JB Emergency Question????

[rvsm410]

So now that all the hubbub is over, and congrats to the crew...I was wondering in the procedures...I noticed the engines were not producing much thrust nor thrust revers used for obvious reasons of ingestion and directional control, but I was looking to see if anything was being sucked into the engines so I was wondering if once the crew has the bird on the deck, do they hit the fuel cut offs to kill the engines while they are rolling/sliding down the runway?

I am assuming the APU would still be in use to provide hyd press.....

 

[CA1900]

...I was wondering if once the crew has the bird on the deck, do they hit the fuel cut offs to kill the engines while they are rolling/sliding down the runway?

I sure wouldn't have. Hypothetically if they had continued sliding toward the end of the runway, I would think max reverse would be the prudent thing to do, ingestion or not. That'd be hard if they were shut down already.

 

[Singlecoil]

According to the NTSB report when this happened to America West, the nosewheel steering and thrust reversers were inoperative due to the faults.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20001205X00227&ntsbno=NYC99IA062&akey=1

 

[rvsm410]

Yeap, I read that report as well, I dont know if that system was changed since then or not...BUt I do see CA1900 point in his post...

I was just wondering....he ya are touch down. mains..nose..the airplane is standing tall, your right down the middle of the runway...pleanty left....do you shut off the fuel to prohibit any further problems of fire, and save the engines? But I see the point...It would be best to keep them running until you know you dont need them for anything.....

 

[Fury220]

Yeap, I read that report as well, I dont know if that system was changed since then or not...BUt I do see CA1900 point in his post...

I was just wondering....he ya are touch down. mains..nose..the airplane is standing tall, your right down the middle of the runway...pleanty left....do you shut off the fuel to prohibit any further problems of fire, and save the engines? But I see the point...It would be best to keep them running until you know you dont need them for anything.....

Yeah, but didn't they stop with around 1200 feet remaining? I'd keep the engines up and running with it looking that close. I dunno...armchair quarterbacking can really suck sometimes.

 

[Counselair]

I sure wouldn't have. Hypothetically if they had continued sliding toward the end of the runway, I would think max reverse would be the prudent thing to do, ingestion or not.

LAX 12,000' I believe they had mucho runway. I think I would have left them running for other reasons. However, with the length of the runway in mind I wouldn't be touching the reversers as to avoid further nose down moment shift on the nose gear. Roll it out, brake only when neccessary.

You Made Me Proud Guys,

Thursday Morning Quarterback,

Counselair

 

[chperplt]

LAX 12,000' I believe they had mucho runway

Plenty of runway because they stopped on the runway... another 800 feet or so and you wouldn't be saying that.

 

[HawkerF/O]

I sure wouldn't have. Hypothetically if they had continued sliding toward the end of the runway, I would think max reverse would be the prudent thing to do, ingestion or not.

LAX 12,000' I believe they had mucho runway. I think I would have left them running for other reasons. However, with the length of the runway in mind I wouldn't be touching the reversers as to avoid further nose down moment shift on the nose gear. Roll it out, brake only when neccessary.

You Made Me Proud Guys,

Thursday Morning Quarterback,

Counselair

Counselair is right. Using the brakes or TRs would have shifted the weight of the aircraft forward onto the nose landing gear. The crew knew this much, as soon as the tires sheared off, the aircraft would decelerate rapidly and that was proven on the video. With that happening, the aircraft's weight would shift to the nose wheel. They knew that was going to happen and it did, so placing the weight on the nose wheel prematurely could have caused the nose to collapse. Shutting off the engines would have taken away the option of using TRs if they needed them. For those who think saving the engines was a factor, WRONG. Who cares about the engines once it is on the ground? If you have to destroy them to save your life or the life of passengers, or even just to avoid injury, so what? Is that really a consideration of professionals?
Chief Pilot: Ummm, I understand you destroyed the engines???
Me: Yes
CP: Well, do you have anything to say for yourself?
Me: Yes, I destroyed the engines
After the nose wheel hit, and the speed slows enough so the elevator will not pull the nose back into the air, full aft elevator. Also, Idle deploy on the TRs would have been an option as well, but as we saw, not necessary. That crew did what they did in a professional manner, and they did it well. They probably used the auto-land cause that runway does not have a center line anymore: The crew ground it off! 1st class job those guys did.

