Delta 767 runway excursion in MAD
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Janet Flight ; I was employed by a company that enjoyed failing people rather than training them and this actual event was a common sim exercise for Command evaluation. The tyre burst was given after V1. VR was often co-incident. So, one is aware of the fact that something happened but no indication of any problem. Aircraft flies ok & the very first call is "Pos clb" followed by response "Gear up". Then the fun starts as the Gear ,going up, wipes away lots of stuff. Pretend CA also bursts onto the intercom & tries to involve FD crew in long analasys telling them that pax are looking out of the right hand window & screaming. (I used to tell the CA that was normal on all my take-offs but the Trainers, oooops, I mean, Choppers, never laughed).
Limited hydraulics, higher weight, less than full flap, limited brakes, etc requires quite a bit of thought and discussion in the hold after take-off & before commencing approach. Did these chaps do all that ? Did they dump fuel (reduce LW to the minimum) etc etc. Very interesting. A regular feature in my company's chop rides and one where most of us said it would never happen in real ;life. It did for these chaps.
Limited hydraulics, higher weight, less than full flap, limited brakes, etc requires quite a bit of thought and discussion in the hold after take-off & before commencing approach. Did these chaps do all that ? Did they dump fuel (reduce LW to the minimum) etc etc. Very interesting. A regular feature in my company's chop rides and one where most of us said it would never happen in real ;life. It did for these chaps.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dark side of the force
Age: 54
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right, Madrid has EMAS, what happened then? I do not know but they have 2 very long runways and another much longer at Torrejon. A closed friend took some pictures and watched the event, there is also a video somewhere on the net on the landing. What he told me is that it was a touch down mid runway and at the end they were still moving.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MrDK
Why does a modern (or an up-to-date) aircraft not cameras all over the place?
At least as a secondary tool.
Installation may be costly, but the equipment is not.
A camera for each gear, each engine, each set of flaps, a couple for the tail, ect. would hardly be a technological advance.
At least as a secondary tool.
Installation may be costly, but the equipment is not.
A camera for each gear, each engine, each set of flaps, a couple for the tail, ect. would hardly be a technological advance.
Just keep the cameras out of the cockpit is my only response.
The combination of a good CVR/FDR + good external video should provide investigators all the information they need.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not just investigators, but the cockpit crew.
Imagine having video surveillance of most of the exterior of the planeavailable up front.
I know of cases where a pilot had to exit the cockpit to go look out a passengerwindow in order to assess a situation. A hassle for the pilot and a discomfortto the passengers.
Imagine having video surveillance of most of the exterior of the planeavailable up front.
I know of cases where a pilot had to exit the cockpit to go look out a passengerwindow in order to assess a situation. A hassle for the pilot and a discomfortto the passengers.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dark side of the force
Age: 54
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both runways at LEMD are continously monitored by cameras, a dozen of spotters and 2 hughe terminals full of pax with a nice view of the runway
I know what is EMAS, I was there when it was installed.
And the last no gear accident I watched 3 months ago was 1.000 times more professional landing than this one. The only reason for non stopping the aircraft is insuficient runway left, where not you told in sim to stop on the runway in a case like this?
I know what is EMAS, I was there when it was installed.
And the last no gear accident I watched 3 months ago was 1.000 times more professional landing than this one. The only reason for non stopping the aircraft is insuficient runway left, where not you told in sim to stop on the runway in a case like this?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
transilvana said "The only reason for non stopping the aircraft is insuficient runway left, where not you told in sim to stop on the runway in a case like this?"
transilvana,
Since you are offering your suppositions, then I’d like to offer some additional thoughts as well.
If they lost the center and right hydraulic system and if because of the tire damage they lost all fluid in those hydraulic systems, then they would lose a lot of important items. The photos show there was significant damage due to the number 8 tire shredding at rotation...you can see this in the photos. That made this heavy weight landing not such a simple event because of the collateral damage.
