Saudi Airline B777-300
 

Does anyone hear something about incident on a B777-300 of Saudi Airline today ? Tow bar broken and pushback crashed...

Thanks

may contain truth in trace amounts...
 

The article is a true gem of well informed aviation journalism, but the photo speaks for itself:

Saudi jet aborts take-off after accident on runway - Emirates 24/7

One does wonder though how that happened during push-BACK ?

Love that bit about "hitting a pole on a runway near the airport" :}

“The accident caused panic among the passengers mainly among women and children''

Queue the music from Titanic :)

The problem is obvious as they were pushing on a chain.

So much for R&N

A/C involved is HZ-AK16 their newest 777-300ER.

http://www.alyaum.com/News/files.php..._920310196.jpg

By the look of it, poor push-back wallah's first (and very likely last) attempt at trying out anything bigger and more powerful than a three wheel scooter...

If they just would remove those poles on the runway! :}

Yes, judging by the tire tracks, looks like the pedal was to the metal on the tug,it snapped off, and slammed the tug right into the nacelle. Look at the tire tracks right under the engine. I don't see any poles around.

Maybe he mistook the gas pedal for the parking brake?

That is not gonna be cheap, gonna take a lot of speed tape to patch it up. :eek:

Maybe it was lost in translation?
 

Did you see the links on the right hand side of that webpage/

This was my favourite: Saudia aircraft takes off just before landing - Emirates 24/7

Actually AK17 is the newest one, but that got damaged by Boeing and is still pending delivery.

Suspicious
 

That tyre mark clearly seen in the pic looks suspiciously like it could have been caused by a tug with the brake on being pushed by an aircraft!

Well the torque and axial shear pins seem to have done their job! Presumably the tow head is still attached to the u/c.

More unconfirmed chat on the subject here at breakfast in JED this morning........

The engine went into full power during pushback and the tug got 'sucked' into the engine nacelle. The driver managed to jump clear.

How he wasn't then sucked into the engine was not discussed.

That may have happened, there looks like what may be a skid mark behind the inboard main gear. Hard to tell from this photo though.

more gems from the other 24/7 go-around report.
 

hahaha :{...cmon man at least talk to a Microsoft FS pilot to get some aviation facts.
Also ,yes, next time no takeoffs before landings:E please , they are so wrong :8

In that case it still belongs to Boeing, so AK16 is the newest one, until money is handed over. :ok:

Yup, couldn't be any other reason. Blame the 'wallah', problem solved.

Oh wait...

Ah!

Still, never let the truth (whatever it is) get in the way of a good story eh?

not likely

the pressure drop (sucking power at full thrust) is too low to accelerate a heavy tug over that distance to enough velocity to produce the damage in the photo to the inlet.

More likely it was the tug under power

If one were to take this newspaper statement at face value, it looks like tea and biscuits, absent both tea and biscuits, for the pilot who tried to take off from an apron. :E

Maybe one of those two guys, at the wheels, is Polish.

Not knowing what's factual vs speculation

what's the possibility that the event happened on taxi out and that the plane was tugged back to a stand and disconected and nothing happened between a tug and the plane to cause the event?

:= Read more carefully. He tried to take off from a runway near the airport...

Would not discount it completely, but that would sound too simple. During my time in the fine land of the sand, I have learnt to expect the most absurd, illogical and unlikely explanation to be the real one...

- skid marks?

andrasz
What is it about
that you don't understand? ;)

Do you understand why I put the :E in there?

In case you were unsure, I was poking fun at the "art" of journalism there.

I did indeed read the whole article.

Cheers.

That -115b puts out a massive amount of thrust. My guess from the picture, engine or engines running, tug driver is in a sharp turn snaps tow bar, aircraft rolls into tug, tug driver ****'s his pants, women and children scream.

Oh those skid marks

Lonewolf_50,

...runway...near...airport...

I was just topping your :E, take it easy :)

Aha, well played, I guess that went over me :O at about FL 250. :}

MELDreamer’s input to the story says that the engine went to full power (post #13).

