UA 737 charter gone wrong at KLWS

[Roger Roger]

wouldn’t it just land on that tail strike pad thing?

That’s the tie down ring, and when a caravan tips it falls fast enough to crunch the bottom of the bulkhead. I guess it’s a pretty big repair job. A PC-12 will crunch the entire rudder. A 207 only falls like 6” when it tips so it doesn’t really hurt anything. I’m not sure what a Cherokee 6 would do but if you loaded it far enough aft to tip it on its tail the CG would probably be so far aft you’d die trying to fly it.

 

[Murdoughnut]

That’s the tie down ring, and when a caravan tips it falls fast enough to crunch the bottom of the bulkhead. I guess it’s a pretty big repair job. A PC-12 will crunch the entire rudder. A 207 only falls like 6” when it tips so it doesn’t really hurt anything. I’m not sure what a Cherokee 6 would do but if you loaded it far enough aft to tip it on its tail the CG would probably be so far aft you’d die trying to fly it.

I remember doing a walkaround with @Seggy once and pointed out on the stretch 73s the thing that sticks out and lets you know if the plane has taken a tail strike (because it'll be scraped). I figured if this thing slowly tipped onto it, it probably would cause less damage than a tail strike, but hard to tell from the pic.

 

[fholbert]

I remember doing a walkaround with @Seggy once and pointed out on the stretch 73s the thing that sticks out and lets you know if the plane has taken a tail strike (because it'll be scraped). I figured if this thing slowly tipped onto it, it probably would cause less damage than a tail strike, but hard to tell from the pic.

I have over 3 million frequent flyer miles, all on US carriers. I've seen some of you guys land. Falling back on the tail skid seems pretty minor.

Throwing in the thrust reversers as soon as the mains hit followed by the nose wheel slamming to the ground shaking the entire airframe. That's abuse.

 

[ShortField]

I remember doing a walkaround with @Seggy once and pointed out on the stretch 73s the thing that sticks out and lets you know if the plane has taken a tail strike (because it'll be scraped). I figured if this thing slowly tipped onto it, it probably would cause less damage than a tail strike, but hard to tell from the pic.

I’ve never been up close to a 73 sitting in its tail, but from the picture it actually looks like it’s sitting on the belly. Can’t zoom in to see, I think the tail skid is aft of where it’s resting. Maybe it eased onto its tail like an old man into a hot bath and just got a scratch.

 

[BobDDuck]

I have over 3 million frequent flyer miles, all on US carriers. I've seen some of you guys land. Falling back on the tail skid seems pretty minor.

Throwing in the thrust reversers as soon as the mains hit followed by the nose wheel slamming to the ground shaking the entire airframe. That's abuse.

Lolwut?

 

[Minuteman]

I got to wondering if you could crush a watermelon under the tail. So, doing some math on the just the static situation of the aircraft on its tail:

• Let's say it weighs 120,000 lbs after landing, and all of that is right over the mains
• Being a li'l generous, the tail contacts the ground around 12° on a -900
• Making a guess, the CG is about 9 feet off the ground, right at the floor of the cabin.

So when the a/c does a tail stand, the 120,000 lbs moves aft by ~1.8 feet past the mains. You now have 216k ft-lbs to be countered by the tailskid(?)

The tailskid is ~50 feet aft of the main gear, so the force back there is 4,300 lbs on the skid. Yes, that would crush a watermelon. Even if you fuzz the numbers to be more favorable (11° and 7 feet off the ground), you still get 3,200 lbs.

You would need 12 "180-pound passengers" to move from the back rows to the forward entry door to tip the aircraft back, but you probably wouldn't want to them to move all at the same time. The average weight of a player on the offensive line or a defensive tackle is ~310 lbs, so seven of them.

 

[Adler]

Lolwut?

The guy thinks day VFR in the relatively simple plane he's owned a known for ages, is the pinnacle of aviation knowledge and skill; and any professional who makes a mistake is obviously a moron.