The damage could possibly have caused the following problems if they lost the center and right hydraulic systems:
They would have had to use alternate gear extension, alternate flap extension, Flaps 20 for landing, a Vref30+20 of 180+ knots, no right thrust reverser, normal brakes inop, alternate brakes inop, no autospoilers, some of the spoilers will be lost even with manual extension, loss of reserve brakes (if they lost the fluid in that closed system as well), loss of nosewheel steering (same reason as loss of reserve brakes), and one shot of accumulator brakes. After accumulator press drops to 1000psi they would be left with only the left thrust reverser for both stopping and steering (if you want to call that steering). So, you can imagine them approaching the end of the runway at a taxi speed, but without brakes or NWS...and yet they manage to use the left reverser to steer the jet about 40 degrees to the left onto taxiway LA and J2. They may have had only the left thrust reverser to accomplish this. Perhaps they departed the prepared surface at about 5-10 knots (so the images suggest).
No injuries. My first thought is hats off to the crew with all that they had to deal with.
In case your friend is not aware, I’d also like to add that runway 32L has a displaced threshold that removes the first 928M/3045ft of the runway. So, if someone observes the landing and is not familiar with the 32L displaced threshold, then that could make you think you see something wrong. If your friend is familiar with the 32L displaced threshold, then I’m not sure why he would suggest they landed near mid-runway.
I would encourage you to first default to thinking that the crew did a great job with the situation. This can perhaps prevent future embarrassment in the event that the facts prove some of your statements to be…well…less than accurate.
I too look forward to finding out the actual details, and to see if the above is anywhere close to what really happened.
transilvana,
Since you are offering your suppositions, then I’d like to offer some additional thoughts as well.
If they lost the center and right hydraulic system and if because of the tire damage they lost all fluid in those hydraulic systems, then they would lose a lot of important items. The photos show there was significant damage due to the number 8 tire shredding at rotation...you can see this in the photos. That made this heavy weight landing not such a simple event because of the collateral damage.
The damage could possibly have caused the following problems if they lost the center and right hydraulic systems:
They would have had to use alternate gear extension, alternate flap extension, Flaps 20 for landing, a Vref30+20 of 180+ knots, no right thrust reverser, normal brakes inop, alternate brakes inop, no autospoilers, some of the spoilers will be lost even with manual extension, loss of reserve brakes (if they lost the fluid in that closed system as well), loss of nosewheel steering (same reason as loss of reserve brakes), and one shot of accumulator brakes. After accumulator press drops to 1000psi they would be left with only the left thrust reverser for both stopping and steering (if you want to call that steering). So, you can imagine them approaching the end of the runway at a taxi speed, but without brakes or NWS...and yet they manage to use the left reverser to steer the jet about 40 degrees to the left onto taxiway LA and J2. They may have had only the left thrust reverser to accomplish this. Perhaps they departed the prepared surface at about 5-10 knots (so the images suggest).
No injuries. My first thought is hats off to the crew with all that they had to deal with.
In case your friend is not aware, I’d also like to add that runway 32L has a displaced threshold that removes the first 928M/3045ft of the runway. So, if someone observes the landing and is not familiar with the 32L displaced threshold, then that could make you think you see something wrong. If your friend is familiar with the 32L displaced threshold, then I’m not sure why he would suggest they landed near mid-runway.
I would encourage you to first default to thinking that the crew did a great job with the situation. This can perhaps prevent future embarrassment in the event that the facts prove some of your statements to be…well…less than accurate.
I too look forward to finding out the actual details, and to see if the above is anywhere close to what really happened.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MrDK
Not just investigators, but the cockpit crew.
Imagine having video surveillance of most of the exterior of the planeavailable up front.
I know of cases where a pilot had to exit the cockpit to go look out a passengerwindow in order to assess a situation. A hassle for the pilot and a discomfortto the passengers.
Imagine having video surveillance of most of the exterior of the planeavailable up front.
I know of cases where a pilot had to exit the cockpit to go look out a passengerwindow in order to assess a situation. A hassle for the pilot and a discomfortto the passengers.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
None; are the thrust reversers not moved by the pneumatics on the 767? The hydraulics don't have much to do with it on the GE powered -300s. I'd suggest they may have had both reversers?
A very nasty situation. Landing high and probably heavy means you're carrying a lot of energy. Add into the mix a Flap20 landing that the pilots almost certainly have never before done for real and some reduced control authority. The jet is almost certain to float unless driven positively onto the runway. It's not hard to see how what was observed could have arisen.