 

[jknight8907]

Counselair is right. Using the brakes or TRs would have shifted the weight of the aircraft forward onto the nose landing gear. The crew knew this much, as soon as the tires sheared off, the aircraft would decelerate rapidly and that was proven on the video. With that happening, the aircraft's weight would shift to the nose wheel. They knew that was going to happen and it did, so placing the weight on the nose wheel prematurely could have caused the nose to collapse. Shutting off the engines would have taken away the option of using TRs if they needed them. For those who think saving the engines was a factor, WRONG. Who cares about the engines once it is on the ground? If you have to destroy them to save your life or the life of passengers, or even just to avoid injury, so what? Is that really a consideration of professionals?
Chief Pilot: Ummm, I understand you destroyed the engines???
Me: Yes
CP: Well, do you have anything to say for yourself?
Me: Yes, I destroyed the engines
After the nose wheel hit, and the speed slows enough so the elevator will not pull the nose back into the air, full aft elevator. Also, Idle deploy on the TRs would have been an option as well, but as we saw, not necessary. That crew did what they did in a professional manner, and they did it well. They probably used the auto-land cause that runway does not have a center line anymore: The crew ground it off! 1st class job those guys did.

Probably used the autoland????



riiiiiiiight.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

I was wondering if the spoilers were dis-armed either on purpose or by some default. When they touched down the wing stayed clean with no deployment of the spoilers. Does the bus not have that?

Just curious on the systems. Excellent job though.

 

[HawkerF/O]

Probably used the autoland????



riiiiiiiight.

Do you know differently? For a guy with no jet time or even a pilot's certificate, you are talking out of school.

 

[HawkerF/O]

I am sure they do have them, but here is where their use would get you into trouble. Spoilers would have Xfered weight to the nose of the airplane. Especially Auto spoliers. Trying to keep the nose in the air with auto-spoilers is not going to happen. When those spoilers come out, that nose is going to come down. By the time the plane slowed enough so the spoilers would not have such a pronounced effect on the weight transfer, they would have been ineffective. Good Call.

I was wondering if the spoilers were dis-armed either on purpose or by some default. When they touched down the wing stayed clean with no deployment of the spoilers. Does the bus not have that?

Just curious on the systems. Excellent job though.

 

[Brett Hull]

Having no experience in anything bigger than an old Lear 55, I'm going to go out on a limb and say autoland was not used.

Autoland plants the airplane firmly in the TDZ. It appeared they kept the power up a little longer than normal in order to assure a smooth touchdown (it looked like they floated through the TDZ - nothing wrong with that considering the circumstances) and the ability to keep the nose up as long as possible.

Busdrivers, set us straight here.

 

[jknight8907]

Do you know differently? For a guy with no jet time or even a pilot's certificate, you are talking out of school.

How many autolands have you seen that held the nosewheel off until it ran out of elevator authority, not to mention floating it on ever-so-gently?

No jet time needed for that observation.....

 

[HawkerF/O]

I should have clarified my statement a little better. I think the pilot let the computer roll out the airplane. How many pilots have you seen stick a center line like they did with a problem such as the one that was on the Airbus? That plane didn't move off the centerline.

