B737 bird strike 10/4/03
Guest
Posts: n/a
So how do you tail strike a computer infested Boeing beast? I thought that all the gizmo's on board would stop a sore @rse on rotation??????????
We all know, don't we, that pilots are overpaid monkeys and that "the computers" do absolutely everything involved with the flying of an airliner these days !
And if the pilots try to do something wrong, then "the computers" will prevent it.
Must be true - a jump seat passenger once told me ! And a pilot on "Airline" said so (what a ...........). Most significantly, what does the media say ?
Anyway, hands up (well - post a reply then) anyone who flies a 737 which TAKES OFF under the complete control of "the computer". I stand by to be amazed. I pull the yoke back at a variable rate, having first attained the correct airspeed, and using training, experience and judgement -- oh dear, silly me !
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bit like the Singapore Jumbo in New Zealand the other week when the highly paid driver put the wrong weight into the FMC didn't double check it with the performance manual got the wrong Vref figures and scraped the arse, left the APU on the runway and caused the engineers a whole lot of grief.
The Helios crew must have pulled back bloody hard to dent the runway, the 800 is fitted with a large rubber lump designed to wear away and also the crushable strut. And if it was that bad, it wouldn't have been able to fly in such a relativly short time.
Any pictures about ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
The Helios crew must have pulled back bloody hard to dent the runway, the 800 is fitted with a large rubber lump designed to wear away and also the crushable strut. And if it was that bad, it wouldn't have been able to fly in such a relativly short time.
Any pictures about ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When an aircraft has landed safely after an incident like this why are passengers not disembarked in a timely fashion and not to have to remain on board for such a long time like the reported two hours in the above instance at Stansted. A two hour wait is away too much. What is the story?
You'd struggle, in my opinion, to design a safe aeroplane that can't suffer a tailstrike.
Once in a blue moon things go badly wrong and the pilot has to earn his money by keeping an aircraft on the edge of the stall at very high AoA (and thus incidence), say climbing out over rising ground through windshear.
If you put in place an incidence protection system that made sure a tailstrike was impossible (and you could certainly do that), you'd almost certainly result in an aeroplane that a pilot couldn't fly like that, you'd also probably have to include sufficient safety factors into the rotation as to effectively increase the runway length required and thus make the aircraft uneconomic.
So, I can't - and speaking as an Engineer (not as a pilot) here, see that it is possible to design an aircraft which is both viable and safe, and is totally resistant to a tailstrike. What you do, and I believe this is normal in airliner pitch control law design, is create characteristics such that a lot of pilot input, beyond that normally used, should be necessary to go to a very high incidence. Thus tailstrike becomes unlikely, but a pilot who needs to can take an aircraft right to the edge of stall.
And then, having done that, we have to reply upon piloting ability. I think it's inevitable once in a while that the combination of control laws and pilot training will break down and you'll get a tailstrike. But, emphasising, I think it would be foolhardy to design a totally tailstrike resistant aircraft, the ultimate protection has got to be in pilot training (allied to a sacrificial structure under the tail).
G
Once in a blue moon things go badly wrong and the pilot has to earn his money by keeping an aircraft on the edge of the stall at very high AoA (and thus incidence), say climbing out over rising ground through windshear.
If you put in place an incidence protection system that made sure a tailstrike was impossible (and you could certainly do that), you'd almost certainly result in an aeroplane that a pilot couldn't fly like that, you'd also probably have to include sufficient safety factors into the rotation as to effectively increase the runway length required and thus make the aircraft uneconomic.
So, I can't - and speaking as an Engineer (not as a pilot) here, see that it is possible to design an aircraft which is both viable and safe, and is totally resistant to a tailstrike. What you do, and I believe this is normal in airliner pitch control law design, is create characteristics such that a lot of pilot input, beyond that normally used, should be necessary to go to a very high incidence. Thus tailstrike becomes unlikely, but a pilot who needs to can take an aircraft right to the edge of stall.
