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

Emirates B777 gear collapse @ DXB?

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

Emirates B777 gear collapse @ DXB?

Old 3rd Aug 2016, 12:38
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 49
Posts: 1,207
Seems they've now censored the tweet. Video of pax on airfield been removed!!
I've seen it (as many others I guess) but indeed taken down.
To be honest nothing major to report - a bunch of mostly Indian people walking away from the aircraft, some carrying cabin luggage. Seems pretty orderly, although not much ground support / firefighter to be seen.
atakacs is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 12:39
  #102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 53
Pax on airfield tweet here:
https://twitter.com/TimesNow/status/760804140154970113
chute packer is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 12:46
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newcastle
Age: 48
Posts: 547
Did an EK aircraft land infront?
An EK 773 from Chennai landed before it.
MATELO is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 12:48
  #104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Whatever the cause, I am in awe of the cabin crew and flight deck crew. To evacuate every passenger and all the crew from a total hull loss is beyond professional. It's legendary.

We always study every aspect of a failure. I hope we study every aspect of this success.

With rumours of a serious outcome for a member of the response team - we need to learn from that, too. Those who rush to help can be at highest risk themselves.

But, frankly, DAMN! Is the 777 the toughest jet ever? Built like a tank, but with no extra weight.
ChazR is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 12:53
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,210
Originally Posted by Keg View Post
A good outcome does not indicate an effective decision making process. Plenty of people have made appalling decisions over the years without a bad outcome. Some people have made extraordinary decisions in diabolical situations and not lived to see the next dawn.

Every decision to stay has significant risks. The point often lost in the QF32 incident was the crew had the ability with QF procedures to disembark with slides and not as an evac. This allowed them to nominate which slides they wanted to use and to do it at a more sedate rate that minimised injuries- ie they could have used main deck only slides and taken their time to get set up properly on the ground with appropriately briefed ABPs to assist.
So if a 'good decision' is made and because of that decision a number of pax are injured and some die, whereas had that action not been taken all would have survived uninjured. You would still defend the decision as a good one? Interesting logic.

The word decision implies that there are alternative courses of action. Those who claim 'this is a no-brainer' are effectively saying there is no 'decision' it is an automatic action. Easier to automate out flight crew when everything is 'no brainer' - like maintain pitch and power (another no brainer action proposed in other threads).
Ian W is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 12:56
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 680
Originally Posted by Bonzo777 View Post
Several pax running with their carry on baggage cases!! When will they ever learn?
Not sure learning curve is possible, working on the assumption it's probably not the same pax involved in every crash.

Maybe given they just survived a plane crash some are in shock and aren't really in the clearest, most logical state of mind.
harrogate is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 12:59
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 1500m from DXB 30L
Posts: 13
Good point hg.
Hopefully I'll never experience that state of mind...

Last edited by marcoalza; 3rd Aug 2016 at 13:03. Reason: typo
marcoalza is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:04
  #108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 355
Pax reaching for the overhead locker

Any pax between me and the exit seen reaching for their luggage in the bins, putting my life at risk, gets punched by me, repeatedly if needs be.

All pax photographed with their hand luggage need to be arrested for disobeying the lawful instruction of the flight crew.

I'm only glad that there were no pax or crew fatalities but one day people will die because ignorant pax deem their hand luggage more important than a human life.

Time to introduce locking overhead bins. Only accessible when the the seatbelt sign has been turned off. Simples!
asdf1234 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:08
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,220
B773 performance struggles at that those conditions.
Not so sure I agree with that statement. Perhaps a heavy 773 with a single engine failure would struggle in those conditions with it's climb out limit but both engines, at the end of the flight with minimal fuel? The climb performance would be more than adequate. The QRH puts the landing climb limit weight with F20 (landing F30, go around F20) for 49 degrees at about 300 tonnes giving approx 50 tonnes over MLW.

