S7 Close one at Domodedovo
Thread Starter
S7 Close one at Domodedovo
Video here :
https://www.rt.com/russia/466077-rus...domodedovo-s7/
Shades of IL76? Or tech issue? Or maybe loadsheet issues?
OTEA
https://www.rt.com/russia/466077-rus...domodedovo-s7/
Shades of IL76? Or tech issue? Or maybe loadsheet issues?
OTEA
Beacon Outbound
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: "Home is were the answer machine is"
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The carrier confirmed the emergency situation, adding that it didn’t prevent the jet from completing its flight and safely landing at Simferopol airport in Russia’s Crimea.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So after nearly running out of runway and hitting a bunch of lights it safely continued to an airport in Russia's Crimea. Where would you even start to comment on that? There is so much wrong in that one sentence alone, and that is even before you start looking at flight safety issues.
Always subject to confirmation, of course - Aviation Herald quotes sources reporting erroneous weight calculation: using ZFW for gross weight, either/or error of 15 tons (!)
Tires damaged, glass from lights found in gear. Nothing (yet) on evidence of tail strike.
Incident: S7 B738 at Moscow on Aug 5th 2019, overran runway on takeoff
Tires damaged, glass from lights found in gear. Nothing (yet) on evidence of tail strike.
Incident: S7 B738 at Moscow on Aug 5th 2019, overran runway on takeoff
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always subject to confirmation, of course - Aviation Herald quotes sources reporting erroneous weight calculation: using ZFW for gross weight, either/or error of 15 tons (!)
Tires damaged, glass from lights found in gear. Nothing (yet) on evidence of tail strike.
Incident: S7 B738 at Moscow on Aug 5th 2019, overran runway on takeoff
Tires damaged, glass from lights found in gear. Nothing (yet) on evidence of tail strike.
Incident: S7 B738 at Moscow on Aug 5th 2019, overran runway on takeoff
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks about 11,500 ft on GE.
How does a 737 use all of that, even with max flex?
Normally see them use up to about 6,000 ft to get airborne, so with max flex (75% thrust I guess) instead of full thrust, I would have thought 8 to 9,000 ft to get airborne.
It may have been an intersection T.O. of course. Never liked the idea of leaving good runway behind.
How does a 737 use all of that, even with max flex?
Normally see them use up to about 6,000 ft to get airborne, so with max flex (75% thrust I guess) instead of full thrust, I would have thought 8 to 9,000 ft to get airborne.
It may have been an intersection T.O. of course. Never liked the idea of leaving good runway behind.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Netherlands
Age: 71
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dixi.
There were always lots of opinions about "leaving RWY behind You" as a risk issue. I tend to disagree, then why Take Off from runways that did not have room to spare? Or carry another 10T of fuel just because it feels better?
I saw my job as being a risk manager, and if time or money could be saved I'd always opt for the cheapest/quickest way to get airborne.
Come to speak of risk: I was never very much at ease when after waiting on the TWY for the one degree drop in temperature in Mexico city, to be legal for the evening T/O, getting the fully laden B744 off the ground. Seeing the opposite red THR lights pass under You, still slowly rotating towards target climb attitude....
BTW, as far as I know all airlines use the OAT as reference for the TO Distance, how about TOR (Temperature Over RWY....) Probably airlines will not like to be remembered at this. Black tarmac sitting in the sun all day with no wind....engines sucking that hot air from just a few feet above it...
This video shows the the 737 not really willing to get airborne, even with its nose pointed up. Looks like not enough power. Will be interesting to read the report, if the pilots used old style "firewalling" the throttles when they saw they were running out of concrete. Or is that something the glass cockpit drivers are forgetting also? OK, OK, we old style manual flyers, we had the "Potomac" accident as well...so nothing new...
There were always lots of opinions about "leaving RWY behind You" as a risk issue. I tend to disagree, then why Take Off from runways that did not have room to spare? Or carry another 10T of fuel just because it feels better?
I saw my job as being a risk manager, and if time or money could be saved I'd always opt for the cheapest/quickest way to get airborne.
