Bent Monach 757 at Gib
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Middle East
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MONARCH 757
The aircraft involved is definately NC and DID a short spell early 90's across the pond, and even one or two trips to Dabolim, via AUH.
Aircraft will be withdrawn from use and will be replaced temporarily by another 757 on interim lease from......none other than BA, we hear.
ZB's GIB services will continue in the meantime on A321's / A320 mix.
Aircraft will be withdrawn from use and will be replaced temporarily by another 757 on interim lease from......none other than BA, we hear.
ZB's GIB services will continue in the meantime on A321's / A320 mix.
At the moment, 757's still doing the GIB run. 321's will not do it, due limited RTOM out of GIB.
NW that was going into storage in France, is being re-introduced to service ASAP. Maybe that will do the GIB runs.
BA 757 on lease, where did that info. come from
NW that was going into storage in France, is being re-introduced to service ASAP. Maybe that will do the GIB runs.
BA 757 on lease, where did that info. come from
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Middle East
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monarch to Lease-in Temporary Equipment
The news that Monarch are to lease-in an ex-BA 757 came from MON Luton itself. The aircraft - apparently - is scheduled idle for the next 13 weeks awaiting transfer to Israel for fit-out as DHL Cargo machine.
MON will use on lesser density routes, thus keeping the sardine machines for the Palma's, etc.
The a/c in question operated strictly BA UK Shuttle services, and thus is not equipped with the leather VGS.
MON will use on lesser density routes, thus keeping the sardine machines for the Palma's, etc.
The a/c in question operated strictly BA UK Shuttle services, and thus is not equipped with the leather VGS.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Middle East
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mon Mishap at GIB
Hi G-AZUK,
Sorry. I appear to have been mis-informed. My information was that the BA mahine going to Monarch for 3 months was G-BIKK.
Shame about the whole incident, especially as you say, after the new paint job.
Sorry. I appear to have been mis-informed. My information was that the BA mahine going to Monarch for 3 months was G-BIKK.
Shame about the whole incident, especially as you say, after the new paint job.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-BIKK would make sense. I believe it's the G-BIK*'s which are going to DHL. Slightly different engines, but pratically the same I think. I remember landing in GIB as pax a few years ago, with that strong s/westerly mentioned before. Was like a roller coaster, dropping like a brick one minute, then felt the updraughts the next, defened by the female's screams!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't Transavia bend a 757 at AMS on Christmas Eve a few years ago? I remember pictures of a collapsed nose gear.
I also seem to remember that the airport had shut the logical runway for the wind direction and the pilots had to cope with a strong crosswind.
Seems to be some similarity?
I also seem to remember that the airport had shut the logical runway for the wind direction and the pilots had to cope with a strong crosswind.
Seems to be some similarity?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the topic in the other thread - was thee actually a hard landing related to a brake prob, or has the metal crumpled like a Coke can from old age (pertinent in the light of CI611 - also big hours/cycles)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woodman, no similarity to the Transavia accident whatsoever.
It was caused by the crew not disconnecting the autopilot until the last minute on a windy approach. As the a/c had already gone into Autoland mode it had applied elevator trim (as it is meant to do) when the crew disconnected there was a bit of a surprise nose up pitch and the resulting effort to get the nose on the ground broke it.
It was caused by the crew not disconnecting the autopilot until the last minute on a windy approach. As the a/c had already gone into Autoland mode it had applied elevator trim (as it is meant to do) when the crew disconnected there was a bit of a surprise nose up pitch and the resulting effort to get the nose on the ground broke it.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Saudi Vegas
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the hell......,
Dat don't make sense to me.
I can't see why there would be a sudden change in attitude when a/p disconnected, trim or no trim !
Then again I'm not as clever as you boys up the front
Dat don't make sense to me.
I can't see why there would be a sudden change in attitude when a/p disconnected, trim or no trim !
Then again I'm not as clever as you boys up the front
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Mars or was it Venus
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I understand the touchdown on the mains was good, on speed in the right place,the nose dropped sharply (757 drivers might recognise this..).maybe technique was wrong but PF is apparently V experienced on type and in current aero practice...
wonder if the elevator PCU is the same as the 737 rudder PCU?...
wonder if the elevator PCU is the same as the 737 rudder PCU?...
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The trim problem is certainly apparent on the B737!
I don't understand how the B737 falls under the parameters for a "fail-passive autloand system" since if I recall correctly from my early days, one of the requirements is that there should be no siginificant out-of-trim condition if the A/P is disengaged at any point during an autoland.
Anyone who has disconnected the A/P on a B737 after it has applied the nose-up trim automatically knows that this is total and utter bo**ocks.
I don't understand how the B737 falls under the parameters for a "fail-passive autloand system" since if I recall correctly from my early days, one of the requirements is that there should be no siginificant out-of-trim condition if the A/P is disengaged at any point during an autoland.
Anyone who has disconnected the A/P on a B737 after it has applied the nose-up trim automatically knows that this is total and utter bo**ocks.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nose up trim is only applied for the flare on a 757, if its in Land 2 status. ie only two out of the three autojockies are working. On a Land 3, there should be no pitch up if the autopilots are disengaged. Must remember to give its a go next time....doh!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to my Boeing manual:
During an approach with two or three autopilots engaged and below 330 feet RA an increment of nose up trim is automatically applied for flare. If the autopilots are subsequently disengaged in the approach, a forward control column force of 20-30 pounds may be required to counter the automatic trim condition. If an automatic multi-autopilot go-around is performed, the increment of automatic trim is removed.
Anyway, we're splitting hairs. This wasn't the cause of the incident so it's not really relevant.
During an approach with two or three autopilots engaged and below 330 feet RA an increment of nose up trim is automatically applied for flare. If the autopilots are subsequently disengaged in the approach, a forward control column force of 20-30 pounds may be required to counter the automatic trim condition. If an automatic multi-autopilot go-around is performed, the increment of automatic trim is removed.
Anyway, we're splitting hairs. This wasn't the cause of the incident so it's not really relevant.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LTN, UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So there's no pics yet then?
Was told on Friday the aircraft will be repaired at a cost of about $8million, against an insured value of about $30million. Alas it will take quite some time, as will require Boeing to do it and GIB not the best place to arrange that!
Was told on Friday the aircraft will be repaired at a cost of about $8million, against an insured value of about $30million. Alas it will take quite some time, as will require Boeing to do it and GIB not the best place to arrange that!