CLANG!!!

How'd you get a video of my last landing? I thought I did a pretty good job, no?
 
PN2012062001002014.-.-.CI0003.jpg


This is why you never drop the nose when landing haha.
 
Based on a post on PPrune, the weather was pretty nasty:

Wasn't as simple as that. Landed at NRT around the same time. Probably just before the aircraft concerned.
Winds observed at 1000 ft agl were 240/58-72 kts, dropping down to 230/48 kts steady at 500 ft. And then there was a +/- 15 kts WS reported. On my observation it was more like +/- 20 kts windshear!
And the turbulence was huge. Moderate to moderate/severe turbulence REPORTED by 4 airplane before me from 500 ft to touchdown. I observed Moderate/Severe all the way down from 500 ft to touchdown.
And BTW the winds reported on ground were 220 to 250 at 28 gusting 44 kts. That's a direct crosswind for the runway in use-16R.
And the winds were spot on!
Airport should have been temporarily closed.
Click to expand...
 
Reminds me a lot of the World DC-10 accident in BWI about 3 years ago. Touched down hard, bounced, then the flying pilot added forward pressure, bringing the nose down onto the runway before the mains. Aircraft was written off as a total loss. Like most long body aircraft, adding strong forward pressure in a 767 on even a normal landing can cause damage. Doing it after a bounce ends in, well, you guys see from the video.
 
SteveCostello said:
Yeah. I saw that in the video. I'm no A&P, but I assume that once you wrinkle an airframe like that, it's pretty much done. Is that a correct assumption?
Click to expand...
Pretty much. De-rotation can be ridiculously hard on an airframe. I seem to remember another handful of 763s have been written off in this manner.

Aside: My airplane (not 767, but EMB-145) requires some technique to arrest de-rotation. And by technique I mean burying the yoke in your lap when landing flaps 45. It's a little more finesse with 22, but guys who let the nose slam down are asking for trouble.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
1198526.jpg


Not necessarily true. This one is flying again.
Click to expand...

a.) Wow. What the hell punched through that?
b.) I could see this being repairable, since it looks like no structural members were actually bent along the length of the plane. Cut the affected pieces out, get some new ones in there, reskin the area. I'm sure it's more complicated than that, but that would be the basic idea. The bent 73, however... that will have damage all the way around the circumference of the airframe. You'd have to chop it and sew it back together with an entirely new section. I would think it'd be easier/cheaper just to take off all the good parts and scrap the rest on a 737.
 
SteveCostello said:
The bent 73, however... that will have damage all the way around the circumference of the airframe. You'd have to chop it and sew it back together with an entirely new section. I would think it'd be easier/cheaper just to take off all the good parts and scrap the rest on a 737.
Click to expand...

The 767-300 (which is what was in the video) has had a history of this type of damage; lots of them have returned to service.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
1198526.jpg


Not necessarily true. This one is flying again.
Click to expand...

Photo evidence that during the upcoming Zombie Apocalypse, a pressurized and sealed aircraft does not mask the sweet deliciousness of living human flesh.

This person learned the hard way that a zombie will penetrate the hull of an aircraft.

You are warned.


Sent from my TRS-80
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top