I vote to have his name changes to either Iceman or Newsbot2.0

 

[GypsyPilot]

I have over 3 million frequent flyer miles, all on US carriers. I've seen some of you guys land. Falling back on the tail skid seems pretty minor.

Throwing in the thrust reversers as soon as the mains hit followed by the nose wheel slamming to the ground shaking the entire airframe. That's abuse.

Cool story bro!

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

No, I hear him. Some people just stop flying as soon as the mains are on the deck. The nose wheel comes down with no regard. I too get the TRs out at main wheel touchdown (after sweeping the speed brake handle to ensure deployment), but with TRs coming out, the nose will want even more to come down fast so it takes a little amount of thought/effort to smoothly bring it down. Some people just don't care and let it come crashing down.

 

[MikeD]

No, I hear him. Some people just stop flying as soon as the mains are on the deck. The nose wheel comes down with no regard. I too get the TRs out at main wheel touchdown (after sweeping the speed brake handle to ensure deployment), but with TRs coming out, the nose will want even more to come down fast so it takes a little amount of thought/effort to smoothly bring it down. Some people just don't care and let it come crashing down.

Mains touch down, TRs get unlocked first in order that the pins inside them have time to retract as the nose is being flown down to the runway. Then deployed on nosewheel touchdown to the desired reverse thrust degree. If the runway is shorter, the nose comes down a little quicker but is still flown down to the runway. On most runways that the average 737 goes to, reverse isn’t really needed, so the guys trying to break the TR pins off by trying to rack the handles back to TR right at touchdown as opposed to unlocking them first and giving it a second or two, aren’t gaining anything.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Mains touch down, TRs get unlocked first in order that the pins inside them have time to retract as the nose is being flown down to the runway. Then deployed on nosewheel touchdown to the desired reverse thrust degree. If the runway is shorter, the nose comes down a little quicker but is still flown down to the runway. On most runways that the average 737 goes to, reverse isn’t really needed, so the guys trying to break the TR pins off by trying to rack the handles back to TR right at touchdown as opposed to unlocking them first and giving it a second or two, aren’t gaining anything.

I’ll unlock them and get the yellow lights (our “two lights” callouts). Give it a Mississippi seconds pause so it is ready and then pull it up to second detent. By then the nose is on the ground or close to it. Not yanking them out and pulling hard. That might create the SWA at MDW overrun problem.

The 800/900 NGs do use reverse basically as SOP, considering we don’t use the full runway and aim for turnoffs. Eg, 16R in SEA is 8,500 ft long but we get off at N or P (Q latest). Flaps 30 V target speeds typically higher 140s, lower 150s with the 5 knot correction. Our procedure is to use TRs, mostly detent 2.

I’ve noticed with the HUD deceleration display on landing, no brakes and just max reverse will initially get the equivalent of autobrake 3 deceleration. As you slow it’s obviously less effective. But they are really good. My own technique is to only use TRs til below 100 knots, then touch brakes. Doing that never gets me the hot brake shudder when coming to park at the gate. I’ve seen some guys touch down and really get on the brakes, and the brake shuddering is guaranteed on taxi in to park.

The -900 (non ER) are pigs. Their Ref speeds are even higher than the 900ERs. My line check recently was on a -900 (non ER). LAX-SEA flaps 30 ref was 151, plus standard +5 so final target speed was 156.

 

[knot4u]

Mains touch down, TRs get unlocked first in order that the pins inside them have time to retract as the nose is being flown down to the runway. Then deployed on nosewheel touchdown to the desired reverse thrust degree. If the runway is shorter, the nose comes down a little quicker but is still flown down to the runway. On most runways that the average 737 goes to, reverse isn’t really needed, so the guys trying to break the TR pins off by trying to rack the handles back to TR right at touchdown as opposed to unlocking them first and giving it a second or two, aren’t gaining anything.

Brake changes are a filthy uncomfortable job, please use your thrust reversers. They are not a wear item. I used to work on a couple of G-150s, those brakes were good for around 350 cycles based on Gulfstreams estimates. I had conversations about that fact with the pilots and I advised them to utilize the the T/R's, we ended up getting around 500 cycles before the brakes required replacement, of course these pilots were what you might call "smooth" with their yanking around on the levers and stuff in the cockpit.

