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 25th Aug 2016, 11:54
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maroc 737 in loss-of-lift incident at FRA

I' m curious what comments there will be on this one:
readywhenreaching is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 12:05
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: In Space
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My guess is a performance error. Clearly in the video a low flap setting was used (flaps 1)so my guess is that performance was based on a higher flap setting but the pilots used a low flap setting instead, either intentional or not. Which resulted in rotating earlier and nearly tail striking. The airport is Frankfurt which has two very long runways, so flaps 1 could of easily been used (if performance allowed).
B737900er is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 12:11
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: LIME&LIPO
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
this one looks very ankward, especially when it touches down again after liftoff. It reminds me of people forgetting about density altitude or ice over the wings.
lucavettu is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 12:50
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The wrong time zone...
Posts: 776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Crikey, that's not flash!
josephfeatherweight is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 13:08
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe something to do with that big white triangle that's following them down the runway.
Nemrytter is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 13:40
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am curious what the trim was set to. To me seems like a rather short take off roll for a (my assumption) reduced thrust take off on a long runway.
172_driver is online now  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 13:49
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: California, USA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Upon further examination - look like a 0 flaps takeoff.

A little something to talk about during the debrief for sure !!
aviator is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 13:56
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Culture

Cock up up followed by cover up. They were lucky to get away with it.
Bigpants is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 13:57
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S51 30 W060 10.
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
wrong derate maybe...incorrect flap setting. Had it been a 738 we woulda seen a show of sparks at the tail.
Another possibility is thrust setting and V speeds calculated for a wrong takeoff weight. ZFW entered prior to refueling, calculations made on a ZFW + fuel remaining from previous flight. Long flight ahead, 10-15 tons of fuel not accounted for.....otherwise it's real hard to not become airborne. Any airplane with the correct thurst setting and a smooth rotation rate, like the one in the vid, can be rotated 10 knots prior to Vr and it will fly. This sure was a combination of "wrongs".

Last edited by sudden Winds; 25th Aug 2016 at 14:19. Reason: :)
sudden Winds is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 14:07
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 8,282
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think I can, I think I can, there, I can, I can!
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 14:12
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flaps 1 takeoff. Planes don't fly if you rotate at too slow a speed. You can see the nose wheel extended early in the TO roll.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 14:34
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, he's definitely got at least Flap 1 set because you can see the slats extended. I cannot recall if Flap 1 is a takeoff flap setting for the 737 but, if it is not, they would have got a config warning on applying thrust. My quarterbacking would guess at wrong weights in the FMC (ZFW entered into the GWT field etc) giving the wrong speeds on the speed tape. I'm very glad the PF did the right thing when confronted with a lack of lift and gave the wings a few more drops of IAS before having another go when a bigger arrow of upward energy was formed. He didn't panic and try and stop, so I reckon he made a good job out of a bad situation, even if they did (maybe) cause that problem in the first place. Incorrect FMC entries have been around for quite some time now and I'm sure there will be more but let's hope better data entry procedures will mitigate against too many occurring.
Pontius is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 14:55
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks like a zero fuel weight error, which can happen very easily, especially if you're rushing. However, a 1 tonne error only equates to around 1 knot on the speeds so it would have had to be a big discrepancy. The PF did a good job though IMHO as a tail strike was on the cards.
CHfour is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 15:15
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could be as simple as the PF rotating when the PM called V1.
Miles Magister is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 15:20
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 56
Posts: 2,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cock up up followed by cover up. They were lucky to get away with it.
So obviously past V1, what should they do but "cover up" ?
His dudeness is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 15:36
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dorset UK
Age: 69
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Miles Magister
4000m runway so pretty sure V1 and Vr would be the same for a 737 even at max weight.
dixi188 is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 15:50
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airplanes I fly have an audio Takeoff Warning if flaps and trim are not set when throttles are advanced.
Three Lima Charlie is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 20:05
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: LPL, UK
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RAM Response...

Royal Air Maroc has apparently responded as follows:

"After false information was spread out regarding flight AT811 from FRA to CMN on July 23, we want to clarify that during take-off, ATC advised of possible wake turbulence from adjacent landing A330. In turn, the Captain decided to execute a manoeuvre to gain more speed until they reached speeds that would ensure a safe take-off".

Really???
CaptainSandL is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 20:37
  #19 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
overhasty protective PR measure if you ask me..not very persuasive.
readywhenreaching is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2016, 20:38
  #20 (permalink)  
A4

Ut Sementem Feeceris
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Right..........
A4 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.