Thirty Three Bird Strikes - One Plane?

[fholbert]

Date:	29-JAN-2022
Time:	23:27 LT
Type:	Boeing 747-83QF
Owner/operator:	Sky Way West Airlines
Registration:	VQ-BVB
MSN:	44444/1493
Fatalities:	Fatalities: 0 / Occupants:
Other fatalities:	0
Aircraft damage:	Minor
Location:	Tokyo/Narita International Airport (NRT/RJAA) - Japan
Phase:	Take off
Nature:	Cargo
Departure airport:	Tokyo/Narita International Airport (NRT/RJAA), Japan
Destination airport:	Baku/Heydar Aliyev International Airport (GYD/UBBB), Azerbaijan

Narrative:
33 dead bodies of duck were found near the runway 34L of Tokyo/Narita at 09:40 LT of 30th January. The runway was closed for 20 minutes.
A Boeing 747-8F of Silk Way West Airlines operated as AZG/7L904 from Tokyo/Narita, Japan to Baku Heydar Aliyev, Azerbaijan suffered some vibration and smell in the cockpit just after takeoff at 23:27 LT of the previous day. But the flight continued to the destination without any report to ATC about the occurrence, since no anomalies were found by the inflight check. The Boeing experienced no further problem, and carried out a safe landing at Baku. After landing inspection, many traces of bird strike and damages to the plane were located.

 

[Richman]

33, 34, whatever it takes…

 

[Boris Badenov]

Obviously, this is VATsim. No WAY an Azerbaijani airline has -8s.

Well I stand corrected.

 

[Skåning]

No WAY an Azerbaijani airline has -8s

Oil money

 

[Minuteman]

suffered some vibration and smell in the cockpit just after takeoff

Another advantage of bleed-less engines!

(The 747-8 has GEnx-2B engines which do have bleed air to supply the normal systems on a 747, but the only bleed on a GEnx-1B on the 787 is for own-engine cowl anti-ice)

 

[Boris Badenov]

(The 747-8 has GEnx-2B engines which do have bleed air to supply the normal systems on a 747, but the only bleed on a GEnx-1B on the 787 is for own-engine cowl anti-ice)

It's essentially seamless from the yoke-actuator perspective. We're mushrooms. One fun thing to contemplate is the "flare assist" which like we know exists, but there's zero information on exactly what the hell it does. From the makers of the MAX. Should be fine.

 

[Minuteman]

It's essentially seamless from the yoke-actuator perspective. We're mushrooms. One fun thing to contemplate is the "flare assist" which like we know exists, but there's zero information on exactly what the hell it does. From the makers of the MAX. Should be fine.

Interesting that that was left out, yet the FSB still decided y'all needed to know about "spudders."

 

[ahw01]

Interesting that that was left out, yet the FSB still decided y'all needed to know about "spudders."

Oh that FSB #comrade

 

[Minuteman]

Interesting that that was left out, yet the FSB still decided y'all needed to know about "spudders."

Oh wait, there's a line item about PACS. In addition to flare assist, it's supposed to intervene if it thinks a tail strike will occur during takeoff.

 

[dustoff17]

Oh wait, there's a line item about PACS. In addition to flare assist, it's supposed to intervene if it thinks a tail strike will occur during takeoff.

JetBlue could have used this one!!

 

[Boris Badenov]

Oh wait, there's a line item about PACS. In addition to flare assist, it's supposed to intervene if it thinks a tail strike will occur during takeoff.

Yes. This is also mentioned in the training. Also without telling us when, exactly, it will activate and what, exactly, it does when activated. Should be fine.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

It's essentially seamless from the yoke-actuator perspective. We're mushrooms. One fun thing to contemplate is the "flare assist" which like we know exists, but there's zero information on exactly what the hell it does. From the makers of the MAX. Should be fine.

My understanding is that somewhere along the line a couple spoilers raise just a little and then stow in the flare to help my landings suck slightly less.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

Oh wait, there's a line item about PACS. In addition to flare assist, it's supposed to intervene if it thinks a tail strike will occur during takeoff.

We are told about that but “it is supposed to work, but it might not.”

 

[jtrain609]

We are told about that but “it is supposed to work, but it might not.”

This is always what I think about when people start discussing pilotless planes. This is such a common refrain, and folks think these things fly themselves. The briefing passengers would get while getting on board would be, "the plane might successfully land, or it might crash, who can know the ways of men."

 

[Minuteman]

People are shelling-out $10k-$13k of real earth dollars for a Muskman's • CCD-based computer vision to navigate a 2 tonne electric vehicle among pedestrians and other traffic.

One of the dirty secrets of software companies transitioning to continuous integration/continuous delivery as a development methodology is that they laid-off whole QA departments. People are literally paying to be beta testers and I have to think the risk modeling people have done the math of "a few injured people addressed as a 'recall'-cum-OTA software update" is cheaper than rigorous development before fielding anything.

I'm sure anything that's a more systemic problem than can be handled by a product manager tweaking their roadmap can be addressed by some big brains getting into a kaizen circlejerk to solve it. Just gotta send it, boys.