Come to speak of risk: I was never very much at ease when after waiting on the TWY for the one degree drop in temperature in Mexico city, to be legal for the evening T/O, getting the fully laden B744 off the ground. Seeing the opposite red THR lights pass under You, still slowly rotating towards target climb attitude....
BTW, as far as I know all airlines use the OAT as reference for the TO Distance, how about TOR (Temperature Over RWY....) Probably airlines will not like to be remembered at this. Black tarmac sitting in the sun all day with no wind....engines sucking that hot air from just a few feet above it...
This video shows the the 737 not really willing to get airborne, even with its nose pointed up. Looks like not enough power. Will be interesting to read the report, if the pilots used old style "firewalling" the throttles when they saw they were running out of concrete. Or is that something the glass cockpit drivers are forgetting also? OK, OK, we old style manual flyers, we had the "Potomac" accident as well...so nothing new...
Looks similar to the Sunwing incident at BFS a few years ago? Flex thrust wrong due error in inputting air temperature but mistake in weight calculation could have same effect. .
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Canada
Age: 49
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems more and more discussions are occurring with fellow colleagues about safety in the aviation as of late. Safety at the lowest cost, obtainable profit being the common denominator. The only ones now stopping the buck going lower are the insurance companies, but if they could make that MEL shorter by managing the risk, well... 
Then we are all to wholeheartedly support that decision...risk management. "Every flight is a mission after all L-O-L "( tv series background laughter popping up somehow in real life
)
This example here just should not have happened at all, period. And if it continued flight, well, bring out the gimp. I understand the pressure one is submitted to as in command, I've seen both ends of the rope, private and airline. But this sh*t just doesn't fly! Certainly not continuing to destination!! (If so...)
BTW, like that TOR, they have RVR now too don't they... Nah, common sense is flying out the window too these days. I've flown jump seat many a times, and when waiting bring up those little "quirks" he (or she/ it/ they/ whatever) made during the flight that had that potential to REALLY work out bad, but worked out luckily after all. They first become agitated that you bring it up, then become even more agitated that you made them agitated. Yes, that's right, YOU! are the wrong one here dude, TWICE!
But then again I'm seeing this everywhere. It's these times more and more I just don't want to discuss with them anymore, but slap sense into them; get off your lazy ass every time yes, verify input 100% yes, do that crawl around and get on your knees in the pouring rain if needed yes, every time yes, and unless well within tolerable? margins, make ALL those performance calculations again if delayed and weather is changing yes. And stop getting all worked up if someone verifies your input or work!
If you act like a Boss, be the Boss and do it like a Boss You mess up, own it! After 3 strikes you're out. Re-certify or go to ground handling.
Just my 1 cent these days.
(ps. There are also some very wonderful colleagues to work with, some...)
Then we are all to wholeheartedly support that decision...risk management. "Every flight is a mission after all L-O-L "( tv series background laughter popping up somehow in real life)This example here just should not have happened at all, period. And if it continued flight, well, bring out the gimp. I understand the pressure one is submitted to as in command, I've seen both ends of the rope, private and airline. But this sh*t just doesn't fly! Certainly not continuing to destination!! (If so...)
BTW, like that TOR, they have RVR now too don't they... Nah, common sense is flying out the window too these days. I've flown jump seat many a times, and when waiting bring up those little "quirks" he (or she/ it/ they/ whatever) made during the flight that had that potential to REALLY work out bad, but worked out luckily after all. They first become agitated that you bring it up, then become even more agitated that you made them agitated. Yes, that's right, YOU! are the wrong one here dude, TWICE!
But then again I'm seeing this everywhere. It's these times more and more I just don't want to discuss with them anymore, but slap sense into them; get off your lazy ass every time yes, verify input 100% yes, do that crawl around and get on your knees in the pouring rain if needed yes, every time yes, and unless well within tolerable? margins, make ALL those performance calculations again if delayed and weather is changing yes. And stop getting all worked up if someone verifies your input or work!
If you act like a Boss, be the Boss and do it like a Boss You mess up, own it! After 3 strikes you're out. Re-certify or go to ground handling.
Just my 1 cent these days.
(ps. There are also some very wonderful colleagues to work with, some...)
