TFS closed due Norwegian B738 RTO
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 23 years on Boeing I have never considered an RTO above 80 Kts for a burst tire.. the "standard" SOPs were up to 80kts stop for any malfunction.. 80 Kts to V1 fire or fire warning, engine failure, inability of a/c to fly. Since when did a burst tire stop the a/c flying? . The general thoughts here seem to be the tire bursts were a result of a high speed RTO for " unknown reasons".? some difficult questions to be answered on the horizon !
Ours too. Up to 80k, stop for anything. Between 80 & V1 , only for engine failure, engine fire or (here's the thing NIGHTSTOP 
OR, any other UNFLYABLE condition. I don't think, actually I know, LF would not stop just for a bang. Well, depends on what sort of bang (sic) but ohmigosh, here we go again with Pprune Skygods. Let us all consider the type of bang, the nature of the bang, what went or didn't go with the bang, was it unfyable (?), can bangs be unflyable ? Oh dear. I think we can tell the real pro's (often with tongue in cheek to add some humour )...........................oooops, not allowed. I'm with LF on this. Off to the hotel, stop on the way to buy a pair of leopardskin speedos & head for the pool.
OR, any other UNFLYABLE condition. I don't think, actually I know, LF would not stop just for a bang. Well, depends on what sort of bang (sic) but ohmigosh, here we go again with Pprune Skygods. Let us all consider the type of bang, the nature of the bang, what went or didn't go with the bang, was it unfyable (?), can bangs be unflyable ? Oh dear. I think we can tell the real pro's (often with tongue in cheek to add some humour )...........................oooops, not allowed. I'm with LF on this. Off to the hotel, stop on the way to buy a pair of leopardskin speedos & head for the pool.
My friend on board says the bang occurred as he nose was lifted, followed by a huge amount of vibration. I honestly don't know if his recollection is correct
And you are correct - if the nose was off the ground, there's no reason they'd be stopping...
spantax AGP sept 1982
DC-10 30 series fully loaded for JFK 381 pax plus 14 crew
high speed RTO at or past V1
due loud bang vibration and nose wheel shimmy
DC-10 overran runway, crossed a main road, hit a building, stopped mostly intact but caught fire in rear and centre section - a/c burnt out quickly but over 300 got out OK
sadly 50 or so did not - all at the back section
photos and pax report here https://tampagr8guy.wordpress.com/20...ax-flight-995/
Spantax Flight BX995 departed Madrid-Barajas at 09:36 on a charter flight to Málaga and New York. The DC-10 arrived at Málaga at 10:20 where 251 passengers embarked. The crew then taxied to the threshold of runway 14. Takeoff clearance was received at 11:58. During takeoff the copilot called out the 80 knots and 100 knots speeds. A short time before reaching V1 (162 kts), pieces of tread of a nose wheel tire started to detach. At or close to V1 a vibration was felt. The airplane continued to accelerate through VR. As the captain tried to rotate by applying up elevator, the vibration was of such magnitude that he feared that the plane might become uncontrollable after takeoff. He decided to abort the takeoff. At that point, with a maximum speed attained of 184 kts, there was 1295 m (4,250 feet) of runway left. The captain retarded the throttles and tried to select reverse thrust. The nr. 3 throttle slipped from his hands, causing a power asymmetry. The airplane veered slightly to the left. The Dc-10 overshot the runway at a speed of 110 kts, colliding with an ILS building, causing engine number 3 to separate. The airplane went through a fence and crossed a highway were it damaged three vehicles. It then collided with a farming construction, causing three quarters of the right wing to break off, as well as the right horizontal stabilizer. The aircraft stopped 450 m (1,475 feet) past the end of runway 14. A fire erupted in the rear of the fuselage.
PROBABLE CAUSE: "The Commission determines the cause of the accident to be the fractional detachment of the retread of the right wheel of the nose gear, originating a strong vibration which could not be identified by the captain, leading him into the belief that the aircraft would become uncontrollable in flight, and thus deciding to abandon the take-off over VR.
The decision of aborting the take-off, though not in accordance with the standard operation procedure, is in this case considered reasonable, on the base of the irregular circumstances that the crew had to face, the short period of time available to take the decision, the lack of training in case of wheel failure and the absence of take-off procedures when failure other than that of the engines occurs."