The difficulty is separating the 'training scenario' that we all get in the sim of majority single engine go arounds with the real life scenario where a go around will often be conducted with both donks operating.

Personally, excluding the possibility of severe windshear, I don't think aircraft performance will have been an issue but that is hypothesis on my part and therefore speculation.
Wirbelsturm is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:08
  #110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Planet Earth, mostly
Posts: 426
The only thing more foolish that trying to get your luggage off a crashed plane, asdf, is starting a fight in the middle of an evacuation.

And locking overhead bins would only make the situation worse as pax try and figure out why they wont open. There is a simple solution however, don't let pax take any luggage into the cabin in the first place.
etrang is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:11
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 355
Originally Posted by etrang View Post
The only thing more foolish that trying to get your luggage off a crashed plane, asdf, is starting a fight in the middle of an evacuation.
I'm not fighting them, i'm punching them to the ground in order to save my life.
asdf1234 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:17
  #112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 22
Could it be that on the initial heavy touchdown something came adrift and power was not available from the no:2 engine? That plus a hot day, tailwind and an old straight 300 (not a great performer on a good day), may explain the alleged 'sinking back onto the runway' theory. Pure speculation of course...
flyonthewall is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:18
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 55
Posts: 563
If they had a problem configuring, they would have aborted the approach.

If they knew in advance, they never would have been allowed to land at DXB.
BT!

If the captain of an aircraft has an in-flight emergency and decides that an airport is the most appropriate place to go to, he will go there. The airport authorities don't get a say in the matter, even though they may wish he went to the next airport. Subsequent disruption is not a factor in deciding where to go.
Super VC-10 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:23
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,220
F20 Gear down landing rate of climb for 225T at 49 degrees gives you approx 390fpm climb at sea level.

Things get interesting if you forget to go from F30 to F20 in the Go-Around.

F30 Gear down landing rate of climb at 225T at 49 degrees gives you approx minus 190fpm at sea level!

Note, all these figures are for SINGLE ENGINE.

Performance with both engines even at 49 degrees is not an issue.


No airport will tell you you can't land with an emergency. They may 'suggest' other options but, as Captain, it's your choice.

Edited to add that these are for the 777-300 GE115. My operator doesn't have the straight 300 so willing to be corrected.
Wirbelsturm is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:25
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mk. 1 desk at present...
Posts: 356
Originally Posted by asdf1234 View Post
Time to introduce locking overhead bins. Only accessible when the the seatbelt sign has been turned off. Simples!
Great idea - until someone's laptop lithium battery goes into runaway and the locking system fails in the 'locked' mode...
Ranger One is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:26
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Delete me
Age: 53
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by log0008 View Post
and why should you attempt to land?
Cos they were already on fire? I do wish someone would clarify the 'near miss' report tho, if cutting the wingtip off in flight and starting a fire qualifies as a near miss then that'd do it Mind you given the near miss between two unrelated planes in India , the originating country of this flight, perhaps the media is mis-attributing an entirely different incident.

Oh my God who is this pink faced bearded bespeckled buffoon on Al Jazeera right now, he looks like the lights are triggering his fight-or-flight response but sadly he opted for the former and didn't leave the studio, so merely opined that something ... probably ... went ... wrong.... is it so unreasonable to expect that someone called upon to give "expert" testimony following a life threatening emergency would have the internet?
Infieldg is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:29
  #117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Earth
Posts: 82
BT!

If the captain of an aircraft has an in-flight emergency and decides that an airport is the most appropriate place to go to, he will go there. The airport authorities don't get a say in the matter, even though they may wish he went to the next airport. Subsequent disruption is not a factor in deciding where to go.
Super VC-10 is online now Report Post
Nice rant Super VC-10, but ignorant.

If a jet has a problem that is going to cause problems with the airport - e.g. a Hydraulic leak - then he won't be allowed into OMDB, it'll be sent to OMDW, a 5 min flight away.

