Pegasus accident in SAW; just reported
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 643
SFP OPTION:
• A reduced idle thrust transition delay
between approach- and ground-idle speeds, which improves stopping distances and in- creases field-length-limited landing weight.
• Increased flight-spoiler deflection from 30 degrees to 60 degrees, which aids brake performance when landing.
• A two-position tailskid at the rear of the aircraft. The tailskid protects longer- bodied 737-800s and -900ERs against inad- vertent tailstrikes during landing, which al- lows higher aircraft approach attitudes and lower landing speeds.
It wouldn't have mattered if they had parachutes!, they die was cast once they decided to land.. or rather didn't elect for a missed approach like the preceding 2 aircraft.
• A reduced idle thrust transition delay
between approach- and ground-idle speeds, which improves stopping distances and in- creases field-length-limited landing weight.
• Increased flight-spoiler deflection from 30 degrees to 60 degrees, which aids brake performance when landing.
• A two-position tailskid at the rear of the aircraft. The tailskid protects longer- bodied 737-800s and -900ERs against inad- vertent tailstrikes during landing, which al- lows higher aircraft approach attitudes and lower landing speeds.
It wouldn't have mattered if they had parachutes!, they die was cast once they decided to land.. or rather didn't elect for a missed approach like the preceding 2 aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: paris
Posts: 24
Originally Posted by grizzled
Re Clandestino's post (#213):
Best post of a general nature regarding culture and safety in a very long time. Should be mandatory reading for those heading off on their first foray into a culture different from their own.
Grizz
Best post of a general nature regarding culture and safety in a very long time. Should be mandatory reading for those heading off on their first foray into a culture different from their own.
Grizz
Things were under control till recently, seems arrogance and negligence are back ...
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
It wouldn't have mattered if they had parachutes!, they die was cast once they decided to land.. or rather didn't elect for a missed approach like the preceding 2 aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Colonies
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by Peter H
Looks like p104 in https://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/nl/med...t_s_dekker.pdf
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Been around the block
Posts: 617
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher
I don't believe this is quite correct. The FMC derived headwind/tailwind component is actually quite accurate, although it does have an averaging function and thus not instantaneous. The crosswind component on the other hand is not reliable. There were other cues, GS, ROD, thrust levers back close to idle and the visual picture would have looked like a rocketship.
There is a good paper on this tha covers FMC wind component calculation: Safety aspects of tailwind operationsSafety aspects of tailwind operations Safety aspects of tailwind operations G.W.H. van Es and A.K. Karwal
There is a good paper on this tha covers FMC wind component calculation: Safety aspects of tailwind operationsSafety aspects of tailwind operations Safety aspects of tailwind operations G.W.H. van Es and A.K. Karwal
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Netherlands
Age: 68
Posts: 152
Not even W/V measuring units along a RWY can be trusted. I remember a long discussion with a MET chap (whose position was on a mayor airport) who noted bizarre wind values, even on quiet days. He found out the units could pick up vortices from departing A/C's wake.
Normally the MET observers would discard the readings as "spurious" signals, but later those values were auto-inserted in reports like ATIS.
When reporting that to his superiors he was told to shut up because in that time the MET service wanted to go fully automatic w/o any human intervention anymore.... and said that if the readings were like they were, the pilots needed to be warned for that......
Normally the MET observers would discard the readings as "spurious" signals, but later those values were auto-inserted in reports like ATIS.
When reporting that to his superiors he was told to shut up because in that time the MET service wanted to go fully automatic w/o any human intervention anymore.... and said that if the readings were like they were, the pilots needed to be warned for that......
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Isla Grande
Posts: 965
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: pandoras box
Posts: 112
Last edited by Roti Canai; 16th Feb 2020 at 09:16.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Age: 43
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by PJ2
I've been waiting for your other shoe to drop by way of explaining to others why it's wrong. If so, please say why. We fly 800s with the package and I can't find anything in the FCTM, the FCOM or the QRH performance section except data on the pitch-roll angles at which various extremities of the airframe are at risk or not depending upon whether an SFP package is installed.
The only information I am able to find online is from non-Boeing sites which in itself points to another issue regarding getting information for operators from Boeing, but I'll leave that aside.
Here is what B737.org has to say, as linked to previously:
The only information I am able to find online is from non-Boeing sites which in itself points to another issue regarding getting information for operators from Boeing, but I'll leave that aside.
Here is what B737.org has to say, as linked to previously:
As the name sais, it increases performance on short fields, for takeoffs and landings.
If you calculate the incident at SAW with the BOEING OPT the difference of operational ldg. distance between the two Aircraft options is about 10% or 250m.
So the statement that SFP does not affect landperf is simply wrong, and thats what i said.
Last edited by KRH270/12; 16th Feb 2020 at 08:42.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: U.K.
Age: 44
Posts: 197
Originally Posted by KingAir1978
I'm not a 737 pilot, but aren't the Flaps supposed to be down during an evacuation? To allow pax to use the overwing exits?
Last edited by Jump Complete; 17th Feb 2020 at 08:42.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: somewhere near a Sea
Age: 40
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by KingAir1978
I'm not a 737 pilot, but aren't the Flaps supposed to be down during an evacuation? To allow pax to use the overwing exits?
Transparency International
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Köln
Posts: 741
