (that is, the A330 L/G problem at Caracas) seem to be reasonably well understood.

I doubt that many major airlines could claim never to have had a case where a possibly-damaged aeroplane has been cleared by outstation maintenance staff for flight back to base without proper inspection.

It is not unreasonable, however, to comment that Air France seems to have had a higher than average number of serious incidents and accidents in the last 20 years or so.

It was also not unreasonable to comment that pieces of A4 paper left outside in South-East England for 24 hours in April of last year failed to accumulate any visible ash dust from the Icelandic volcano, whether the paper was white or black.

Evidently, however, it is quite acceptable on this thread to post remarks deeply insulting of the French culture in general, and its pilots in particular.

Lemurian, unless and until the R&N Moderators rethink their criteria for intervention on these threads, you and I and the majority of normally fair-minded readers and contributors are probably wasting our time here. And take note of what ATC Watcher has said.

Chris

PS: This was originally post #82.

Last edited by Chris Scott; 3rd May 2011 at 17:32. Reason: PS added.
Chris Scott is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 13:42
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FR
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@ ATC Watcher:
The link provided by blind pew in post #70 validates your point of view. There is a problem.

Then, it's not about "waiting for the bad period to go away", it seems to me.

What if "AF and the staff that work for it" was "constantly on the defensive" because of still being accused of "having not yet realised the seriousness of their situation", when in fact they are aware & working to correct it?

I'm not sure maintaining that sort of pressure (*) is the right thing to do.

(*) i.e. "every smallest incident will come up in the spotlight" (and quickly transforms in some kind of bashing)

AZR

PS : I'm not AF.
AlphaZuluRomeo is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 14:29
  #74 (permalink)  

Sun worshipper
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Chris,
As you've probably noticed, I don't really post any more on this forum for the appalling lack of courtesy, parochialism or pure hatred one doesn't see anywhere else on any aviation-related sites (and I am a member of a few...)
The whole site is a huge jet blast and when I see you, or PJ2 or PBL savaged by imbeciles who don't know their asses for their noses, let alone talk about aviation, I can't accept it.

That AirFrance has a safety culture problem, I'd be the last to deny it. As a matter of fact there is a culture problem at AF, of which safety is the most important aspect. The origin of that problem dates back to the moment Air Inter was absorbed, some eighteen years ago. Can't say it better, and we could have a conversation / discussion / even an argument about it.

What is wrong is that when at the end of January, it was revealed that we'd ask a foreign panel to investigate areas of safety improvement(s), that was probably not newsworthy as the thread went totally unnoticed, although, to my knowledge, nobody else in Europe has done anything similar.
What is not acceptable is malice, and hatred ( sorry, can't see another word, when even a Canadian writes a totally unproven experience on "Aerofrog"). That's about the max I can take, and I can dish a few items of cuisine too.

Look at the AF447 search :
"Won't find the f...ing black boxes because that will kill AF and Airbus;"
"They'll never find them because they don't want to find them"
after 4 phases:
"we'll never know what happened to that airplane and AF is saved "
"they started the 5th phase but it's just a show for the families"
"they found the DFDR chassis, of course they've already removed the SSMU"
"they found the recorder, but you'll see, the data are unreadable"...


Have you seen posters acknowledge the fact that Air France, not the insurers, not the government, not anybody but the BEA, is financing the search and recovery of the recorders, the passengers and some pieces of the airplane ? And that, at a time when, according to the French law, there is a manslaughter procedure ested against them ?
On a film you could see the BEA official and a gendarme acting as "officer of the Law", putting some seals on the container and a label one can read as "AF447 Unvoluntary manslaughter..."
We, at AirFrance know better than anyone that we're going to get kicked in the teeth in that coming report : there are training / qualifications / PilotUnions attitudes / Management mistakes on social peace..... etc...issues,
but it was deemed necessary and important to get a final conclusion on that accident.
After all, who is responsible ?
Airbus ? The aircraft had been certified, down to the last pitot tube, CTM have been published...
AirFrance ? The crew have been released in accordance with DGCA texts and regulations and agreements with the AOC.
Letting the memory of the accident fade away wasn't really a bad proposition, or was it ?
But NO . Another 28 M euros later, at last the boxes are back at the surface.
Did it strike anyone how odd the whole recovery procedure is ? As if neither AF or the BEA wanted the weest smidgereen of a wisp of a hint of foul play.
I'm telling you. We live in a F...ing distorted world when one actions have to be to appease idiots, biggots and haters ( not even talking about the conspiracy crackpots ).
As for the most anti-French of all, the one who calls himself "French but fortunately trained abroad", just take a look at the French Forum. Easy and quick. You'll discover that there are two kinds of French airline pilots : those with AF and those who failed the AF entry, those who'll try and make you believe that we're born AF pilots and are privileged by birth. Sheesh !
There's somebody I hate more than a hypocrite and that's a turncoat.
I owed you that explanation, Chris, for respect's sake. I had to make sure that you knew I was INCENSED
Regards

