RYR nasty bird strike at PIK
 

Understand that one of this morning's RYR departures from PIK had a serious bird strike on rotation. Aircraft was still on the runway about an hour later "cooling the brakes". Still having engine repairs tonight.

Well done the crew. :)

I imagine a pretty exciting deceleration. :eek: :eek:

Are you saying that he aborted the takeoff AFTER V1? If so you shouldnt be congratulating the crew but pulling their licences!

Mutt.

Not only is Findo suggesting it was after V1 but reading it again the birdstrike was on "rotation".........and he still aborted !

Hmm......lets see if anyone has some facts before the court martial wraps up.

Come on guys, I know as a not-very knowledgeable wannabe that you don't abort the takeoff after V1... And i'm sure this would have been mentioned during the years of training it took for them to get their jobs. I'm sure that they had the best of reasons, and i'd be interested to hear what they are because this kind of this is very interesting to me.

Either way, as a frequentish flyer on this route, I bet the passengers were complaining like hell about the delay! I'm sure some passengers would quite happily get on a plane that was on fire, rather than wait 20 minutes for one that wasn't! Personally, however, if the captain doesn't think the aircraft is safe to fly, I trust his experiance and training more than my desire to get somewhere.

Rupetime,

Remember, V1 and VR are often coincident. That said it would have to be something pretty catastrophic to abort as rotation commenced (if that's how it REALLY happened).

GF
:cool:

mutt:

You have obviously already decided that the crew made a big mistake and should lose their licenses when you do not have the faintest idea of what they were faced with.

Let us just suppose, for example, that a flock of seagulls took out BOTH engines on rotation just how do you imagine that they would still be able to go flying?

Exactly that happened to a friend of mine at NCL in a BAC 1-11 some years ago. They did a great job of stopping the aircraft in what was left of the runway and ended up in the grass just off the end with everything and everybody intact (except for the engines).

Was that rotation on the taxyway or on the runway??? :D

Years ago I was working at a Helicopter firm (nothing exciting, just a parts audit - although I enjoyed my time there) when they showed me a aircraft that had suffered the misfortune of having a bird actually bounce off a Rotorblade, and enter the cockpit, via the glass! You can bet the pilot got that one down QUICK. I also was regaled by an ex-navy pilot with tales of a second officer that had become quite ill during the flight and vomited copiously over the flight-instruments and controls, before slumping forward onto the cyclic, causing an uncommanded autopilot disconnect. Apparently it's quite difficult to correct the unscheduled nocturnal aerobatics that resulted, especially while being assulted by a semi-conscious 220Lbs man, and unable to see your instruments for semi-digested junk-food, and trying not the breathe while you're doing it.

I was going to ask about the possibility of bird-strike on the 737 killing both engines, actually, but it seemed a bit cheeky for a wannabe to start hypothising when experianced aircrew hadn't done so. 737's are not noted for their gliding ability. They're seldom seen at glider meets (unless someone at ATC REALLY needs to pay more attention) and you need a bloody impressive thermal, or exceptional sloping ability, to "get around" with one!

Personally, I think there are a million and one scenarios that could have faced these men. Wait untill the accident report is available (if they're PPRUNE members, they may even wish to tell us what happened themselves!) before making ANY judgements. The main thing is, everyone is still breather (except the birds, presumably). And you know what they say... "Any landing you walk away from is a good one... If you can use the plane again, it was exceptional!"

If you're interested, the AAIB website is;

http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/

Obviously, it'll be a while before this particular story reaches it, There are some tragic accidents on it, of course, but also some quite interesting ones. Like the baggage handler who clatted a 146 with his truck because the tyres were bald, and the Yak pilot who mistook his flaps indicator for his gear indicator and landed "wheels up". Probably an easy mistake to make, but quite amusing when no one's hurt, and it's happening to someone else. There's also some salutory lessons, i'm sure. Most of you probably know it already, but for anyone who doesn't it's worth a quiet virtual "potter about" in.

Gentlemen, gentlemen.
 

The original poster may have made a simple error such as meaning to write that the strike happened 'just before' rotation.

Either way, this is an intriguing thread. Is there no-one at PIK who can give us the griff?

