Caribbean B738 at Georgetown on Jul 30, 2011, overran runway
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Nitpicker330,
I do not want to put you down in any way.
In training in the sim we all follow the QRH and get responses from the aircraftsystems as they should do. In real life time this can be totally different as in the books or sim. A heavy damaged aircraft can and will respont totally different than in the sim. The only way to know what was selected with the flaphandle is the flaphandle itself: the reaction of the system behind it depends on the integrety of the systems in the aircraft remains.
Really don't know what happended, investigation will reveal. The only thing I know is that a 800 or 900 on contaiminated runways are hard to slow down due to aquaplaning and a relatifly heavy aircraft on only 4 wheels. (like a 321)
apologize for my English grammar
I do not want to put you down in any way.
In training in the sim we all follow the QRH and get responses from the aircraftsystems as they should do. In real life time this can be totally different as in the books or sim. A heavy damaged aircraft can and will respont totally different than in the sim. The only way to know what was selected with the flaphandle is the flaphandle itself: the reaction of the system behind it depends on the integrety of the systems in the aircraft remains.
Really don't know what happended, investigation will reveal. The only thing I know is that a 800 or 900 on contaiminated runways are hard to slow down due to aquaplaning and a relatifly heavy aircraft on only 4 wheels. (like a 321)
apologize for my English grammar
Last edited by Henri737; 5th Aug 2011 at 20:48.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I mean slats and flaps could have gone up after the a/c came to rest uncommanded and no conclusions can be made looking at the pictures.
Last edited by Henri737; 5th Aug 2011 at 18:25.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York City
Age: 47
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should the fuselage have stayed in tact?....
May/may not be related but definitely worthy of scrutiny... Dateline, a current affairs program in Australia, did a story just last month about three other 737NG aircraft that have crashed on landing and broken up because of defective parts by a Boeing supplier which Boeing ignored even after two employees made them aware of the problems: "They say they couldn't keep quiet any longer over defective parts being made by a subcontractor, Ducommun, which they say were then allowed into 737 Next Generation planes between 1996 and 2004… some even had to be hammered into shape or packed with filler to make them fit."
See the story and read the transcript here: SBS Dateline | A Wing and a Prayer
May/may not be related but definitely worthy of scrutiny... Dateline, a current affairs program in Australia, did a story just last month about three other 737NG aircraft that have crashed on landing and broken up because of defective parts by a Boeing supplier which Boeing ignored even after two employees made them aware of the problems: "They say they couldn't keep quiet any longer over defective parts being made by a subcontractor, Ducommun, which they say were then allowed into 737 Next Generation planes between 1996 and 2004… some even had to be hammered into shape or packed with filler to make them fit."
See the story and read the transcript here: SBS Dateline | A Wing and a Prayer
So far there have been now 4 cases of B737NGs with these fraudulent parts that have broken up in a similar fashion. Coincidence? Perhaps, but the first fatality will come back to haunt Boeing I suspect.
Boeing's "Lipgloss on the Pig" re core values and ethics following their past ethical misbehaviour appears to be just that; gloss.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi fdr
I saw that Dateline program and I was horrified to see that this current accident involved the same type of structural failure at the joints described. However, I disagree with your terminology of "Lip gloss on the pig". I suggest that the term "bovine excrement" should be applied to the quality management system used for these parts.
As SLF, I will in future try to avoid three rows of seats each side of these splice joints.
I saw that Dateline program and I was horrified to see that this current accident involved the same type of structural failure at the joints described. However, I disagree with your terminology of "Lip gloss on the pig". I suggest that the term "bovine excrement" should be applied to the quality management system used for these parts.
As SLF, I will in future try to avoid three rows of seats each side of these splice joints.
As SLF, I will in future try to avoid three rows of seats each side of these splice joints.
and better for me, as I can select those seats that you leave open.
Considering that most survivable accidents that have a percentage of fatalities; those that are killed are because they are trapped in the aircraft long enough to be overcome by fire and smoke. While those that survive with only injuries are those that exit out a couple of feet drop through the breaks in the fuselage.
Of course I will admit that "if" there is no fire, most of the severe injuries are those that are exited out through the breaks in the fuselage.
Those are the breaks
and I will take my chances with living and hope to get seated next to one of those break joints
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Downunder
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's been a spate of similar accidents to this one over the last few years and I wonder how many of them are due to low fuel quantity, so many companies compelling and even forcing their pilots to operate with minimum fuel.
Arrive at destination with min. gas and it's hosing down, either divert quick-smart or take your chances in the rain.
Be interesting to know how much fuel was left at the end of the landing roll if I can call it that.
Arrive at destination with min. gas and it's hosing down, either divert quick-smart or take your chances in the rain.
