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

Caribbean B738 at Georgetown on Jul 30, 2011, overran runway

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

Caribbean B738 at Georgetown on Jul 30, 2011, overran runway

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 13th Aug 2011, 01:17
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The aircraft was properly configured for a 30 flap landing!!!
Uh.....should not it have been a 40 Flap landing ?!?!
DC-ATE is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 02:14
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1060 West Addison
Age: 71
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It takes at least 30 seconds (closer to 35) to retract B738 flaps from 30 to up. That is with two engines at idle, two engine driven hydraulic pumps, two electric hydraulic pumps and an intact aircraft.

I guess all will be revealed.
Ohhh the irony is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 04:09
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Airborne
Age: 63
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Properly configured for 30 flap

Dc-Ate, I agree that 40 flap would be my choice, but both 30 and 40 flap settings can accomplish the job safely with out any fuss. The point here was focused on earlier speculation about whether the were extended at all and the adjective "properly" configured was an attempt to convey that the aircraft flaps and slats were in a landing configuration at touch down as opposed to retracted at touched down or even extended for touch down then hurridely retracted for all types of posted theories.
dingy737 is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 04:29
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 57
Posts: 3,094
Received 479 Likes on 129 Posts
IF it is pilot error what would interest me is why an experienced Captain could make such an error. Fatigue for instance?
It is highly unlikely that the last error, or indeed the last few errors in the chain, weren't made by the pilots. The real improvements will be in identifying why these errors were made. ie did a poor culture exist within the pilot group with respect to briefing intentions should the landing not be working out? Was the authority gradient in the flightdeck appropriate? Was deviation from SOPs the norm? Do the SOP's preclude retracting flap while still on an active runway? Does the rostering system result in fatigue? Were the pilots likely to face negative feedback from management if they diverted or conducted a go-around? The answers to questions like that will describe to you
why an experienced Captain could make such an error.
Or going around at 500' if not stable...... or, if you've not touched down by the end of the touchdown zone/markings...GO AROUND.
100% correct in my opinion.
Senior airline management need to be responsible for the cultivation of a culture in which this is the norm and deviating from it is seen as poor airmanship.

i saw 2 Caribbean airlines 738 vacating rwy there. both times, i was paying attention on the flap setting before and while they were vacating the rwy. and ofcourse, both times these were fully retracted before even getting to the runway end.
IMO this is going to be a major factor in the findings. Again....how can a companies SOP's be approved when they are flawed in this way? This incident may be the result of decisions made at a management level, should the regulator take some responsibility ? The head of operations?

After impact the cable from the flap handle to actuator, did not break, but was under 7 times normal tension due to the bent fuselage, this resulted in an up selection to the actuator, somehow there was enough residual Hyd. psi to retract them.
And you know this how? Are you sure it wasn't 8 times normal tension? How did you calibrate the tensiometer?

Maybe there was a problem with flaps, maybe it was not going to full 40. so the crew may have attempted to cycle it without success and in the confusion while on final approach may have inadvertently left the lever in the "UP" position with the flaps stuck partially extended. On short final the flap may have slowly started to follow the lever position (UP). This may not have been realised and the pilot (unknowingly) compensated by adding more power to maintain his speed, or the auto thrust system automatically doing so. This would explain the assumed somewhat long and fast landing
My Lord.....I sincerely hope that you are not an airline pilot. If that was the case, the Captain should surely be held responsible for making the decision to continue the approach with a flap problem into a short strip while 'confused'.

touched down only about half way down the runway abeam the terminal building with about 3000 feet of runway remaining.
Who would have thought? Instead of it being some freakish anomaly with flaps retracting by themselves , it's looking like a case of poor flight discipline. Who is responsible for the safety culture of an airline? I have my ideas on the answer to that.

As to the lack of flaps/slats.....perhaps that particular Captain retracted them at touchdown on short runways to dump the lift and, supposedly help with the stopping. Just a thought. I never did that but it WILL work.
Won't work very well in a 737-800 but anyway, if the SOP's don't stipulate where the after landing proceedure is to be commenced then there is a hole in the cheese just waiting to bite a crew.
A FA friend mentioned, on B738s, once the emergency evacuation is activated,the flaps will retract to allow pax to use the overwing exits as an evacuation area...
Your friend is wrong.

