Hard landing/bounce on 320 fleet
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moscow
Age: 48
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not to land? Is 5 feet high for you or do you have another reason?
By the way is it possible that ground spoilers ( to continie popular Colsie thread about spoilers) might extend at 5 feet after bounce if I decide to land & set levers to idle.
According to FCOM they extend (if armed) if main struts compressed & below 6 feet and Lever angle (not actual thrust) below 15 degrees. So technically it is possible to make hard landing from even 2,3,4,5 feet due to GS extension after bounce up to 6 feet & setting levers to idle.
By the way is it possible that ground spoilers ( to continie popular Colsie thread about spoilers) might extend at 5 feet after bounce if I decide to land & set levers to idle.
According to FCOM they extend (if armed) if main struts compressed & below 6 feet and Lever angle (not actual thrust) below 15 degrees. So technically it is possible to make hard landing from even 2,3,4,5 feet due to GS extension after bounce up to 6 feet & setting levers to idle.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why, because bent metal costs big bucks, chances are if you didn't get it right the first time you don't have the skill to fix it either.
That bounce will take a lot of energy, now that you're out airspeed and ideas, what will be your next move?
a. Increase flare and hold on.
b. Lower the attitude and hold on.
c. Give it a shot of thrust (good luck).
That bounce will take a lot of energy, now that you're out airspeed and ideas, what will be your next move?
a. Increase flare and hold on.
b. Lower the attitude and hold on.
c. Give it a shot of thrust (good luck).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moscow
Age: 48
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Bflyer:
Affirm, we have load report, but not as the part of PFR. This situation is the real one. According to load report it was bounce up to 4 feet with thrust at 50% and down rate 350 after 1,65 first touch, thrust set to idle and the second touch with vert. rate only 200 ft per minute, but load is 2,2. Pitch is constant, no dual input. I wonder how it could be.
Affirm, we have load report, but not as the part of PFR. This situation is the real one. According to load report it was bounce up to 4 feet with thrust at 50% and down rate 350 after 1,65 first touch, thrust set to idle and the second touch with vert. rate only 200 ft per minute, but load is 2,2. Pitch is constant, no dual input. I wonder how it could be.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: N33 24.7 E36 30.8 E 36 30.8
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with NV pilot....the best option is to go around and figure out what went wrong the first time...then the new approach will count as a first one..otherwise, it will be a fight between man and machine..and the outcome is usually messy to say the least
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: N33 24.7 E36 30.8 E 36 30.8
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Boroda
here is my read on the event as best as i could
The first bounce might have been caused by a late flare with or without a downdraft caused by weather
The thrust levers were either retarded to idle completely or out of the CL detent on the way to idle at some intermediate position...but the thrust did not dissipate completely by touchdown and 50% of it was still produced by the engines..which, coupled with the reaction to the downward force produced the bounce
350 fpm at touchdown the first time corresponds to a HARD landing
It appears that the PF accepted the bounce..kept his thrust levers at idle and kept his pitch constant for the second normal touchdown at 200 fpm
(no pitch change)
As for the load being constant at 2.2 g...well i don't know...but my guess is that it is the sum total of the load exerted on the aircraft at this phase
best regards...
Bf
here is my read on the event as best as i could
The first bounce might have been caused by a late flare with or without a downdraft caused by weather
The thrust levers were either retarded to idle completely or out of the CL detent on the way to idle at some intermediate position...but the thrust did not dissipate completely by touchdown and 50% of it was still produced by the engines..which, coupled with the reaction to the downward force produced the bounce
350 fpm at touchdown the first time corresponds to a HARD landing
It appears that the PF accepted the bounce..kept his thrust levers at idle and kept his pitch constant for the second normal touchdown at 200 fpm
(no pitch change)
As for the load being constant at 2.2 g...well i don't know...but my guess is that it is the sum total of the load exerted on the aircraft at this phase
best regards...
Bf
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a big head called Tom,
Who didn't read his FCOM,
He spoke through his $$$$,
Ended up in the grass,
And posted it on PPRuNe.com
Who didn't read his FCOM,
A pilot can deactivate the other stick and take full control by pressing and keeping pressed his priority takeover pushbutton. For latching the priority condition, it is recommended to press the takeover push button for more than 40 seconds.