PS
And take note of what ATC Watcher has said.
No. As I've been reading his posts on the French forum for quite a while, he'll never be a reference . from one of the most vocal and active AF bashers on the forum, I take no lesson.

Last edited by Lemurian; 3rd May 2011 at 16:31.
Lemurian is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 15:05
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: near EDDF
Posts: 775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Safety Concerns
...The big mistake is the assumption that no load 15 report means no hard landing which means category of landing is known. This is FALSE. No load 15 report means that the category of landing remains unknown.

No load 15 report following a crew report of a hard landing requires an FDR readout or a severe landing inspection. It is a very important difference
@ Safety Concerns
It is also a big mistake to think that a Task for the A320Fam (05-51-11-200-004A) is the same as for the A330.

The correct task for the AF A330 is 05-51-11-200-802-A. There is NO choice to read out the FDR or do the severe landing inspection.

In contrary to the A320 you have to find out the landing impact parameters:
Originally Posted by AMM A330
...If you do not (or if you cannot) read the landing impact parameters from the load report 15, or the DFDRS, do these steps before the subsequent flight:
- Supply DFDR or QAR data (if available) to Airbus with the pilot report and the load trim sheet,
- Do the inspection in paragraph 4 and make a report of damage or what you find,
- Airbus will do an analysis of the incident to find if the aircraft can return to service. (The aircraft cannot return to service without Airbus decision).
...
(Highlighted by me)
IFixPlanes is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 15:05
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have you seen posters acknowledge the fact that Air France, not the insurers, not the government, not anybody but the BEA, is financing the search and recovery of the recorders,
could it be that the few millions cost of this search is a good investment if the boxes tell us the probes were at fault and not AF?
Safety Concerns is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 15:14
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Age: 83
Posts: 3,788
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
So it is all Air Inter's fault?

That is a huge relief.
JW411 is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 15:22
  #78 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somewhere between E17487 and F75775
Age: 80
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Speaking as one who rates pretty low on any empathy test and who is likely to say "oh, the xxx are all unmitigated swine" where xxx may be any race or nationality in the world*, I'm nevertheless horrified at just how quickly members of PPRuNe on Flight Deck Forums descend into savagery and rip and tear at French airlines or French airframe manufacturers, the Spanish ATC, the Russians, the Poles, or the American military.

C'mon guys, lighten up - or go express your views on JB. Not here, where I visit to read calm and reasoned postings to find out what really happened......

* This applies especially to my own country of birth.
OFSO is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 15:35
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ifixplanes technically you are correct BUT........

the safety recommendation was quite clear that Airbus should address the load 15 issue for ALL A320's and 330's and 340's.

Also the same logic applies across the fleet because the human factor error is often the same:

I have no load 15 report so I haven't performed a hard landing and the inspection/verification process comes to a halt. WRONG!!!!!!

The basic point is still correct irrespective of any unnecessary nitpicking.
Safety Concerns is offline  
Old 3rd May 2011, 15:39
  #80 (permalink)  

Sun worshipper
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
could it be that the few millions cost of this search is a good investment if the boxes tell us the probes were at fault and not AF?
No. Whatever the initial cause of the accident, AirFrance will not escape a few pointed questions about their operations... flight management...
So it is all Air Inter's fault?
That is a huge relief.
Did I ever write that or are you just trying to be stupid ( because you're succeding) ?
Lemurian is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.