Jknight, in fact you DO need jet time for this observation. If you had more experience, you would know that the elevator did not run out of authority, as that would have brought the nose down with a great deal of force. The pilots are a little more professional than that. The tail is swept, just like the wings and unlike the 172 you are learning in, and when a swept wing quits flying, it breaks over, unlike a straight wing that just kind of bottoms out/flutters and starts to descend. We don't do full stalls in jets like we do in 172s. Why? It's dangerous and you'll lose a lot of altitude. You do stalls at 3000, jets must be a 10,000 to even practice stall recognition and recovery. I know you are use to lowering the nose when you get the 1st indication of a stall, but in jets we leave the nose where it is and power out of it. Unload the wings on a jet, and hang on! Didn't know I was going to be giving instruction today.

Also, some of the nicest landing you will have will be with the newer auto-land systems. I know the older ones were a little rough, but they have made great strides in the auto-land systems literally holding the mains off 2 feet off the ground and rolling it on. It's pretty sweet.

Once again, I should have clarified what I menat when I 1st posted, and I apoligize if anyone misunderstood what I was trying to say.

 

[jknight8907]

I should have clarified my statement a little better. I think the pilot let the computer roll out the airplane. How many pilots have you seen stick a center line like they did with a problem such as the one that was on the Airbus? That plane didn't move off the centerline.

Jknight, in fact you DO need jet time for this observation. If you had more experience, you would know that the elevator did not run out of authority, as that would have brought the nose down with a great deal of force. The pilots are a little more professional than that. The tail is swept, just like the wings and unlike the 172 you are learning in, and when a swept wing quits flying, it breaks over, unlike a straight wing that just kind of bottoms out/flutters and starts to descend. We don't do full stalls in jets like we do in 172s. Why? It's dangerous and you'll lose a lot of altitude. You do stalls at 3000, jets must be a 10,000 to even practice stall recognition and recovery. I know you are use to lowering the nose when you get the 1st indication of a stall, but in jets we leave the nose where it is and power out of it. Unload the wings on a jet, and hang on! Didn't know I was going to be giving instruction today.

Also, some of the nicest landing you will have will be with the newer auto-land systems. I know the older ones were a little rough, but they have made great strides in the auto-land systems literally holding the mains off 2 feet off the ground and rolling it on. It's pretty sweet.

Once again, I should have clarified what I menat when I 1st posted, and I apoligize if anyone misunderstood what I was trying to say.

Yes, I know that he didn't let it completely run out of authority. However, he did hold it off as long as he could while still avoiding a hard derotation.

I'm not learning in a 172 (not that that matters).

I guess the final say on whether or not he used autoland will come when the full report is published.

 

[HawkerF/O]

Yes, I know that he didn't let it completely run out of authority. However, he did hold it off as long as he could while still avoiding a hard derotation.

You said " How many autolands have you seen that held the nosewheel off until it ran out of elevator authority," How is that knowing he didn't let it run out of authority when you just sat up there and said he did? Look, I am not trying to knock you, but you came at me a little strong. I bet you are a stand up guy and learning to become a great stick, I think you just need to be a little less sarcastic, especially on technical issues, until you have a little more experience. I don't know you and you don't know me, but obviously we have lots in common so let's do what you said and wait on that final report then whoever is wrong can buy the other a drink. What say you?

 

[Dr Pokenhiemer]

I can't believe two things.

1) Why does everyone have to play "I could've/would've done it better." Just give kudos to the crew for staying calm and doing a textbook job. Noone got hurt--who cares if the spoilers were disarmed or if TR's were used.

2) Who feeds those rediculous questions to Larry King? "Does the good weather make it easier to deal with am emergency?" Just prior to touchdown, "What is going through the minds of the pilots at this instant?" WHAT A MORON!! Thought he would be smarter than that--maybe that's why I never watched him before last night.

 

[FL030]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A review of entries at NTSB.gov will show that there are two modes of failures that have caused the 90 degree spectaculars. One is of the incorrect re-assmbly of a nose strut and the other is an internal failure of the steering valve.

For the first it looks like JetBlue has 2, UAL has 1, Canada 3000 has 1 and another unnamed carrier in Ireland. Who knows how many other times this has happened.

America West has one of the steering valve incidents.