 

[MikeD]

I’ll unlock them and get the yellow lights (our “two lights” callouts). Give it a Mississippi seconds pause so it is ready and then pull it up to second detent. By then the nose is on the ground or close to it. Not yanking them out and pulling hard. That might create the SWA at MDW overrun problem.

The 800/900 NGs do use reverse basically as SOP, considering we don’t use the full runway and aim for turnoffs. Eg, 16R in SEA is 8,500 ft long but we get off at N or P (Q latest). Flaps 30 V target speeds typically higher 140s, lower 150s with the 5 knot correction. Our procedure is to use TRs, mostly detent 2.

I’ve noticed with the HUD deceleration display on landing, no brakes and just max reverse will initially get the equivalent of autobrake 3 deceleration. As you slow it’s obviously less effective. But they are really good. My own technique is to only use TRs til below 100 knots, then touch brakes. Doing that never gets me the hot brake shudder when coming to park at the gate. I’ve seen some guys touch down and really get on the brakes, and the brake shuddering is guaranteed on taxi in to park.

The -900 (non ER) are pigs. Their Ref speeds are even higher than the 900ERs. My line check recently was on a -900 (non ER). LAX-SEA flaps 30 ref was 151, plus standard +5 so final target speed was 156.

Flaps 40 is where it’s at for a good approach speed and shorter landing roll. A little bit extra power to carry and hence a little extra noise, but not bad.

 

[Tiptank]

Brake changes are a filthy uncomfortable job, please use your thrust reversers. They are not a wear item. I used to work on a couple of G-150s, those brakes were good for around 350 cycles based on Gulfstreams estimates. I had conversations about that fact with the pilots and I advised them to utilize the the T/R's, we ended up getting around 500 cycles before the brakes required replacement, of course these pilots were what you might call "smooth" with their yanking around on the levers and stuff in the cockpit.

Pound sand. If I have to stop a tube going 120 mph in a safe manner I'm not considering if you get dirty from doing your job. Good grief, get over yourself.

 

[MikeD]

Brake changes are a filthy uncomfortable job, please use your thrust reversers. They are not a wear item. I used to work on a couple of G-150s, those brakes were good for around 350 cycles based on Gulfstreams estimates. I had conversations about that fact with the pilots and I advised them to utilize the the T/R's, we ended up getting around 500 cycles before the brakes required replacement, of course these pilots were what you might call "smooth" with their yanking around on the levers and stuff in the cockpit.

The reversers on the -200 feel more effective than the ones on the -300/400/500. The jet slows down well with about 50% reverse, and brakes smoothly applied around 60 once stowing them. I’m not worried about making a particular runway exit unless traffic behind is a factor or runway length is an issue, so I accept some extra rollout to slow down comfortably. Minimal necessary brake usage is a good thing. We have one guy who likes constant autobrakes 2, or 3 if empty. For no particular reason.

 

[MikeD]

Pound sand. If I have to stop a tube going 120 mph in a safe manner I'm not considering if you get dirty from doing your job. Good grief, get over yourself.

i don’t think he’s saying that. I think he’s more criticizing the guys who honk on the brakes hard routinely and unnecessarily, when there’s no critical reason to do so. The pilots who have no concept of how to take care of the jet a little, and instead treat it like a rental car.

 

[knot4u]

Pound sand. If I have to stop a tube going 120 mph in a safe manner I'm not considering if you get dirty from doing your job. Good grief, get over yourself.

I've seen plenty of "expensive" pilots, don't be that guy. Asking pilots to not hammer on the brakes on every landing was not a mandate, it was just a reminder. I get payed to get dirty, wanna get dirty?

 

[Roger Roger]

Carbon brakes are happiest if you heat them up good.

 

[amichael]

And the majority of brake wear occurs on taxi out, not landing.

 

[knot4u]

And the majority of brake wear occurs on taxi out, not landing.

Source?