...so NOT a normal landing then := or what :confused:

A whole new failure mode for that airplane.

I can hear structural engineers' skulls exploding all over the planet....

I think "normal" should be interpreted as "nothing out of the order until touchdown" (like, fire or smoke, or a malfunction).

So on a relatively calm day, facing a very long runway, one of the best trained MD-11 crews landed, bounced twice, and that was enough to cause the aircraft to suffer catastrophic structural failure? I appreciate we haven't got any G-force readings, so impossible to determine how hard they touched down, but still, something doesn't sound quite right.

Is the MD-11, besides being not that easy to land, exceedingly damage intolerant? Or, rather, damage intolerant when subjected to a "hard" landing?

Heavy G-Loads
 

According to a guy who had access to the info of the initial readout of the black boxes they had several touchdowns. The first with 2G, second 3G and finally over 4G. No wonder the fuselage broke apart.

FDX 80 in Narita was like that. First touchdown was 1.7. The second was over 3 (as I recall).

Why did a normal cargo flight land on RWY 33L?

Mutt

As noted earlier, 33R was closed for maintenance.

To the poster who quoted the, alleged, G-loads - many thanks. Bit more than just a "hard" landing then.

Mutt

33R notamed closed for maintenance at material time

If,it was hard on landing... we will have to wait and see how hard is hard! In any case looks like no fire O/B, prior to the landing? But, it does have the characteristics of the Narita accident. With or without A/T hard landings are generaly pilot induced and can be influenced by meteo conditions. But, as far as I can read it was a clear day, hot and a very long runway. Temp. inversion could also be a factor prior to touchdown.

The MD-11 is a fine airplane which require no special handling skills. However it has characteristics which an MD-11 trained pilot can best handle, ie it needs to be flown as an MD-11 and not as any other wide bodies.

As far as I remember, Riyadh is a hot and high altitude airport. I had to reject a few landings which could not be salvaged when the PFs ( f/os, trainee captains )failed to recognise dangerously high sink rates prior to landing.

Temperature inversion is normally not a big factor in botched landings, but a huge on during take offs.

You are absolutely correct...RUH in the summertime is not for the unwary.
Been there, done that....for many years.

Hot and High ?
 

SO let's summerize it:

40 deg C on ~2000 feet MSL is "hot an high" airport ??
and should not be used by unwary....?

PS no1. Dubai with sooooo many flights per summer days, even if at ~MSL,
but >50 deg C.....is OK for "unwary pilots" ??

PS no2. In Narita on that day, shall we assume also "hot and high" airport and "unwary" pilots ?

Nothing special about RUH, I flew there for 19 years, 10 on the MD-11 and would say very benign.
When I did MD-11 line training we were lucky enough to fly with the ex CP of EVA, who mentioned that Saudia bought their MD-11's with dual main gear shocks, which was an option. Anybody hear of this?
I saw some firm landings, but no bouncers which seem to be the kiss of death on this thing.
"Dangerously high sink rates" are not endemic to RUH, this is what we get paid for day in and day out.

All you guys who do it every day do not understand that RUH might be tricky for the "unwary", please consider that many LH pilots do not more than 10 to 15 landings per year, include mixed fleet flying, throw in fatigue, and you have a situation where an airport might be a major threatening variable, if it is out of the normal range, and the sandpit with 40+ temps always is. It is so very easy to get into trouble...:bored:

I just knew that 'fatigue' would be brought up by someone.
Lets see, FRA-RUH...yup, sure is a fatiguing sector, alright.:rolleyes:

While this is a fact on the other long range fleets at LH (most of the flights there are enlarged), the average MD11 pilot there averages about 5-8 landings a month...

Still not much, but more than on the other long range fleets.

I would not be surprised if fatigue was a contributing factor. The flight time FRA-RUH is not very long, but the departure in FRA was in the middle of the night...

FB and 411A, you two geezers are wasting your time trying to educate these fellas. There are fellas who happen to escape difficult conditions and think they are infallible....tsk, tsk. Well, rarely do you see 50deg C in OMDB and normally the heavy flights avoid operating during the really hot periods. Maybe OKBK will get the above 50deg C days.

and only Owls and Witches should fly in the middle of night, Right ?

PS
one should worry about hot or high or both "hot and high" RWY,
only before T/O.

For Landing the only difference may be longer run...but not limiting factor in this case, Right ?