Assuming that the pilots were, like me, just plain vanilla line shags, I suggest that they did ok. Perhaps shutting down on the runway would improve the outcome next time. Easy to say from the comfort of an armchair.
A very nasty situation. Landing high and probably heavy means you're carrying a lot of energy. Add into the mix a Flap20 landing that the pilots almost certainly have never before done for real and some reduced control authority. The jet is almost certain to float unless driven positively onto the runway. It's not hard to see how what was observed could have arisen.
Assuming that the pilots were, like me, just plain vanilla line shags, I suggest that they did ok. Perhaps shutting down on the runway would improve the outcome next time. Easy to say from the comfort of an armchair.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
767 Thrust Reverse
Bernouli,
You are correct. All of the GE engines I fly have pneumatic reversers. However, the Pratt's have hydraulic reversers.
You are correct. All of the GE engines I fly have pneumatic reversers. However, the Pratt's have hydraulic reversers.
Thrust Reverser System (PW)
Each engine has a hydraulically actuated fan air thrust reverser. Reverse thrust is
available only on the ground.
The reverse thrust levers can be raised only when the forward thrust levers are in
the idle position. An interlock stop limits thrust to idle reverse while the reverser
is in transit.
The EECs control thrust limits during reverser operation.
Each engine has a hydraulically actuated fan air thrust reverser. Reverse thrust is
available only on the ground.
The reverse thrust levers can be raised only when the forward thrust levers are in
the idle position. An interlock stop limits thrust to idle reverse while the reverser
is in transit.
The EECs control thrust limits during reverser operation.
"None" is correct - 767/PW4000 have hydraulic reversers, 767/CF6-80C2 have pneumatic reversers (it's a long story). Most of Delta's 767-300s are PW4000, but last I checked they did have a handful of CF6 powered -300s (all 767-400ERs are CF6).
Looking at the pictures I don't see anything definitive that would say PW4000 vs. CF6, but I think PW4000 would be a pretty good bet. The give away is the core exhaust (CF6 has an external plug, PW4000 is an internal plug), but I haven't seen a good view from that angle.
Looking at the pictures I don't see anything definitive that would say PW4000 vs. CF6, but I think PW4000 would be a pretty good bet. The give away is the core exhaust (CF6 has an external plug, PW4000 is an internal plug), but I haven't seen a good view from that angle.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: sfo
Age: 70
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
engines
Assuming that is the correct aircraft, DaveReid is right. According to Boeing ACT (Aircraft Conf Tracking) N182DN has PW4060. It also has over 98,000 hours 
This is probably the ultimate in stupid SLF questions, but did the excursion cause any additional damage or disruption beyond what would have occurred if they'd shut down on the runway?
There is so much wrong in this thread its hard to know where to start. The incident was investigated by the Spanish authorities, FAA and Delta Air lines. All 3 reached the same conclusion. The crew turned in a flawless performance.
The first indication of trouble was a bang at rotation. At 400 feet per Boeing logic multiple cautions and warnings came on. They lost the C and R hyd systems and breaking on the right truck. They also lost the right reverser. They assessed the situation and made a decision to make a overweight landing rather then circle a long term to burn off fuel since they were down to 1 hyd system. Only center fuel can be dumped and that tank was emptied. Approach speed was about 168 knots. All gear and configuration changes had to be made with alternate systems.
The landing was in the middle of the touchdown zone at the correct airspeed. Only braking available was the left truck and left reverser. The aircraft departed the runway off the left side and came to rest near a taxiway with minimal damage.
The investigation did not find or see any possible way to maintain the aircraft on the runway. The excursion off runway was at low speed after rudder effectiveness was lost. The incident was documented by the FDR and multiple cameras at the airport.
The first indication of trouble was a bang at rotation. At 400 feet per Boeing logic multiple cautions and warnings came on. They lost the C and R hyd systems and breaking on the right truck. They also lost the right reverser. They assessed the situation and made a decision to make a overweight landing rather then circle a long term to burn off fuel since they were down to 1 hyd system. Only center fuel can be dumped and that tank was emptied. Approach speed was about 168 knots. All gear and configuration changes had to be made with alternate systems.
The landing was in the middle of the touchdown zone at the correct airspeed. Only braking available was the left truck and left reverser. The aircraft departed the runway off the left side and came to rest near a taxiway with minimal damage.