Many,many years ago, I was involved in an abort in a Convair 880 at Haneda when right at the call of V1, No.3 engine suffered a catastrophic, uncontained engine failure. We came to a halt at the end of the runway, just as the performance graphs told us we would. Shortly after we taxied back to the bay, all mainwheel fuseable plugs blew. No.3 engine had a hole through the side of the cowl that you could have crawled into. The engine failure was immediately followed by an engine fire warning. All this happened on a final command check of the pilot in the left hand seat. A pretty touch and go decision to make at the time but considering the damage and the nature of the failure, I'm glad the decision was made to abort. Apart from that, we had another two days stayover in Tokyo.:D

Not as bad as it sounds, abort occured before rotation but pax had to be bussed off and aircraft towed because of "seized brakes". Aircraft was on runway for about 1 hour.

Thank you angels you are quite correct. I copied the information from a non pilot report elsewhere without changing anything. It does not seem to have made sensational headlines anywhere which is quite refreshing after the metro accident last week in possibly similar circumstances.

The result of the incident is that all walked away safely. What I would have said, if I was a passenger, was well done the crew.

Once decision speed is reached, the pilots decsion is presumed (keep going). Of course the aircraft may not agree in the rarest of circumstances. It would not be t helpful to the cause of safety, to encourage pilots to override their training by adding a "what if" in the decsion process. Of course I have no idea what the facts are in the reported incident so my comments are only generalized.

Regarding the BAC 1-11, I'm not aware of any such incident involving multiple engines, certainly it would have been reportable and in the database.

NCNG - Looks like you signed up to Pprune to help out on this one. Nice one, many thanks for settling things.

Findo -- What happened to you is a trap which has caught people out many times before. When I c&p stuff, I always try and give the source, hence you can deflect criticism onto said source with a 'don't shoot the messanger' type of response.

Cheers.

lomapaseo:

Most of us are well aware of the definition of V1, VR, V2 etc but V1 becomes totally irrelevant when all your engines quit!

I'm sorry you can't find the BAC 1-11 incident in your precious data base. The airline was BIA. The Captain was C... F... and the F/O was D... S... They did a first class job in difficult circumstances.

I also know of another near-catastrophic bird strike which might interest you but which is also probably not in your data base.

A BAe 146 operated by an NFD crew got airborne at night from Genoa. They went straight through a flock of seagulls which took out 2 engines immediately. The crew did a fantastic job - quickly round the harbour in the dark at 500 feet - which was just as well for the 3rd engine failed on finals!

On both occasions the crew were very practical and not too concerned with the theoretical!

Multiple failures from birdstrikes are not as uncommon as you would seem to suggest. I just hope that you never have to deal with such a scenario.

Instant reaction
 

Well said JW411.

lomapaseo, I doubt anyone would advocate - 'encourage pilots to override their training', but they need to sometimes have other solutions up their sleave.

I only fly turbo props but I know which runways are long enough for me to abort after V1, in the very unlikely event I need to stop, to deny that thought is rather foolish.

In 1997 an Emerald Budgie out of STN aborted after rotation, the end result, everyone walked away, what might have happened otherwise does not bear thinking about.

Commanders need to think outside the square sometimes, that comes with experience, lomapaseo has neither methinks.

Meeb

"In 1997 an Emerald Budgie out of STN aborted after rotation, the end result, everyone walked away, what might have happened otherwise does not bear thinking about."


I witnessed this event, ended up in the grass off 23. It was carrying the Leeds United Football team if i remember rightly?
Definately seemed a good decision to me bearing in mind the engine damage sustained.

JW411,

I somehow expected the original posting to reflect of the finest Sun reporting techniques, i therefore decided to see when people would actually decide to abort after V1. You gave me an excellent example, as did Meeb..........

Hate to do it to you, but you have to remember the words at the bottom of this page....

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. or the unscrupulous, to elicit certain reactions

Mutt.

In the mid 90's, Yukla 27, E-3 Awacs at Elmendorf, AFB, Alaska. Multiple Geese strikes on T/O roll. Lost one at V1 and and another at just after Vrot(same side). They didn't make it. Lost some good friends on that one. As for stopping after V1, If you can personally hand the authorities your ticket (license) then you have done at least one thing right! No second guessing the crew in ANY case. Well done to them.

Ed

They are only as common as those truly verified in data bases. I also don't recall a BAE146 being in the data base.

The data base has a singlular use to promote changes to improve safety. What's not verified in the data base will not be addressed.