DC-10 30 series fully loaded for JFK 381 pax plus 14 crew
high speed RTO at or past V1
due loud bang vibration and nose wheel shimmy
DC-10 overran runway, crossed a main road, hit a building, stopped mostly intact but caught fire in rear and centre section - a/c burnt out quickly but over 300 got out OK
sadly 50 or so did not - all at the back section
photos and pax report here https://tampagr8guy.wordpress.com/20...ax-flight-995/
Spantax Flight BX995 departed Madrid-Barajas at 09:36 on a charter flight to Málaga and New York. The DC-10 arrived at Málaga at 10:20 where 251 passengers embarked. The crew then taxied to the threshold of runway 14. Takeoff clearance was received at 11:58. During takeoff the copilot called out the 80 knots and 100 knots speeds. A short time before reaching V1 (162 kts), pieces of tread of a nose wheel tire started to detach. At or close to V1 a vibration was felt. The airplane continued to accelerate through VR. As the captain tried to rotate by applying up elevator, the vibration was of such magnitude that he feared that the plane might become uncontrollable after takeoff. He decided to abort the takeoff. At that point, with a maximum speed attained of 184 kts, there was 1295 m (4,250 feet) of runway left. The captain retarded the throttles and tried to select reverse thrust. The nr. 3 throttle slipped from his hands, causing a power asymmetry. The airplane veered slightly to the left. The Dc-10 overshot the runway at a speed of 110 kts, colliding with an ILS building, causing engine number 3 to separate. The airplane went through a fence and crossed a highway were it damaged three vehicles. It then collided with a farming construction, causing three quarters of the right wing to break off, as well as the right horizontal stabilizer. The aircraft stopped 450 m (1,475 feet) past the end of runway 14. A fire erupted in the rear of the fuselage.
PROBABLE CAUSE: "The Commission determines the cause of the accident to be the fractional detachment of the retread of the right wheel of the nose gear, originating a strong vibration which could not be identified by the captain, leading him into the belief that the aircraft would become uncontrollable in flight, and thus deciding to abandon the take-off over VR.
The decision of aborting the take-off, though not in accordance with the standard operation procedure, is in this case considered reasonable, on the base of the irregular circumstances that the crew had to face, the short period of time available to take the decision, the lack of training in case of wheel failure and the absence of take-off procedures when failure other than that of the engines occurs."
It occurs to me that if both tires on one side blew more or less simultaneously, there would be very sudden yaw to that side that could easily be mistaken for a catastrophic engine failure - not a blow tire.
That's assuming of course the blown tires caused the RTO, not the other way around...
That's assuming of course the blown tires caused the RTO, not the other way around...
Perhaps one tyre blew, leaving the other one fully serviceable. Max braking whilst carrying twice the normal weight was probably what did for the second tyre.
Last edited by ZeBedie; 25th Nov 2015 at 20:02.
Rog747, your post brings it all back. I was there. First to land after runway inspection and assurance that fire cover still available. Not nice turning final and landing with a burning wreck on the end of the runway.
Thread creeping, a bit, but it becomes interesting again. The DC10 was past VR. Definite GO situation but what a dilemma. Commander on the spot, again, uncomfortable about the flying quality of his aircraft and facing calamity if he rejects.
As a spotty FO on Tridents, we were party to one of our aircraft rejecting at or just above V1 at Bilbao after running into a long wet puddle and facing non-acceleration. Tough call again, eh ? He rejected and ground-looped as the end of the short runway threatened !Overview with 20/20 hindsight vision was that he should have continued. Lively debate in the Vanners for years later !
Then, sometimes you don't even know. During Command Training (sorry, testing) after Base Training (sorry, testing) we finally headed home with ATC telling us that we had left lots of rubber all over the runway. No bang, no swing, no vibration. Training Captain (sorry, Testing Captain) did deliver a masterful lesson in Command "thinking", leadership, CRM etc as we carried on to Base. Cripes, didn't even like the bloke but it was very useful demonstration of the skills we new Commanders were expected to demonstrate.
Oh yeah, still got the speedo's.
Thread creeping, a bit, but it becomes interesting again. The DC10 was past VR. Definite GO situation but what a dilemma. Commander on the spot, again, uncomfortable about the flying quality of his aircraft and facing calamity if he rejects.
As a spotty FO on Tridents, we were party to one of our aircraft rejecting at or just above V1 at Bilbao after running into a long wet puddle and facing non-acceleration. Tough call again, eh ? He rejected and ground-looped as the end of the short runway threatened !Overview with 20/20 hindsight vision was that he should have continued. Lively debate in the Vanners for years later !
Then, sometimes you don't even know. During Command Training (sorry, testing) after Base Training (sorry, testing) we finally headed home with ATC telling us that we had left lots of rubber all over the runway. No bang, no swing, no vibration. Training Captain (sorry, Testing Captain) did deliver a masterful lesson in Command "thinking", leadership, CRM etc as we carried on to Base. Cripes, didn't even like the bloke but it was very useful demonstration of the skills we new Commanders were expected to demonstrate.
Oh yeah, still got the speedo's.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As at this point in the proceedings we don't know if it was one or both tyres that caused the loud "bang" and it is not SOP to stop for a blown tyre we have to assume that the reason for stopping was that directional control of the aircraft was in doubt....... And it IS SOP to stop for control problems.
Anyhow well done to the crew, no one hurt and no more damage to the aircraft just a lot of noise from the PPrune gallery Microsoft pilots.
Anyhow well done to the crew, no one hurt and no more damage to the aircraft just a lot of noise from the PPrune gallery Microsoft pilots.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: S/C de Tenerife
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couple of photos from a local newspaper in here, just for the record.
El Aeropuerto Tenerife Sur vuelve a estar operativo | Diario de Avisos
El Aeropuerto Tenerife Sur vuelve a estar operativo | Diario de Avisos