The investigation did not find or see any possible way to maintain the aircraft on the runway. The excursion off runway was at low speed after rudder effectiveness was lost. The incident was documented by the FDR and multiple cameras at the airport.
Buttonpusher
And the last no gear accident I watched 3 months ago was 1.000 times more professional landing than this one. The only reason for non stopping the aircraft is insuficient runway left, where not you told in sim to stop on the runway in a case like this?
His piloting skills as a glider pilot must have placed him theoretically in the left seat so he could determine what level of professionalism occurred.
Sailvi 767:
I thank you for your input. Isn't it a shame that we can't get reports like yours on pprune a lot quicker in order to stop the idiots from posting rubbish?
For many years, I have been hoping that Pprune would get back to being a Professional Pilots Forum but I now accept that in today's commercial advertising environment this is unlikely to happen.
Just about every professional pilot in the world knows that in a serious loss of hydraulic situation, nosewheel steering is one of the first luxuries to be taken away.
So, the Delta crew, having through no fault of their own lost two out of three hydraulic systems decided to get back on the ground.
This was an excellent decision and I speak with more than 50 years of professional flying. They did a great job. They landed the aircraft and kept it straight until it became impossible and gently went off the side of a runway.
I don't believe that they ever had the luxury of having been on a taxiway.
No one was hurt. The aircraft was undamaged (any more than it was by the tyre burst - talking of which, I once survived a landing where all 16 tyres blew).
So that brings me back to the way Pprune is headed.
Transilvana:
Now that you know the truth, would you consider apolgising to the Delta crew for the rubbish that you have posted on this thread?
Would you agree with me that you know NOTHING about operating large aircraft?
I see that you are a glider pilot (according to your profile). I would like you to know that I have been flying gliders for more years than you will ever know throughout my professional career and I was a CFI on a gliding club for 17 years. If you had been one of my members then I would have been ashamed of you.
Incidentally, I introduced pprune to the word "sciolist".
It is just such a terrible shame that the rest of us who have so much experience of professional flying are being put off from contributing our past experiences by idiots like the above-named sciolist.
I thank you for your input. Isn't it a shame that we can't get reports like yours on pprune a lot quicker in order to stop the idiots from posting rubbish?
For many years, I have been hoping that Pprune would get back to being a Professional Pilots Forum but I now accept that in today's commercial advertising environment this is unlikely to happen.
Just about every professional pilot in the world knows that in a serious loss of hydraulic situation, nosewheel steering is one of the first luxuries to be taken away.
So, the Delta crew, having through no fault of their own lost two out of three hydraulic systems decided to get back on the ground.
This was an excellent decision and I speak with more than 50 years of professional flying. They did a great job. They landed the aircraft and kept it straight until it became impossible and gently went off the side of a runway.
I don't believe that they ever had the luxury of having been on a taxiway.
No one was hurt. The aircraft was undamaged (any more than it was by the tyre burst - talking of which, I once survived a landing where all 16 tyres blew).
So that brings me back to the way Pprune is headed.
Transilvana:
Now that you know the truth, would you consider apolgising to the Delta crew for the rubbish that you have posted on this thread?
Would you agree with me that you know NOTHING about operating large aircraft?
I see that you are a glider pilot (according to your profile). I would like you to know that I have been flying gliders for more years than you will ever know throughout my professional career and I was a CFI on a gliding club for 17 years. If you had been one of my members then I would have been ashamed of you.
Incidentally, I introduced pprune to the word "sciolist".
It is just such a terrible shame that the rest of us who have so much experience of professional flying are being put off from contributing our past experiences by idiots like the above-named sciolist.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sailvi 767
Thanks for some facts to counter the crap slung by some of the less erudite members of the forum. Hats off to the crew for what appears to be a flawless job given a very crappy situation. Sleep well, for as a wise old pelican once said, "Anyone can do the job when things are going right. In this business we play for keeps".
Thanks for some facts to counter the crap slung by some of the less erudite members of the forum. Hats off to the crew for what appears to be a flawless job given a very crappy situation. Sleep well, for as a wise old pelican once said, "Anyone can do the job when things are going right. In this business we play for keeps".
