Bent Monach 757 at Gib
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
From: UK
This post has the potential of giving us some hard learnt experience of landing a big jet at Gib. I have read here that it may have been a pilot problem or a technical problem. It would be really valuable if the definitive answer could be posted here when it is available. My sympathies to the crew and pax whether it was a technical problem or a pilot induced one. I have in the distant past flown into Gib so I am aware of the tricky wind situation, and one of my colleagues got it a bit wrong one day and hammered a light just before the threshold (journos note - this was not a passenger ac which would aim to land further in than on the numbers at the threshold so hold your pens). I also watched with eyebrows raised a F104 Starfighter whose chute hadn't deployed flash over the road at great speed and nearly get wet at the far end.
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 3
From: Arizona USA
Well mole...notice you're up to your usual form.
When the aeroplane is bent on landing, it usually IS the pilots that screwed up...or were just plain unlucky. CI B747 at Kaitak, is a good example. Nothing new really.
When the aeroplane is bent on landing, it usually IS the pilots that screwed up...or were just plain unlucky. CI B747 at Kaitak, is a good example. Nothing new really.
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 32
From: Blighty
411a, you really are an idiot aren't you. What about a technical problem the flight crew weren't aware of on landing. Ever been to GIB, i have many times.
Please go back to you Flight Sim game, and get a life
Please go back to you Flight Sim game, and get a life
Plumbum Pendular
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
From: Avionics Bay
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: Asia
I have just spent a week flying out of Gib and had a good look around MONC, the nose gear has impacted into the flight deck causing a large distortion to the floor and damaging all kinds of internal wiring etc. They are planning to build an inflateable hangar around the a/c and Boeing will repair it at a cost of $4 millon.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: UK
Don't hang the pilot!!
A reliable inside Monarch source told me the landing recorded a max 1.75g. Hardly the stuff of heavy landings, even if the nose was slammed (not proven).
Let's not rule out structural failure.. this was after all a very elderly example of the type. The HP involved may yet be proven innocent of any mishandling of the landing!
There but for the grace of God go all of us!
Let's not rule out structural failure.. this was after all a very elderly example of the type. The HP involved may yet be proven innocent of any mishandling of the landing!
There but for the grace of God go all of us!
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: A PC!
RAF can do it too!
This reminds me of a similar problem on an RAF VC10 a few years back when I was flying them.
Turnround visual inspection showed wrinkling of the aft fuselage under the engines. An "expert" was flown out to a/c, declared it "fit one flight back to Brize" (from Canada I think) and the wrinkles were all marked with indelible ink.
The crew said said they would fly it if the "expert" was a passenger - he didn't want to but eventually agreed.
When they got home, all the wrinkles had moved and serious delamination of the skin was found. The skin had pulled free of the ribs due to corrosion.
The engineers then nearly wrote the jet off when jacking the back up to a force of 2 tons to put it back into shape, they misread the gauge and tried to turn it into a banana by applying 20 tons of force!
Now, this is not the same as the famous Tristar moment when the crew stuffed a mainwheel up into the wing, cracking the spar, and then flew a go around - in the VC10's case it was old age not idiocy!
Turnround visual inspection showed wrinkling of the aft fuselage under the engines. An "expert" was flown out to a/c, declared it "fit one flight back to Brize" (from Canada I think) and the wrinkles were all marked with indelible ink.
The crew said said they would fly it if the "expert" was a passenger - he didn't want to but eventually agreed.
When they got home, all the wrinkles had moved and serious delamination of the skin was found. The skin had pulled free of the ribs due to corrosion.
The engineers then nearly wrote the jet off when jacking the back up to a force of 2 tons to put it back into shape, they misread the gauge and tried to turn it into a banana by applying 20 tons of force!
Now, this is not the same as the famous Tristar moment when the crew stuffed a mainwheel up into the wing, cracking the spar, and then flew a go around - in the VC10's case it was old age not idiocy!
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,027
Likes: 2
From: on the beach
Moggie
I can remember a number of years ago doing a survey on a BAe125 in Cape Town that had a 'similar wrinkling' of the fuselage skin around the engine area.
Our experts told us that rear engine mounted aircraft were more prone to this after a heavy landing.
I can remember a number of years ago doing a survey on a BAe125 in Cape Town that had a 'similar wrinkling' of the fuselage skin around the engine area.
Our experts told us that rear engine mounted aircraft were more prone to this after a heavy landing.
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
From: ???
Moggie more than one of the VC10 had this problem, they all had to be reskinned! As for the L1011 go around, he didnt have much choice as the engines were throttled up for a touch (sadly he did more than that) and go. Your description is a tad over dramatised, the rear spar was indeed cracked but the gear was safe to land on! RAF not on their own with this as CX did the same to one of their L1011's.
As for skin rippling, take a look around the aft belly on a B747.
As for skin rippling, take a look around the aft belly on a B747.
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
From: near EGKK
Last edited by Desk Driver; 27th June 2002 at 08:35.