Be interesting to know how much fuel was left at the end of the landing roll if I can call it that.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Indies
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Min fuel?
Due to high cost of fuel in Georgetown it is standard policy to tanker enough fuel to return to home base without refuelling. I doubt that this was a case of not enough fuel. However it may have made a difference if the A/C had only uplifted enough fuel in POS for a one way trip. Just speculating.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 5° above the Equator, 75° left of Greenwich
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's been a spate of similar accidents to this one over the last few years and I wonder how many of them are due to low fuel quantity, so many companies compelling and even forcing their pilots to operate with minimum fuel.
Arrive at destination with min. gas and it's hosing down, either divert quick-smart or take your chances in the rain.
Be interesting to know how much fuel was left at the end of the landing roll if I can call it that
Arrive at destination with min. gas and it's hosing down, either divert quick-smart or take your chances in the rain.
Be interesting to know how much fuel was left at the end of the landing roll if I can call it that
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dhardesthard -
Due to high cost of fuel in Georgetown it is standard policy to tanker enough fuel to return to home base without refuelling. I doubt that this was a case of not enough fuel. However it may have made a difference if the A/C had only uplifted enough fuel in POS for a one way trip. Just speculating.
With 154 passengers the amount of payload capacity available for 'tankering' fuel, before reaching max landing weight, is very limited.
I'd estimate the amount of fuel they could 'tanker/ferry' before reaching max landing weight is probably less than 6,000 lbs. Six thousand pounds is maybe 200'/65 meters)(?) extra landing roll.
Due to high cost of fuel in Georgetown it is standard policy to tanker enough fuel to return to home base without refuelling. I doubt that this was a case of not enough fuel. However it may have made a difference if the A/C had only uplifted enough fuel in POS for a one way trip. Just speculating.
With 154 passengers the amount of payload capacity available for 'tankering' fuel, before reaching max landing weight, is very limited.
I'd estimate the amount of fuel they could 'tanker/ferry' before reaching max landing weight is probably less than 6,000 lbs. Six thousand pounds is maybe 200'/65 meters)(?) extra landing roll.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Usually the alternate for GEO is POS, so they would have had to upload round-trip fuel anyway. The flight time POS-GEO is around an hour, so we're not talking a huge amount to tanker over required fuel. That said, they probably land close to or at max landing weight every time in GEO anyway with that pax load. We always did.
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe it!!!
lomopaeso claims to be "able-bodied" and willing to jump out of any opening to escape, yet on the AA B-767 evacuation thread lomo professes to prefer to wait for the airstairs, a limo to the terminal, and a hot cuppa...give me a break...
lomopaeso claims to be "able-bodied" and willing to jump out of any opening to escape, yet on the AA B-767 evacuation thread lomo professes to prefer to wait for the airstairs, a limo to the terminal, and a hot cuppa...give me a break...
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Indies
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
misd-agin
Looking at the arial shots of the crash site on avherald the A/C seems to be less than 200ft/65metres beyond the end of the paved circuit. This could have been the DIFFERENCE that I referred to because of the tankered fuel. Again just speculating. Using your figure of 6000 lbs, that is a lot of weight for a 737 that is close to MLW into Georgetown for that particular landing.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not withstanding.
whatever the landing weight, whatever the tanker fuel, if the landing is legal, schedulable with the normal landing factors applied, the role of the crew is to deliver the aircraft at the scheduled weight to the TDZ. If conditions are such that they are unable to achieve those conditions they divert.... or they run off the end of the tarmac as demonstrated.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Downunder
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct there Teddy.
I was on a refresher course the other day where the matter of landing accidents was raised, and that these accidents are now more prevalent than controlled flight into terrain.
Our SOP's have gone exponential over the last 10 years but the latest amendment is to actually check the performance if the RWY LDA is less than a certain length, depending on type.
I was on a refresher course the other day where the matter of landing accidents was raised, and that these accidents are now more prevalent than controlled flight into terrain.
Our SOP's have gone exponential over the last 10 years but the latest amendment is to actually check the performance if the RWY LDA is less than a certain length, depending on type.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: on land
Age: 60
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
preliminary findings?
GUYANA-Pilot error
I know pilots 'are people too', but IF this is so, is it even possible for two airmen in what appears to be a fairly routine approach to not notice high speed and ultimately audible warnings?
Surely there's more to it?
I know pilots 'are people too', but IF this is so, is it even possible for two airmen in what appears to be a fairly routine approach to not notice high speed and ultimately audible warnings?
Surely there's more to it?
Last edited by slf4life; 10th Aug 2011 at 17:01.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Indies
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot error?
How about a flap 30 landing after a long float resulting in a very late touchdown and subsequent overrun of the R/W. When the fuselage broke, a cable or rod activated the flaps and slats to retract.