Runway material 'liberates' during take off roll, severely damages aircraft
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 59
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capngrog
Thanks for the pictures.
The old 1000 words worth.
Could a brisk left xwind help make this damage, me wonders?
And DAR
I also struggled with the first picture and the many excellent theories, until the kid in me said : " But , Dude the registration is surely aft on most aircraft!?"
To witch he was promptly asked to mind his own business and drink his beer! Eh!
Cheers
Cpt B
The old 1000 words worth.
Could a brisk left xwind help make this damage, me wonders?
And DAR
I also struggled with the first picture and the many excellent theories, until the kid in me said : " But , Dude the registration is surely aft on most aircraft!?"
To witch he was promptly asked to mind his own business and drink his beer! Eh!
Cheers
Cpt B
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orbit
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reminds me of Holguín (Cuba). Years ago company MD11 blew a large hole in the runway upon rotation, destination Europe.(not the hole
) . We had just landed, back at the pool received a roster revision, 1 day became a 7 day layover, runway(the only 1) closed. Not a bad place to spend a week doing...
*
) . We had just landed, back at the pool received a roster revision, 1 day became a 7 day layover, runway(the only 1) closed. Not a bad place to spend a week doing...*
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That damage sure is high up the fuselage side though!
Really, you guys want to argue vortex generator vs vortex dissipator????
How about, it was responding to a post that said engines cant suck up pavement.....
Jeeez.
(on a side note, its called a tail number.....)
Last edited by Smythe; 1st Jun 2019 at 02:43.
I vividly recall seeing a RAF Tristar shred a layer of tarmac out of the Bangor, Maine runway! This occurred at rotation and left a large, but not particularly deep hole, in the top layer of tarmac, neatly exposing an earlier runway tarmac layer below.
Actually, I beg to differ - this is an aircraft registration. Tail numbers are more commonly associated with military aircraft, and the term is well-used, for example, in the USA military because the aircraft identification is a number and is almost always on the tail (fin) of the aircraft.
Actually, I beg to differ - this is an aircraft registration. Tail numbers are more commonly associated with military aircraft, and the term is well-used, for example, in the USA military because the aircraft identification is a number and is almost always on the tail (fin) of the aircraft.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, I beg to differ - this is an aircraft registration. Tail numbers are more commonly associated with military aircraft, and the term is well-used, for example, in the USA military because the aircraft identification is a number and is almost always on the tail (fin) of the aircraft.
On civilian aircraft tail number refers to the registration number.
On Military aircraft, tail number is the serial number.
Examples: https://flightaware.com/resources/registration/ https://aviation-edge.com/aircraft-r...mber-database/
and please...dont beg.
The empennage also known as the tail or tail assembly, is a structure at the rear of an aircraft that provides stability during flight, in a way similar to the feathers on an arrow.
Last edited by Smythe; 8th Jun 2019 at 07:10.
Tail number is synonymous with registration number.
On civilian aircraft tail number refers to the registration number.
On civilian aircraft tail number refers to the registration number.
See also UK CAA CAP 523.
In the early 1990s a PW 4060 powered 767-300 was damaged by flying asphalt pavement during an engine run-up at Schiphol-East. The damage to the aft fuselage and horizontal stabilizer was extensive and a new stabilizer was even flown in from Seattle and exchanged for the damaged one. In this case it was evidently not from pavement material thrown up by the landing gear, as the aircraft was stationary.
On June 4th, 1989, a CF6-50 powered 747-200 was a decidedly uncommon replacement for a DC-10 to Heraklion Airport, Crete, Greece. Landing as well as take-off were on 09, necessitating for take-off a backtrack towards the otherwise generally overflown western runway end with a 180 deg turn on the turning pan.
The airport was normally only used by smaller aircraft types with less than 4 engines. After take-off a huge rising column of dust was observed, a kind of dirty thermal, and the next airplane landing reported a lot of loose pavement material and damaged runway lights. The runway was subsequently closed for some time, and a shorter crosswind runway was opened for those who could accept it instead of diverting.
The 747 was not scheduled there again. But no airframe damage was reported (as far as I know). In this case, the outboard engines may have swept up loose stuff from the pavement edges, i.e. outside the path of the stabilizer, and the inner engines, well, those were blowing on ground frequented by two- and three-holers!
On June 4th, 1989, a CF6-50 powered 747-200 was a decidedly uncommon replacement for a DC-10 to Heraklion Airport, Crete, Greece. Landing as well as take-off were on 09, necessitating for take-off a backtrack towards the otherwise generally overflown western runway end with a 180 deg turn on the turning pan.
The airport was normally only used by smaller aircraft types with less than 4 engines. After take-off a huge rising column of dust was observed, a kind of dirty thermal, and the next airplane landing reported a lot of loose pavement material and damaged runway lights. The runway was subsequently closed for some time, and a shorter crosswind runway was opened for those who could accept it instead of diverting.
The 747 was not scheduled there again. But no airframe damage was reported (as far as I know). In this case, the outboard engines may have swept up loose stuff from the pavement edges, i.e. outside the path of the stabilizer, and the inner engines, well, those were blowing on ground frequented by two- and three-holers!
Last edited by Plumb Bob; 9th Jun 2019 at 02:43. Reason: Minor corrections
That damage sure is high up the fuselage side though
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...=rep1&type=pdf
Early 90's a Monarch 733, departing to MAH. The crew only found out when they did their walkaround at destination that the leading edge of the tailplane was battered and had blocks lodged in it. Thing with block paving - once one block is liberated, the rest will quickly follow. Luton had just block paved their turning circle.
I believe Luton had a similar problem several years ago with block paving being thrown up and damaging the tailplane of a departing jet.
Early 90's a Monarch 733, departing to MAH. The crew only found out when they did their walkaround at destination that the leading edge of the tailplane was battered and had blocks lodged in it. Thing with block paving - once one block is liberated, the rest will quickly follow. Luton had just block paved their turning circle.