Local procedures. You can rant all you like about Captain's authority, if the problem doesn't occur on final, and there is time to plan for it, the jet is going to OMDW.
keepitrealok is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:33
  #118 (permalink)  
ddd
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Paradise
Age: 56
Posts: 87
EK521

Last Update: 2016-08-03 12:57:11 GMT
An Emirates Airlines Boeing 777-300, registration A6-EMW performing flight EK-521 from Thiruvananthapuram (India) to Dubai (United Arab Emirates) with 282 passengers and 18 crew, was on final approach to Dubai's runway 12L at 12:41L (08:41Z) but attempted to go around from low height. The aircraft however did not climb, but after retracting the gear touched down on the runway and burst into flames. All occupants evacuated safely, no injuries are being reported. The aircraft burned down completely.

The airline reported: "Emirates can confirm that an incident happened at Dubai International Airport on 3rd August 2016 at about 12.45pm local time."

United Arab Emirates Government confirmed an Emirates aircraft arriving from India suffered a crash landing at Dubai Airport, all passengers have been evacuated, there are no reports of injuries.

According to ATC recordings the aircraft performed a normal approach and landing, there was no priority or emergency declared. Upon contacting tower tower reminded the crew of lowering the gear and cleared the aircraft to land. Another approach reported on tower frequency. About 2 minutes after EK-521 reported on tower, the crew reported going around, tower instructed the aircraft to climb to 4000 feet, the crew acknowledged climbing to 4000 feet, a few seconds later tower instructs the next arrival to go around and alerts emergency services. The position of the aircraft is described near the end of the runway.

Related NOTAM:
A1156/16 - AD CLSD. 03 AUG 11:20 2016 UNTIL 03 AUG 14:00 2016. CREATED: 03 AUG 11:18 2016

A1155/16 - AD CLSD. 03 AUG 10:00 2016 UNTIL 03 AUG 12:00 2016. CREATED: 03 AUG 10:07 2016

Metars (Airport: Dubai, Dubai International Airport):
OMDB 030900Z 11021KT 3000 BLDU NSC 49/07 Q0993 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 1500
OMDB 030800Z 14012KT 100V180 6000 NSC 48/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000 DU
OMDB 030749Z 14012KT 110V180 6000 NSC 47/09 Q0994 WS ALL RWY TEMPO 35015KT 4000DU
OMDB 030700Z 06007KT 360V100 8000 NSC 44/10 Q0995 NOSIG
OMDB 030600Z 06005KT 350V100 8000 NSC 42/12 Q0995 NOSIG

The last seconds of slide out after failed go-around:


The aircraft erupting into flames (Video: Kazim Abbas):


The wreckage of A6-EMW after fire was extinguished (Photo: dotEmirates):


A6-EMW on fire at Dubai (Photo: Airport WebCams):


Map (Graphics: AVH/Google Earth):
ddd is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:33
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 355
Originally Posted by Ranger One View Post
Great idea - until someone's laptop lithium battery goes into runaway and the locking system fails in the 'locked' mode...
So the laptop battery goes awol in an unlocked bin at 38000ft. You still have an overhead bin fire to contend with. Who says the unlocked bin fire will be noticed and acted upon in time?

Locking the bins when the seatbelt sign is on will prevent injuries and potentially save lives throughout periods or turbulence, post landing taxy and emergency evacuations.

Go bang your head a bit more, you seem to enjoy it.
asdf1234 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 13:44
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 298
I know FR24 isn't totally reliable, but there were two aircraft immediately ahead of, and behind the aircraft. No known emergency declared prior to touchdown, and no emergency squawk. So the report of planning for an emergency landing doesn't look right. Unless quickly announced during a short lived windshear event, which I can't see happening, as the crew would be likely fighting the conditions.

This is Emirates' very first hull loss in 31 years of ops.

With respect to the crew and passengers.

Last edited by OntimeexceptACARS; 3rd Aug 2016 at 13:51. Reason: added text
OntimeexceptACARS is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.