blues deville Posted August 8, 2016 Author Share Posted August 8, 2016 2 hours ago, DEFCON said: Thanks Blues. I'm sure there'd be a very large increase in drag during the retraction sequence and even though it may have been initiated with a positive rate, a high density altitude combined with a 20 + knot sheer would have brought the aircraft down fairly quickly. Boeing's FTCM for the 777 discusses how critical pitch control is during go arounds. Anything excessive and a tail strike is possible. However, it seems to be if you want to walk away from a crash, make it a 777-200. BA at Heathrow, Asiana at San Fran and this latest event in Dubai. Perhaps that Malaysia 777 is in one piece at the bottom of the ocean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 It does seem to be an unusually resilient bird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 1 hour ago, DEFCON said: It does seem to be an unusually resilient bird. Must be all that carbon fibre. Following is an article from Boeing re the 787 that talks about their experience gained from the use of carbon fibre etc. on the 777. You may also find it of interest. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_06/article_04_2.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 If they touched down and then commanded the Go Around without physically following through on the Thrust Levers they might have gotten themselves caught since the AT would not have commanded go around thrust. They pull up, realize too late that the thrust is still at idle................ Just another theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blues deville Posted August 9, 2016 Author Share Posted August 9, 2016 Someone was pretty fast with that gear handle. And from some of the photos the flaps do appear to be F20 and not F30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boney Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 Maybe they had to use flaps 20 for landing with those temperatures, ie. "Climb limited". Hopefully we would get information, but you never know, with a state airline in a controlled state. Hmmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blues deville Posted August 9, 2016 Author Share Posted August 9, 2016 57 minutes ago, Boney said: Maybe they had to use flaps 20 for landing with those temperatures, ie. "Climb limited". Hopefully we would get information, but you never know, with a state airline in a controlled state. Hmmmm. Good point. That is a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 Interesting article ... thanks Malcolm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 Emirates 777 crash inquiry details chaotic evacuation 06 September, 2016 BY: David Kaminski-Morrow London Investigators have detailed the extraordinary evacuation of the crashed Emirates Boeing 777-300 at Dubai, disclosing that cabin crew had to cope with problems at all 10 exits. The General Civil Aviation Authority has also revealed that passengers were already unbuckling seat-belts and leaving their seats as the aircraft was still sliding along the runway. Investigators have determined that the 777 came down on its engines and fuselage, with its undercarriage retracted, after failing to climb away during a go-around on 3 August. The aircraft shed its right-hand engine at it came to a halt, resulting in an intense fuel-fed fire. While the aircraft had five exits on each side, the evacuation slides for those on the left were badly affected by the wind. The inquiry also notes that cabin crew assigned to the two forward left-hand doors were initially unable to open them – possibly because the aircraft was listing to the right – and required assistance. Four of the left-hand doors were ultimately opened – the central door was left shut owing to smoke outside – but their slides were either blown up against the aircraft or, in one case, detached before it could be used. Passengers could only evacuate from the rearmost left-hand exit before the wind made its slide unusable. Four of the right-hand exits – on the side facing the fire – were opened. The forward slide was initially wind-blown and subsequently deflated after some occupants had escaped, while the second exit was temporarily barred from use due to smoke. Passengers evacuating down one of the slides on the aft right-hand doors “became stuck”, says the inquiry, because it filled with water during the firefighting effort. Cabin crew redirected passengers to the rearmost right-hand door slide, which had to be held down by firefighters owing to the wind. While cabin crew had instructed passengers to leave belongings behind, the inquiry states that “several passengers” evacuated the aircraft carrying their baggage. The aircraft’s captain and senior flight attendant were the last to leave the aircraft. They were forced to jump from the forward left-hand door – the slide for which had detached – because the aircraft had filled with smoke as a fuel tank exploded, and they could not locate the cockpit evacuation ropes. Flight EK521 had been transporting 282 passengers, of which 269 had been seated in the economy-class cabin and the other 13 in business-class. None was in the first-class section. Despite the chaotic situation, all the passengers, as well as the 18 crew members, survived the accident, although a firefighter attending the crash was fatally injured during a wing tank explosion about 9min after the jet had come to rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 An interim report https://www.gcaa.gov.ae/en/ePublication/admin/iradmin/Lists/Incidents Investigation Reports/Attachments/90/2016-2016 - Preliminary Report, AAIS Case AIFN-0008-2016 - A6-EMW.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 So....the Coles Notes summary. The crew experienced a windshear (or 2 or 3 depending on how you call it), when advised by the automation that it was a long landing decided to go-around by horsing the aircraft back into the air, retracting the flaps and gear, read back a clearance while still below 85' but forgot to actually push the power up. PF neglected to advance power for the go-around, PM neglected to monitor the aircraft performance and actions of PF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 On 2016-08-09 at 8:47 AM, Trader said: If they touched down and then commanded the Go Around without physically following through on the Thrust Levers they might have gotten themselves caught since the AT would not have commanded go around thrust. They pull up, realize too late that the thrust is still at idle................ Just another theory. Nailed it. Looks like you're the winner in the "here's my theory contest." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 Good call Trader. I find it amazing that pilot screw-ups like this keep happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 21 hours ago, seeker said: Nailed it. Looks like you're the winner in the "here's my theory contest." May best be categorized as "blind trust" in the automated system to pull their nuts out of the fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.