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

Maroc 737 in loss-of-lift incident at FRA

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

Maroc 737 in loss-of-lift incident at FRA

Old 27th Aug 2016, 14:55
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by nomorecatering
I heared on another form that that PNF's airspeed indicator had a pitot problem and was over reading. Seems plausalbe enough.
This Ci 738 reported a problem reading the speed as well IIRC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21qZPaCRSQI
armchairpilot94116 is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2016, 15:08
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Sandy lane
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What a bunch of amateurs at HR trying to defend this take off - you would get more respect if you just hold up your hands and say we ****** up, we are human! Not try and tell us the moon is made out of cream cheese.
too_much is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2016, 19:51
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: England
Posts: 1,079
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
A stop would have been ok at FRA
Presumably, since they were rotating, they had passed V1. Are you advocating a stop after V1?
ZeBedie is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2016, 20:10
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think the 'monday morning fly halfs, and scrum halfs' who are sharpening their knives for a beheading are still waiting for their turn in the real world. If these guys screwed up they did a good job of not burying themselves in a burning hole. Let's wait for the full facts: although I share the pessimism in that.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2016, 20:13
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is no problem at all departing with flaps1 on a 4000m rwy even with a 800.
WeMadeYou is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 07:02
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: planet earth
Age: 73
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by atakacs
Is this being formally investigated as an incident by the BFU?
This question was asked to BFU

Their answer:
"BFU has no knowledge about this incident.
BFU is not investigating."
rageye is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 08:28
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Age: 72
Posts: 896
Received 33 Likes on 17 Posts
Looking at the footage, does it seem likely to anyone else, that the technique used by the PF may be something that he has used previously (on many occasions) in a Mirage or an F-16?
Although I'm not sure how that fits in with managing an encounter with wake turbulence.
WingNut60 is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 09:13
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
V Speeds

(SLF here)

I've been watching a lot of YT videos about flight training etc. While these 152s etc. didn't set any speed bugs, part of the takeoff briefing was sometimes, "In case of engine failure below 500ft, land straight ahead on the runway, if below 1000ft, land straight ahead in a field, if above, turn back and land on whatever runway".

Living near EDDN, I see 738s etc. taking off from the 2700m runway with what looks like 50+% to spare.

Originally Posted by ZeBedie
Presumably, since they were rotating, they had passed V1. Are you advocating a stop after V1?
Now I wonder - is it possible that V1 on the 4000m runway at EDDF is actually above Vr or even V2?

I guess it's possibly a matter of definition - a problem above V2 is probably not a rejected takeoff any more but a forced landing that just happens to be on the runway just taken off of... ;-)
RealUlli is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 09:17
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
What a bunch of amateurs at HR trying to defend this take off - you would get more respect if you just hold up your hands and say we ****** up, we are human! Not try and tell us the moon is made out of cream cheese.
This will never happen in certain cultures, captain is God and is never wrong. Blame it on the ATC, weather, maintenance, aircraft, passengers, but - captain is never wrong.

Personally, I don't know what I would have done in this scenario, either abort or continue the roll until GS approaches tyre limit and then rotate. Certainly I wouldn't try to hold the aircraft at ~ 10 pitch or so and wait for it to gain speed to finally lift off. It's not a soft field takeoff in a C172...
FlyingStone is online now  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 09:28
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: El Dorado
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Isn't it quite astonishing that none of the media seem to pick up this story and the subsequent Twitter message?
LLuCCiFeR is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 16:36
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: on the move
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PA on TKOFF

Still remember that day when travelling as pax on a RAM flight out of MRS to CMN.
Captain was still doing his welcome PA during roll out.
Finally ended up 'I wish you a pleasant flight' while we were then doing a good 80kts.
Wasn't impressed and wondered when the approach brief would start...
discus2 is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 17:13
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Reading
Age: 41
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm interested here in the question of whether it's better to try and continue takeoff rather than reject.

Given they had probably 3000m+ of runway left is it really a good idea to try and force the thing into the air, when you don't have any real idea why it isn't flying? Yes if it's a short runway then you may have no option, but with that much runway remaining, a rejected takeoff needn't even be aggressive.

I'm always slightly perplexed by the way in which rejected take-offs are talked about as extremely risky manouvers, anywhere above 100 knots. Especially if you're in a narrowbody, and have a lot of runway left, what's the big deal? Think about high altitude airports, the same planes are routinely landing at ground speeds of 170+ knots and it's no big deal.
neila83 is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 19:12
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A 700 will use about 1200 meters from start to rotation on a derated take off. You can take off, land and stop safely with a touch of brakes and idle reverse on a 4000 meter runway.
Fl 1 is perfectly safe on both 700 and 800 NGs. The only time I use more is when I am runway limited.
Yes, you get less tail clearance with FL 1, but if you know how to rotate an aircraft, it will never be a problem.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2016, 22:53
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the Old Folks' Home
Posts: 420
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Not Like AF447

At least he didn't keep pulling, hoping it would start to fly like was done in AF447.
Smilin_Ed is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2016, 13:12
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Reading
Age: 41
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZeBedie
Presumably, since they were rotating, they had passed V1. Are you advocating a stop after V1?
Yes, if V1 is limted by Vr rather than stopping distance. If they were heavier, Vr would be higher and so would V1. Would it then suddenly become unsafe to stop at that higher speed?

It's about using common sense. If you know you've got 3000m of runway left, you pull back, the plane won't fly, you don't know why, perhaps staying on the ground and starting to stop with plenty of room left for gentle braking is best?

Planes land all day long at high altitude airports at 170 knots +. If you're in a narrow body on a 4000m runway, stopping after V1 isn't an issue. Too many seem to think a plane has some kind of self destruct mode built into it if you even think about it and would rather take a potentially crippled plane into the air.

Of course, if there is ambiguity about stopping distance remaining, its different, but here there absolutely isn't
neila83 is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2016, 13:16
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I quite like the idea of being flown by pilots who can not only **** up but can get themselves unfecked.

Novel, according to some who post on here...
glad rag is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2016, 16:37
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,541
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
It appears that we have the "CVR"

https://youtu.be/s8ptLtYt7wk
Check Airman is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 23:56
  #78 (permalink)  
atlas12
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Centaurus
Is that so? Couldn't find anything of that advice in the 737 FCTM for normal ops take off.. Another personal technique, maybe?
Sure, it hasn't failed me yet
 
Old 31st Aug 2016, 00:04
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,994
Received 15 Likes on 11 Posts
Realulli---no never, V1 can never be faster than VR or V2....

A single engine Cessna 152 is just a little bit different to a twin engine Jet.....

http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/medi..._DEP_SEQ07.pdf

http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/medi..._DEP-SEQ04.pdf

And this JAR25 extract

http://www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/S...en/JAR-25.html

Last edited by ACMS; 31st Aug 2016 at 00:19.
ACMS is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 02:05
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,651
Received 131 Likes on 69 Posts
Originally Posted by Check Airman
Only in America!!
Capn Bloggs is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.