And then, having done that, we have to reply upon piloting ability. I think it's inevitable once in a while that the combination of control laws and pilot training will break down and you'll get a tailstrike. But, emphasising, I think it would be foolhardy to design a totally tailstrike resistant aircraft, the ultimate protection has got to be in pilot training (allied to a sacrificial structure under the tail).
G
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: MAN
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After a birdstrike a few years ago we were kept on the plane for more than two hours - until it was far too late to contact people meeting us and tell them we would be late. So our relatives were left hanging around an airport for 6 hours.
Very grateful for the pilot's skill in getting us back to the airport, don't get me wrong. But take a couple of hundred people, stress them (it was a big bird!), relieve them, then keep them strapped in for 2 hours with no information and no refreshment and you will have that many pi$$ed of customers.
Very grateful for the pilot's skill in getting us back to the airport, don't get me wrong. But take a couple of hundred people, stress them (it was a big bird!), relieve them, then keep them strapped in for 2 hours with no information and no refreshment and you will have that many pi$$ed of customers.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: uk
Age: 60
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ghengis,
Having read your last post I totally agree with what you have said (something which may surprise you,no doubt).
At the end of the day to devise a computer to stop over rotation would be simple enough but we cant have a computer overriding every decision the flight crew make.What happens when his decision is the only last course available and the system says no,That is not a viable option.
The flight crew are trained to react to a variety of different problems they may encounter but on this occasion they made a rather large mistake but not quite as bad as the Singapore 747 crew thank heavens.
I was on shift last Thursday night and saw the Helios aircraft on the remote stands at stansted but must confess didnt really take a lot of notice of it.It wasnt until Saturday that I knew much of the incident but then I was in bed all day Thursday.
Maybe next time I will take a closer look but from what I have read this situation has been blown out of perspective by the press as all these situations do. But as has been asked by many people "What do the press know about our business?" Answer Not much!
Having read your last post I totally agree with what you have said (something which may surprise you,no doubt).
At the end of the day to devise a computer to stop over rotation would be simple enough but we cant have a computer overriding every decision the flight crew make.What happens when his decision is the only last course available and the system says no,That is not a viable option.
The flight crew are trained to react to a variety of different problems they may encounter but on this occasion they made a rather large mistake but not quite as bad as the Singapore 747 crew thank heavens.
I was on shift last Thursday night and saw the Helios aircraft on the remote stands at stansted but must confess didnt really take a lot of notice of it.It wasnt until Saturday that I knew much of the incident but then I was in bed all day Thursday.
Maybe next time I will take a closer look but from what I have read this situation has been blown out of perspective by the press as all these situations do. But as has been asked by many people "What do the press know about our business?" Answer Not much!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kelowna Wine Country
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes
on
11 Posts
Unfortunately it is not just the media who have little understanding. I was involved on the fringes of the news business for many years and in every single time I knew about what was printed the facts were distorted mildly or just plain wrong but I have to say it was frequently because the sources were ambiguous or themselves not knowledgeable. There is a humourous side to this too and it would be a pity to do without it. My favourite occurred last year.
"Hero Mountie saves the day after moose strike."
"A Mountie working with the US police saved the day by kicking out the jammed door of a learjet which left the runway in Oregon and burst into flames after striking a moose during take off." a police spokesman in Vanvouver said today. He went on
"He's a big guy, over 6'1" and always good in a crisis. We're glad the incident wasn't more serious. It would have been a different matter if they had struck the moose after take off."
That might have caused an inquiry at ATC?
"Hero Mountie saves the day after moose strike."
"A Mountie working with the US police saved the day by kicking out the jammed door of a learjet which left the runway in Oregon and burst into flames after striking a moose during take off." a police spokesman in Vanvouver said today. He went on
"He's a big guy, over 6'1" and always good in a crisis. We're glad the incident wasn't more serious. It would have been a different matter if they had struck the moose after take off."
That might have caused an inquiry at ATC?
