ANA 763 Hard Landing Fuselage Damage (Video)

[waveflyer]

I was asking for facts- others were commenting on Ab Initio, and I thought it prudent to ask if one or more were before judging.
Regardless, that certainly looked liked a PIO to me- and experience matters in that- no matter how many sims and how much time you spend in the books and taking tests, real world experience is something many carriers trend away from globally- so I think it's fair to examine this event and talk about what issues there may be.

It's not like heavy drivers get a ton of flair time as it is.

Besides- from all accounts, the md-11 is not a 767 and has tail issues in the wind that contributed.

I'm not pre-judging that crew, but never think flying should be so deferent we don't talk about accidents and incidents. If I crash- or have a less impactful incident, I fully expect to be under the microscope- and hope we all learn a thing or two.

 

[tankerhead]

Those wrinkles will buff right out.

 

[Boxboy]

Seriously.... it could happen to any one of us on any given day. Remember, even monkeys fall off of trees.

 

[igneousy2]

That long hum? There was a recent incident on the same runway and under the same condition that took the life of two pilots that were way pass the private pilot stage

I don't know the particular crew involved nor would I comment on them if I did, but I have flown with many mainline guys and they are on the majority, well trained, good pilots, this is a company that spends 4 years training a pilot before they release them into the right seat and then they spend many years flying domestic before they start flying international trips, I can assure you that they were well trained, experienced pilots just like the MD11 pilots were, how about knowing the facts first.

Sorry...not judging these particular pilots...but I gotta know...is it four years from ZERO time. Sorry if that's the case it is NOT a lot of time to go from zero to the right seat of a heavy...I don't care how good the "training" is.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Sorry...not judging these particular pilots...but I gotta know...is it four years from ZERO time. Sorry if that's the case it is NOT a lot of time to go from zero to the right seat of a heavy...I don't care how good the "training" is.

I don't understand what you mean? We have been doing the same thing here in the US for decades now on both the civilian side and the military side and always the argument is that the military side makes the difference because of its training, don't tell me now that all I knew to be true is a lie LOL!

Ok, here is the scenario, a young person just graduated from high school and decides to become a pilot, they join UND for example and start from cero hours and get their licenses all the way to commercial, multi instrument and they do their turbine transition and build up hours up to around 500 hours, then they come out and join another academy that takes them to a type rating of a transport category jet, 737, A320 or so, from there the right seat of one of those jets and he/she continues building up experience and after 6 years they transition to a wide body where they continue on the right seat and after three or four extra years they become captains, that may not be the case in recent history here in the US but it is because of stagnation and the current state of the industry, but in times of growth this is a typical progression scenario is it not?

OK, now somebody comes from the military and they start also at cero hours and they build up their time up to 500 or 600 hours and from there they go to fly fighters or transport and continue building their times and experience and 3,000 hours down the road they apply at the airlines and so forth. Isn't this the normal progression of things?

The only difference here is that in the case of ANA, it is all done in the same outfit and they are earning their F/O salary from day one, maybe if they wouldn't get paid then we would feel it was more normal????? OK, the same individual (provided there would be such an opportunity here in the US, it is a shame that there isn't) joins company X and he/she is sent to their training facility in California, there they get all their licenses and turbine transition upto 500 or so hours, then they join the ANA academy in Japan and they continue their training for another three years or so and then they join as F/O's on domestic operations on the 737, A320 and the progression is as I explained before, except that they get 5 times more training than the individual that went the civilian way here in the US, don't get as to why this is a problem.

 

[FO 4 Life]

Besides- from all accounts, the md-11 is not a 767 and has tail issues in the wind that contributed.

What tail issue contributed to the MD11 accident?

 

[DCAA320]

What tail issue contributed to the MD11 accident?

I believe after the re-engineering, it was too small.

 

[ackattacker]

I believe after the re-engineering, it was too small.

That's the sum of the accusation... in a bounce situation, you suddenly find yourself too slow with the nose dropping rapidly and needing a lot of very quick, powerful elevator authority which you don't have. Not saying it's true or not about the MD-11 or that it was a factor in this case either.

 

[FO 4 Life]

The hard part about a bounce in the MD-11 is that you don't necessarily know you've bounced. The tail is small, which correlates to coming down the pipe at 170+ knots if you're heavy, but I don't think it contributed to the FedEx accident. I've seen a re-enactment including control inputs.

You can get away with things in the 757/767 you can't in the MD-11.

 

[DCAA320]

You can get away with things in the 757/767 you can't in the MD-11.

As in an unstable approach?