Many years ago, my airline had that once during engine start on a DC-10. Throttle cable had been moved and misrouted during maintenance, so that the inner cable was in a pulled state at the main engine control end, while the thrust lever on the flight deck was in the normal idle position. One of the rpm's, I think N1, was above 80% and rising before the fuel cut-off was effective, if my memory serves me right. Hair-raising experience, as the Flight Engineer told me when they came back into the office. I think I still remember which F/E.

Back to JED. With brakes off, and given a similar malfunction, a 777 loaded for this short trip might begin to advance against the tug and then break out of line to the side where the tug isn’t. Towbar shear pins snap; the a/c moves further forward. By the time the flight deck is aware that they not only have a runaway engine, but a runaway airplane as well, the tug is hit by the engine inlet. The skid marks on the ramp near the inlet may have to do with the uncommanded turn induced by differential thrust and/or the angle of the nose wheel that was steered by the towbar until shear pin break-off.

So maybe, if you accept the uncommanded accelerating engine, the rest does not appear to be excessively wild phantasy?

A similar incident happened to a 777 years ago, in that particular case the thrust levers were not at idle they had been moved (after all checklists/flows were complete) to rectify and unrelated maintenance issue, crew failed to notice the position (human factors) Eng 2 started first, reached idle and rapidly accelerated to a high thrust, broke the tow bar and the A/C moved forward and yawed left instantly due to the asymmetric thrust thereby missing the tug with the nose gear, also the tug now accelerated towards the aircraft or engine. The crew were able to stop the aircraft before contacting the tug, had it been powered by GE90-115 maybe they would have hit the tug.

My guess is its a similar incident, and questions asked as to the reason for the thrust increase, thrust lever position or EEC fault?

Tug jump
 

And that was.... Hmmm ..an A6 aircraft I think... But not allowed to post operators are we ... Didnt get any nice pics on pprune but.

Theory
 

Based on the photo in post 5.

There appear to be 3 sets of skid marks visible in the photo:
1: opposed cresents just in front of the engine;
2: large radius arc splitting to 2 tracks in the foreground;
3: (possibly) behind the inboard main gear wheels.

Marks #1 from tug which doesn't move much but is rotated ~90° right during the "manoeuvre".

Mark #2 traces the arc of the nose gear, radius = nose gear to tug centre of rotation, as the a/c rotates to its left. Track splits into two when the shear pin lets go and gear steers left.

Mark #3 caused when crew apply brake (parking brake?) and also indicates a/c rotation to its left.

So, the ballet started with the tug in position indicated by marks #1 and the a/c further back and with a heading maybe +30° to +90° compared to its final heading. Towbar probably close to a/c axis.

No.2 engine goes to high power. A/c brakes are off. Tug brakes are on. No.1 engine may not have started yet or is spooling up or at idle. Monster resulting torque is enough to skid the nose gear to the a/c's left. Shear pin goes when the nose gear steering angle limit is reached. Crew apply brakes. Tug driver ****s his pants. Tug contacts inlet and rattles around against it until No.2 is shut down.

Name and Blame Saudi style
 

Punishments? Throttle hand excisions? Local laws are known to be harsh and nonsensical :))

Nothing comes to mind with a FADEC runaway to me. Everything is so redundant.

Yea I was trying to be kind, I seriously doubt a engine fault.

To be clear, I don't know anything about the 777!

But I do know that, in the 737NG if the autothrottle is armed during pre-flight checks, one only has to touch either of the TOGA switches and both engine thrust levers will immediately advance to takeoff power.

Thats why we don't arm the autothrottle until approaching the departure runway!

If the 777 system is anything like the 737 then . . . . . .:eek:

I'd imagine the 777 is similar to the 744 you need flaps for the TOGA switches to be armed.

Zero chance that it happened like that.

Read SMOC posting, the reason is known, the cause isn't.

Nothing a bit of speed tape couldn't sort!!

A simple explanation might be an attempt to taxi with the tug still attached. Has happened a fair few times in the history of aviation and probably will in the future too. ATC clearance received, headset disconnected, bit of distraction, easy to do...

Even a big tug would be no match for two 115Bs.