Ended up in the grass,
And posted it on PPRuNe.com
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Around the world.
Age: 42
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know perfectly well that holding the button for 40 secs will latch after plenty of pilot incap in the sim, I am saying that the latching condition can be reset in-flight, unlike the comment earlier regarding needing a reset on the ground - which I suspected was a confusion with the autothrust lock out which does indeed need a reset on the ground.
Regarding use of the button in flight, I have yet to see anyone use it correctly on the line in terms of pressing the button and saying 'I have control.' When I first started on the aircraft and the training captain needed to correct my flare, generally he tweaked it with a 'dual input.' Then last year I did a month as safety pilot and again watching the new guys landing, the trainers if a correction was needed used dual input.
Another note, the 40 sec lock out seems to take forever in the sim, I have let go before now thinking at least a few minutes must have passed only for the other stick to not be latched out yet. I have seen other guys do this as well.
Regarding use of the button in flight, I have yet to see anyone use it correctly on the line in terms of pressing the button and saying 'I have control.' When I first started on the aircraft and the training captain needed to correct my flare, generally he tweaked it with a 'dual input.' Then last year I did a month as safety pilot and again watching the new guys landing, the trainers if a correction was needed used dual input.
Another note, the 40 sec lock out seems to take forever in the sim, I have let go before now thinking at least a few minutes must have passed only for the other stick to not be latched out yet. I have seen other guys do this as well.
Last edited by tom775257; 4th Aug 2008 at 18:16.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moscow
Age: 48
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BF:
Thanks for your read. The fact is that levers were without a doubt constantly at 50% from before the first impact until top of the bounce and it lead to GS nonextension (it became the main reason of the hop).
And I am looking for your confirmation of my theory about GS extension logic posted at post 21 - that once levers were set to idle (actually at 4 feet) GS extended (either struts had been still compressed after the first land attempt or smthg with proximity sensors after such a touch) and it caused despite the low rate (200fpm) such a load.
Do you think this idea about GS has a right to exist?
BRGDS, Boroda
Thanks for your read. The fact is that levers were without a doubt constantly at 50% from before the first impact until top of the bounce and it lead to GS nonextension (it became the main reason of the hop).
And I am looking for your confirmation of my theory about GS extension logic posted at post 21 - that once levers were set to idle (actually at 4 feet) GS extended (either struts had been still compressed after the first land attempt or smthg with proximity sensors after such a touch) and it caused despite the low rate (200fpm) such a load.
Do you think this idea about GS has a right to exist?
BRGDS, Boroda
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: B612
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to settle the issue, here's a quote from the A320 FCTM 01.020 Page 16 of 18:
"If a flight crewmember fails on a sidestick, or a mechanical failure leads to a jammed stick (there is no associate ECAM action), the "failed" sidestick order is added to the "non failed" sidestick order.
In this case, the other non affected flight crewmember must press the sidestick priority pushbutton for at least 40 seconds, in order to deactivate the "failed" sidestick.
A pilot can at anytime reactivate a deactivated stick by momentarily pressing the takeover push button on either stick."
Further, on page 17 of 18:
"Note: When a sidestick is deactivated by opposite sidestick priority pushbutton, it can be reactivated with its own sidestick priority pushbutton."
"If a flight crewmember fails on a sidestick, or a mechanical failure leads to a jammed stick (there is no associate ECAM action), the "failed" sidestick order is added to the "non failed" sidestick order.
In this case, the other non affected flight crewmember must press the sidestick priority pushbutton for at least 40 seconds, in order to deactivate the "failed" sidestick.
A pilot can at anytime reactivate a deactivated stick by momentarily pressing the takeover push button on either stick."
Further, on page 17 of 18:
"Note: When a sidestick is deactivated by opposite sidestick priority pushbutton, it can be reactivated with its own sidestick priority pushbutton."
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: France
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the two sidesticks had been mechanically connected, then a number of accidents would have been avoided. The fact that despite maturity in the A320 world, landing accidents involving dual sidestick, and training accidents caused by the trainer's inability to assess sidestick inputs by his trainee, are far too common. (This aircraft is a nightmare to train on!).
