Pitch and Roll to progressively scrape an A380
 

0 p / 6.4 r Inner Engine Scrape
3 p / 7.1 r Outer Engine Scrape
7.7 p / 7.4 r Wing Tip Scrape
12. 6 p / 5.3 r Rear Fuselage Scrape
11.5 p / 0 r Rear Fuselage Scrape (oleo comp)
13.5 p / 0 r Rear Fuselage Scrape (oleo ext)

So they needed >= 7.1 deg Roll

(Ref A380 FCTM)

To get #4 onto the runway like that, he was a long way left of the centreline.

Perhaps it wasn't so much a case of too much wing down, as it was a case of not being properly aligned with the runway. Similar to the pod scrapes that we have seen at the old Hong Kong with guys trying to align with the centreline when it was much too late & they should have been going around, but not for the same reason.

Put it this way - all the pax were very lucky to walk away THIS time.

"If you haven't experienced it, you have absolutely no right in being judgemental here."

:D I couldn't agree more Bagel...quick to judge is reserved for the foolhardy.

I have had a very similar experience in NRT and it is not quite as simple as some on here would have people believe.

Hindsight is 20/20......it's easy to sit at a computer and punch out

"If the conditions were above their skill level then they shouldn't have been attempting to land."

...but for the grace of God go I gents!

Bagel and HighspeedAl
 

Does more than 20 years experience in Funchal (in the old 1350m 04/24 Rwy and the new 05/23, but now with heavy aircraft), count? Does LPHR, LPPI, count?

I'm sure waiting for your approval to continue posting my personal point of views...

hey "fill yer boots"....

Balanced, objective and non-judgemental points of view please.

Had there been an instructor on the flightdeck, wouldn't it be rather more likely a small incident may happen? It infers the presence of a low time trainee, or low experience on type.

I am always baffled by the innuendo on these threads. It is a rumours thread after all, but why stop short? Why not expand on the inference being made. Is the "Tut-Tut" the objective? It a) either kills the thread outright, or b) sends it off into the weeds of "personality"?

tut tut?

Rudder being used - but from the pic I don't see much evidence of roll control at all! No roll spoilers and no aileron:rolleyes:

You might be looking at the wrong wing? Wouldn't devices be deployed on the port wing at this stage? Hopefully some left (counter roll)? Spoilers and ailerons down on the right wing? (hence not visible?)

So if the auto throttle is all over the place in gusty conditions, just turn it off and fly manually??!! Otherwise the thrust is forward, back, forward, back... drives everyone crazy! Turn it off and manually set it. Flying skills, never a lost art!

KAL frowns badly on any pilot innovation not to use the autothrust. Their punishment culture puts fear in anyone deviating from SOP of maximizing use of automation. I've seen instructor management pilots who I had to fly with ( during the pilots' strike of 2001 and 2003 ) ashen face with morbid fear that we had committed a severe violation of SOP when I prevented the autothrottle from retarding the thrust levers which led to an EICAS caution message during an approach in extremely gusty conditions. It took much explaining to convince them that it was an absolutely " non - event " and they kept telling me that I had to put in an ASR!:ugh:

The fact that someone stated an Airbus instructor pilot was onboard HAS COOLED DOWN ALL THE INSINUATIONS AND INNUENDOES. Sad but true; a lot of armchair pilots and inexperienced fools think that landing in gusty, turbulent crosswinds in NRT is a piece of cake. I have seen one airplane coming to an easy landing but the next one coming 2 minutes later struggling......the sudden changes can be really challenging; inexperienced watchers think the second one must have been flown by a novice!

Found on facebook
 

Is that related?


http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot..._4224220_n.jpg

I agree totally withFlying Bagel, HighSpeedAluminum and Ace Springbok wrt to gusty crosswind landings. We can easily see a lot of bull**** con artists posting the bs here. No doubt KAL has quite a colourful history, but let's be fair and unprejudiced. Ace hit it right on, the fact that they had an Airbus Instructor onboard certainly curtailed a lot of racially charged innuendoes to be lobbed over in this thread.

re-checked; it's definitely related.

[quoteTheir punishment culture puts fear in anyone deviating from SOP of maximizing use of automation. I've seen instructor management pilots who I had to fly with ( during the pilots' strike of 2001 and 2003 ) ashen face with morbid fear that we had committed a severe violation of SOP when I prevented the autothrottle from retarding the thrust levers which led to an EICAS caution message][/quote]

Them sympathies and commiserations to the two locals on that flight! From what I know the present Flight Ops MVP has a very punishment oriented philosophy; this incident could well be a career ending or at the very least career stalling one in KAL.

When are they going to learn that cookbook flying will only get them past the novice stage; i am sure they want to get beyond that!

Oshkosh was not a hard landing as per PFR.

NRT
 

While by no means an "old Narita hand", I have been there maybe 15/20 times, and can most definitely confirm it's a place to watch out for in windy conditions. I can't fathom why (no obvious terrain/obstacles) but every time I've been there I've noticed significantly more turbulence/windshear than you would normally expect from the reported wind.

Armchair condemnation is easy and fun, but the truth is, no matter how good you are (or think you are), in a large transport aircraft events can -and eventually will- conspire to humble you. Don't forget, as a previous poster wrote, that "there but for the grace of God go I". :ouch:

Fly safe, work hard at your craft, and be lucky.

@ Rollingthunder

No livery = test flights from Airbus with first build aircrafts for the certifications, required by multiple authorities (e.g. FAA) and I assume also the manufacturer to learn about ac behavior in various conditions.

Not reporting engine pod contact?
 

Gee, that's bordering on the criminal! Remember AF Concorde came to grief after tire damaged by FOD fallen from a DC-10. If an engine pod contacted the runway surface, God knows what could have been scraped off or fallen off only to become a killer hazard for others. Can believe such behaviour! Maybe the punishment culture led to this.

Certainly bordering on the criminal. According to some ex-colleagues of the offender, he wasn't reported to the authorities eventhough KAL found out about the incident when the aircraft returned to Seoul whereby another outbound crew found the damage. They retrieved the QAR recordings and found the culprit. He was grounded for a couple of weeks, sent for ground debriefing and had a couple of simulator sessions before released back on line. It was done hush hush by KAL in house without the KCASA or JCAB alerted as that would probably incur a huge fine for the airline. All well and fine for that miscreant and his airline. HOWEVER A HUGE HAZARD for other operators who ran the risk of hitting any FOD resulting from the engine pod prang leading to something fatally damaging! He must be well protected by some higher ups for the company to risk that!

Video.

A lot of smoke before main gear permanently on ground but not sure if it's from LG, ENG 3 or 4, or doubtfully the R wingtip.

.