There are some posts on this thread that scare me a bit if they are made by airline pilots. Hopefully they are just teenage kids who love Microsoft FS and enjoy pretending to know things on this forum.
At the end of the day a combination of solid SOP's and the flight discipline to follow them and this over run would never have ocurred.
Framer
framer is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 06:34
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: EARTH
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
once the a/c is on ground with reversers deployed,there is no question of trying to get airborne again.look what happened to AI Express at Mangalore.
I s there any talk about where the a/c touched down in this case?

Flaps 30 is good enough for a 7000ft rwy...its good enough for 6000ft even if its wet with good braking action....no sweat.
gottofly is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 07:19
  #166 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The only 'fly in the ointment' for Dingy737 (#162) is that (OK, it did come from the WSJ, that fount of all that is knowledgeable and right) the flap lever was reportedly found in the up detent in the wreckage. That certainly is one heck of an 'up selection to the actuator'
BOAC is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 07:51
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Sand Box
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BOAC. The flap handle was found in a landing flap detent.

CG
Curry Goat is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 10:37
  #168 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks CG - that makes more sense. WSJ starring again in reporting! Link to WSJ in post #138 was my source.
BOAC is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 11:22
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: US
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Finding the flap handle in the landing detent is inconclusive. If they ran the evacuation checklist the flaps would have been placed in the flap 40 detent. We will know soon enough where the flaps were or were not during the roll out. Speculation at this time is only that, speculation.

Jet
sky jet is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 11:55
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: EGNX
Posts: 1,210
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Here is an example of a landing which should have been aborted. Note the application of flaps deep into the flare!

Doors to Automatic is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 12:12
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: EU?
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Aerogal video in youtube shows normal landing with landing flaps maybe 30 to 40 in the last seconds. Title of video is misleading too - nothing scary about it.

On the -200 we used to extend flaps from 30 to 40 after landing sometimes to help with the drag. Felt effective. I had never heard of retracting flaps while on landing roll until pprune...
FalcoCharlie is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 14:10
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
nothing scary about it.
Really? I counted about a 12 second float, during which he added more flaps. Now THAT, I have never heard of. You really should not change configuration so close to the ground like that.

I had never heard of retracting flaps while on landing roll until pprune...
You never did your PPL? I thought it was standard to retract flaps on a short field landing in a small aircraft. I would not advise to get in the habit of doing this in an airliner though.
Sqwak7700 is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 15:18
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: EU?
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry cannot quote. Scary is relative. If you want scary extend the speedbrakes a few degrees to stop the float (not recommended). Of course I am certain nobody has done this, or landed with the flap load relief operating. These things never happen to us, only others far far away.

PPL? Too old to remember, however I seem to remember a discussion about instead of retracting the flaps after landing some people retracted the gear instead. Maybe that was the reason they didn't teach that.
FalcoCharlie is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 16:48
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"On the -200 we used to extend flaps from 30 to 40 after landing sometimes to help with the drag. Felt effective."

No where to find in the Boeing 737-200 FCOM or FCTM.

Time for a serious talk with the chief-pilot.....
Henri737 is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2011, 22:04
  #175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 57
Posts: 3,094
Received 479 Likes on 129 Posts
Of course I am certain nobody has done this, or landed with the flap load relief operating. These things never happen to us, only others far far away.
Landed with the flap load relief operating? Mucked around with flap below 500 feet or on the runway? Geez no wonder you guys used to stack em more often in the old days. Never ever seen it or heard of it happening in the decade or so I've been with airlines. We would have gone around at 500ft if we were at the load relief speed. Things change a bit over the years by the looks.
framer is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2011, 16:17
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
gotofly -

Is there any talk about where the a/c touched down in this case?

Flaps 30 is good enough for a 7000ft rwy...its good enough for 6000ft even if its wet with good braking action....no sweat.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Non pilot eyewitnesses reported a long landing.

My perfromance charts say, even with Flaps 40, that 6000' will have weight restrictions if wet.

