whatever happened to .....?
 

Does anybody know anything about the investigation on this accident? It's been almost a year now and I cannot find anything on the investigation or cause...

The Japan TSB has not issued anything yet, that I can find on their website. I guess not surprising when a foreign outfit is leading the investigation. Heck, there is not even a preliminary factual data report out yet for the AMR crash in Kingston...Not surprising, since the Jamaican's are slooooooooow!

Although I must admit, the Jamaican's prelim report did contain a fair amount of information, and was released within a couple of weeks.

It is a bit suspicious that nothing has been released yet.

Perhaps a little corporate influence?

To the contrary. The relevant information (in my opinion) has been disseminated to MD11 flight crews at that company, remedial training has been designed and implemented, and I myself have gone through a sim session where the FX 80 accident was the primary focus.

Details cannot be made public due to the Japanese officials' decisions. If the company violated those decisions they'd be off the investigatory team.

So you are saying that the investigation is complete and the Japanese officials "decisions" are preventing the findings to be released to the public?

What decisions are you referring to?

My read is that the investigation is still ongoing to evaluate all possible factors and the Japanese Investigators-In-Charge are not ready to publicaly conclude that all factors have been evaluated.

Meanwhile the operator can see enough factors uniquely applicable to their operation to improve their response.

Sounds good enough for me.

If there was a known generic problem likely to affect other operators they would have been advised before the final report hits the street.

Flight safety doesn't wait for final reports it is constantly on-going and updating. However the final report does give one closure that all the lessons are there to be learned

Exactly.

The Japanese are being very methodical. But there are things that can be improved immediately without violating the confidences of the investigation.

I wish I could say plainly, but we were warned.

If you fly MD-11's, though, I think in general that it is a good idea to be proficient in bounce recovery. In general, that is a good idea. This is based solely on my experience in flying the aircraft, and not on anything told to me.

Is bouncing an MD11 a common occurrence, or is there a landing "technique" particular to FedEx that causes it?

Huck;
Fully concur with the Japanese authorities' methods. Also fully agree with you re bounce recovery, and that means bounce recovery for all types, not just one. It's just a very good idea as you say and should be standard kit.

notadog;
If I may, I think you're probably going to have to wait a bit for the answer to your question as the Japanese authorities have not yet released their report and have asked that comments not be made in public yet, but have discussed specifics with the operator. I think that is plenty and respects both the investigative and safety processes.

You "bounce", you "go"
 

notadog

Unfortunately, most MD11 operators are reticent about publicising their "bounced" landings or tail strikes; that is not to say these are not occurring, just that we don't get to hear about them.

About 9 years ago, there were several "bounced" landings where attempts to land were made resulting in major 'frame damage (EVA Air (TPE) ~USD3.8M; CAL HKG ~destroyed), a couple of tail strikes with FDX, etc.

The "smarter" operators, either by experience or by learning of others' experience, became proactive and instigated a "bounced" landing recovery procedure, reinforced by simulator training/practice.

As for FDX's landing technique, I cannot comment but they have been operating the type for a hell of a lot of years/hours and one would assume that if there were systemic deficiencies in their prescribed landing techniques, there would be similar incidents, if not accidents.

The rule is: you "bounce", you "go around". (Trick is in the go-around, pitch attitude <10deg NU until 35-50ft RA, otherwise you will get a tail strike).

Actually, they teach us 7.5 degrees.

And the latest technique is to develop enough visual references in the windscreen that you can nail 7.5 without looking inside. It works pretty well, actually - by the end of the sim I could hold it +/- .5 degrees without looking down....

Visual Reference - An interesting concept
 

Huck
Unfortunately, and without being condescending, the bunch that I fly with consider visual reference generally to mean eyes glued to the PDF; hence we are all trained to pitch up to less that 10deg until at least 35ft RA during a bounced landing. Visual reference outside the screens - I don't think so!
Good training and then more good training in bounced landing recovery techniques goes a long way to reduce the accidents/incidents when a "bounce" occurs.

I'm also trying not to be condescending, however a max of 10 deg. attitude in the initial stages of a go-around from a bounce is probably a good idea in most heavy jets.

FedEx has suffered a significant number of landing incidents, including 3 hull losses.

Depends on the severity of the bounce, but generally speaking you are correct. In some cases, maintaining the landing attitude (not adding additional pitch) and adding a bit of power will permit a successful landing. The MD11 is not a difficult airplane to land. It does however require strict attention to proper technique and a stable approach.

does the type have autospoiler/ spoiler retraction? just curious,...

is a bounced LDG different from a baulk/GA in the type?

and how 'easy' would a novice MD-11 pilot induce POI's during a bounce?

I do know that many things must be left unsaid,...but those questions are quite inocuous,....

:)












I'm surprised boeing didn't steal 'PCA' yet :)

Yes.

Not much. Except for tailstrike considerations.

If a "novice' pilot attempted to salvage a bad bounce, it's quite possible.

Bottom Line
 

"The MD11 is not a difficult airplane to land. It does however require strict attention to proper technique and a stable approach." notadog 2-FEB-10

I've been following this thread closely, not wanting to 'weigh-in' until a more complete picture of the circumstances surrounding this landing emerged from official sources. Doesn't look like that's going to happen anytime soon.

notadog summed it up, though, accurately and concisely. Couldn't have said it better myself - thanks.:ok: His two, simple sentences are a great takeway for those on this forum who've heard and read all the negative press that continues to 'dog' this wonderful aircraft.

So, bottom-line: "proper technique and a stable approach" on the MD-11 will keep you out of the ditch...or worse.

"The Ferrari is not a difficult car to drive. It does however require strict attention to proper technique and a stable handling."

Not difficult but maybe not in everybody's hands.

Please define proper technique.....does the MD11 technique differ from that required in landing and Go arounds in the L1011?