Of course, Airbus say there is nothing wrong with the design...
But how sustainable this view is in light of the ongoing stream of accidents, and what we do to reduce the rate of landing accidents in this aircraft is a complete mystery...
(For my part, I've been thinking about buying some shares in Messier-Dowty!)
Of course, Airbus say there is nothing wrong with the design...
But how sustainable this view is in light of the ongoing stream of accidents, and what we do to reduce the rate of landing accidents in this aircraft is a complete mystery...
(For my part, I've been thinking about buying some shares in Messier-Dowty!)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moscow
Age: 48
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
StEx
The fact is that GS did not extend at the first touch because levers were at TLA of about 50 degrees and only after bounce were they set to idle.
Here we come to the logic described in FCOM just after your note where we can find that GS can be extented even up to 6 RA feet and thrust above idle. And this logic lead me to conclusion that when levers were idled and under condition struts had not decompressed by that moment GS extended as RA was at 4 feet. And that lead to hard landing from such a height.
The fact is that GS did not extend at the first touch because levers were at TLA of about 50 degrees and only after bounce were they set to idle.
Here we come to the logic described in FCOM just after your note where we can find that GS can be extented even up to 6 RA feet and thrust above idle. And this logic lead me to conclusion that when levers were idled and under condition struts had not decompressed by that moment GS extended as RA was at 4 feet. And that lead to hard landing from such a height.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At my own airline we had a tail strike attributed to Dual Input on the A321, I myself am guilty on several occasions of adding input without pushing red button, sometimes only a small input is needed and I don't want to take the landing away from the other pilot, other instances require taking over.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Miami
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From AIRBUS FLIGHT OPERATIONS BRIEFING NOTES
Landing Techniques
Bounce Recovery - Rejected Landing
Recovery from a light bounce
In case of a light bounce, the following typical recovery technique can be applied:
•
Maintain a normal landing pitch attitude:
−
Do not increase pitch attitude as this could cause a tailstrike; and,
−
Do not allow the pitch attitude to increase, particularly following a firm
touchdown with a high pitch rate.
Note:
Spoiler extension may induce pitch up effect.
•
Note:
Spoiler extension may induce pitch up effect.
•
Continue the landing;
•
Keep thrust at idle; and,
•
Be aware of the increased landing distance.
Recovery from a high bounce
In case of a more severe bounce, do not attempt to land, as the remaining runway
length might not be sufficient to stop the aircraft.
The following generic go-around technique can be applied:
•
In case of a more severe bounce, do not attempt to land, as the remaining runway
length might not be sufficient to stop the aircraft.
The following generic go-around technique can be applied:
•
Maintain a normal landing pitch attitude;
•
Initiate a go-around by triggering go-around levers and/or advancing throttle/thrust
levers to the go-around thrust position (depending on aircraft type);
•
•
Ignore the takeoff configuration warning, if any;
•
Maintain the landing gear and flaps configuration;
•
Be ready for a possible second touchdown;
−
Do not try to avoid a second touchdown during the go-around. Should this
happen, the second touchdown would be soft enough to prevent damage to the
aircraft, if pitch attitude is maintained;
•
aircraft, if pitch attitude is maintained;
•
When safely established in the go-around and no risk of further touchdown exists
SIDENOTE:
After reverse thrust is selected, a full-stop landing must be completed
(i.e., with a steady positive climb), follow normal go-around procedures; and,
• Reengage automation, as desired, to reduce workload.SIDENOTE:
After reverse thrust is selected, a full-stop landing must be completed
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moscow
Age: 48
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The same recommendations do we have at volume 3 FCOM bullitens. But there is no reference about what is low/high. My company SOP gives the bounce limit as 5 feet. And in case of low bounce we are recommended to adjust thrust to smooth the second touch opposite to airbus recommendations to keep idle. Any dual input during the flight is regarded as severe violation.
Saw this on Youtube recently; looks like a last second wind gust caused a high-bounce.
YouTube - British Airways Go-Around Sofia Airport
YouTube - British Airways Go-Around Sofia Airport