1500 hrs in the 737NG, most guys use 7000', or perhaps slightly, more runway, as the switch from Flaps 30 to Flaps 40.Wet runway and the switch is made for longer runways. Landing distance is part of the decision, the more critical factor is the reduced tendency to float with Flaps 40.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2011, 20:05
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ref Aerogal

I counted about a 12 second float, during which he added more flaps.
If I had to guess: flaps selected, but not extended because of flap load relief. When just before touch, speed bled off, flaps extended (just speculation).
BTW do they use FCOM's in South America?
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2011, 22:33
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 57
Posts: 3,094
Received 479 Likes on 129 Posts
Flaps 30 is good enough for a 7000ft rwy...its good enough for 6000ft even if its wet with good braking action....no sweat.
I guess that would depend on the braking that was used considering that at Flap 30 and MLW Auto brake 2 will pull you up in 2370m nil wind. The runway is shorter than that so AB2 is obviously out if you're silly enough to be using Flap 30. Try AB3 Flap 30, if you do everything perfectly as by the book with nil wind it will pull you up 370m short of the end. How many people chew up 370m by carrying speed into the flare or having a touchdown located further in than 1000 foot? Plenty. If you were AB3 and flap 30 and touched down at the 2000ft markers for whatever reason, you will have to intervene with some heavy braking to avoid an overrun.
What if it was a 3 kt tail instead of nil wind? That increases all the distances by about 100m. Nah, Flap 30 in this situation would be a poor choice if you had no wind and were heavy.
Even Flap 40 AB2 will stop you only 30m short of the grass at MLW and put you 70m off the end if you have a 3kt tailwind.
My point? This needed to be a Flap 40 landing with AB3 as a minimum which will stop the aircraft in 1700m if everything goes well, it leaves you with about 500m for unforseen things like
1/ not crossing the threshold at exactly 50'
2/ not being exactly on speed
3/ not executing the perfect flare and touchdown
4/ the reported nil wind actually being a slight tailwind.
For all I know this crew did use Flap 40 and appropriate braking, but to say that Flap 30 is 'no sweat' is to ignore variables that you have limited control over, and to bank on everything going as planned.

PS all the above figures are derived from my books and the aircraft they apply to have 'short field performance'. I don't know if the accident aircraft did as well.
At max landing weight the aircraft legally requires a strip length of 1620m dry or 1860m wet (nil wind, standard day etc). If it's not short field performance then it'l need a fraction more.
framer is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2011, 00:45
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Airborne
Age: 63
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Emergency return

Question: If you depart from a 7400 ft runway at max Landing weight and loose an engine in a 737-800 can you return to land at that field.
The VREF speeds for max landing weight are aprox.,
Flaps 40= 142. Faps 30= 150 Flaps 15 = 158
The Boeing procedure for a single engine landing is to use flap 15. The Boeing Advisory landing distance for flap 15 one eng. inop. on a wet runway= 4888 feet, using max manual braking and max operative reverse thrust and of course touching down at the 1000 foot point.
I know of 2 such return to land events at that field at flaps 15 eng. out, still with no fuss, so flaps 30 is still more than adequate, and 40 being the best choice. So using flaps 30 are not to blame here.
Also the Boeing after landing procedure kicks in when clear of the runway which is when the flaps would be retracted, after speaking with a colleague at this airline in question this is also their SOP.
I do not understand this procedure of retracting flaps on the landing roll as they will transistion from the gratest drag posistion to the greatest lift posistion on its way to a fully stowed posistion and adversely affect the weight on wheels for proper braking.
dingy737 is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2011, 01:50
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I do not understand this procedure of retracting flaps on the landing roll as they will transistion from the gratest drag posistion to the greatest lift posistion on its way to a fully stowed posistion and adversely affect the weight on wheels for proper braking.
The rest of your post makes sense to me but the above quoted text doesn't.

While full flaps produces more drag, more lift per unit of airspeed is produced as well. Note the lower Vref speeds associated with increased flaps setting. On jet transports, ground spoilers increase the weight on wheels and produce additional drag. This is far more effective at dumping lift than retracting flaps and adds drag instead of reducing it.

Retraction of flaps during the landing roll reduces the amount of lift produced at any given airspeed, thus increasing weight on wheels. It is an accepted and even manufacturer recommended technique to reduce landing roll distance on some light aircraft. Especially handy in bush flying.

I'm not aware of any jet transport aircraft where flap retraction during the landing roll is a recommended or approved action though. Ground spoilers are far more effective anyway and the danger of inadvertently selecting gear up instead of flaps up is mostly eliminated.
westhawk is offline  


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.