Posted by Frenk Boreman
Absolutely right! I have seen guys who think that the B777 is a piece of cake like an big size B737 or B767. 99.99999999999% of the time, the B777 is a dream but. It can bite and when it does, itwill truly shock fellas who did ZFT in the box thinking it is the real thing, like the taste of a coke!

2009PP:

I thank you for your reply. I freely admit that I have not seen a photograph of the No.2 engine reverser apparently open on the left side. If indeed that was the case, then I have absolutely no idea why that should be.

As for LH all or nothing procedures; I happily bow to your superior knowledge.

All is clear!

If No.2 T/R opens on just one side, would this pruce enough yaw due to the interaction with the fin to cause a runway excursion? Anybody ever experienced this type of failure?

At airliners.net people claiming to refer to eyewitness reports describe a too high flare with a following hard touchdown and high bounce as the beginning of this accident. After another nose wheel tochdown the nose wheel collapsed. People even claim the crew had initiated a late go around. Take all this with caution.

@Less Hair

Brings back memories....
YouTube - ‪Fedex crash Tokyo Japan 22 march 2009‬‎

Volume,

If one one half of the T/R deploys then you get an amber U/L indication in the N1 indicator instead of a green REV. In this situation you would only in effect have reverse idle on that side and as the engine is on aircraft centreline then it would have little or no affect on aircraft yaw.

If I remember correct,someone told me that the vref on the MD11 at max landing weigth is over 170 knots,which means a sinkrate over 850 ft/min on a normal glideslope at sea level.The other interessting thing is that the max landing weight is about 20 percent higher than the DC10-10.How it was certicated on that high weight I don,t know.Because someone must have known about the design weakness regarding landing gear and wing spar carried over from the DC 10.At least after the Faro accident.
A difficult question perhaps,but if the Max landing weight was adjusted down to DC10 standard,would it still be a money maker for the cargo operators?

Saudia MD-11, the ones I flew. MLW 218405 Kilo, Vref 162 Vapp 167 at Flap 35, at Flap 50, subtract 5 kts.

411a
 

I would like to tip my hat, to 411a and his admirable real-world training ethics. :ok:

Somebody mentioned over 850 fpm descent required for a three degree glidepath at gross weight. Throw in a ten knot tailwind, and that down rate is closer to 1000 fpm.

As I recall, at 1400 fpm the fuselage cracked in two at Edwards AFB on original hard landing certification tests. That airframe was repaired and delivered to a customer later. It was covered in AW&ST many years ago.

Staying current HAND flying the line gives real-world currency that the "Magic Kingdom" just can't replicate.

But the training "Sim Gods", to a man disagree.

Oh, those brave Men and their Proud Simulators! :rolleyes:

CC

Actualy 222+/- ton LDW is the highest I´ve seen. Descent rate should be normal 700-750 fpm aprox 165-170 IAS. At 50´ft flare and voila, she will kiss the pavement..... with a little ajustment from the pilot !!!

were any of these landing accidents using Auto?

Using auto what? Auto pilot, auto throttles, auto brakes. Come on give us some sort of a hint at the question. Auto covers a lot in the MD11.:}

Auto Know Better:E

Concerning the LH Cargo flight: Probably not. SOP at LH is 'manual flight - manual thrust'.

May I ask if anybody can give us here next info:

On all MD11 incidents/accidents (any company)
how many of involved pilots, came from other Douglas aircraft there ?

Another words, were all of them flying MD11,
without any previous experiance on MD80 or even a DC9 ?

:cool:

Source or Reference? Haven't heard anything about it. :confused:

No doubt referring to this crash, at Nairobi, and not Jo'burg:

Lufthansa Flight 540

That’s inferring an error by the crew. Wasn’t it due to the L/E cb tripping? IIRC the T/O config warning was quickly modified to detect L/E position.

First I have heard of a CB actually tripping. Every report I have ever read said that although the L/E flaps were seleceted down, the pneumatic system that powered them wasnt switched on due to the CB not being set, and that the L/E devices were not included in the configuration warning at that time. There is some suggestion that the aural T/O config warning was a MEL item and a recommendation was that it should not be (not that it would have made any difference in this case if the L/E flap setting wasnt included in the warning parameters)

In 1974 the following appeared in Flight International: "Flight has investigated the configuration on a 747 simulator and finds that a combination of pneumatic bleed-valve selections and circuit-breaker malfunctions can produce a situation where the pilots' caption warning shows green, but only four of the eight lights at the
engineer's station agree. The other four lights are extinguished by the faulty circuit-breaker setting"

The regrettable thing was that the same thing had happened the year before to BA (thankfully without incident) who had communicated the incident and several airlines were in the process of ordering mods as a result. After the Nairobi crash there was a debate as to why some operators, but not others, were aware of the issue.

LH's captain got cleared after the german investigation back then.