• The UAL gear problem was caused by a third party facility. Were the others? - TM

 

[jknight8907]

You said " How many autolands have you seen that held the nosewheel off until it ran out of elevator authority," How is that knowing he didn't let it run out of authority when you just sat up there and said he did? Look, I am not trying to knock you, but you came at me a little strong. I bet you are a stand up guy and learning to become a great stick, I think you just need to be a little less sarcastic, especially on technical issues, until you have a little more experience. I don't know you and you don't know me, but obviously we have lots in common so let's do what you said and wait on that final report then whoever is wrong can buy the other a drink. What say you?

*shrug* Fine with me. I'll try to phrase my statements better next time.

 

[pilotmiketx]

Probably used the autoland????



riiiiiiiight.

His comment was tongue-in-cheek. You see, what he was trying to say was that the crew...aw to hell with it, if you're too dense to get it, it's your own damn fault.

 

[pilotmiketx]

I can't believe two things.

1) Why does everyone have to play "I could've/would've done it better." Just give kudos to the crew for staying calm and doing a textbook job. Noone got hurt--who cares if the spoilers were disarmed or if TR's were used.

2) Who feeds those rediculous questions to Larry King? "Does the good weather make it easier to deal with am emergency?" Just prior to touchdown, "What is going through the minds of the pilots at this instant?" WHAT A MORON!! Thought he would be smarter than that--maybe that's why I never watched him before last night.

After Katrina, I saw a news-bimbo on CNN talking about a landing accident at NEW (nevermind the airport was still closed and half-submerged) as the news copter beamed down some live footage of a couple of upside-down airplanes. In the tight shot, there was plenty of mud visible all over the planes--they had obviously been under water recently. Then the camera zooms out and we can all see that they're on the friggin' ramp surrounded by a bunch of other damaged planes, yet she blabs on about all the dangers from all the relief aircraft operating there and how there was "obviously some sort of takeoff or landing accident" yada yada yada...could've slapped that bitch.

 

[enigma]

Jknight, in fact you DO need jet time for this observation. If you had more experience, you would know that the elevator did not run out of authority, as that would have brought the nose down with a great deal of force. The pilots are a little more professional than that. The tail is swept, just like the wings and unlike the 172 you are learning in, and when a swept wing quits flying, it breaks over, unlike a straight wing that just kind of bottoms out/flutters and starts to descend. We don't do full stalls in jets like we do in 172s. Why? It's dangerous and you'll lose a lot of altitude. You do stalls at 3000, jets must be a 10,000 to even practice stall recognition and recovery. I know you are use to lowering the nose when you get the 1st indication of a stall, but in jets we leave the nose where it is and power out of it. Unload the wings on a jet, and hang on! Didn't know I was going to be giving instruction today.

Thread hijack alert!!!!!!!, or maybe just a slight change of direction.

You do NOT power out of a stall on a swept wing jet, when you practice "stalls" in your sim, or your airplane, you are practicing recovery from an approach to stall . I don't know the numbers for your airplane, but most transport catagory aircraft will give a stall indication at around stall plus 7%. It is that seven percent that allows you to use power for your recovery. If you reach true aerodynamic stall in a swept wing jet, you WILL NOT recover with power alone. I speak from personal experience.

The latest in upset recovery training makes this very point. You don't recover until you push over and break the stall. In fact, the proper recovery could actually be to pull power off if you stall in a nose high attitude while flying a jet with it's engines slung under the wings, because the thrust vector rotates the nose up in those airplanes.

The swept wing may be different from a 172, but it still follows the same basic law. Too much angle of attack, and it stalls, and stays stalled until the angle is decreased.

If you go back and re-read your own words, you'll realize what I mean.

sorry for the lack of development in this post, it's been a long day.

later,
enigma

PS, it's been a while since I flew a Lear with its marginally swept wing, but that airplane is restricted to being flown by factory test pilots when it is test flown after wing work that requires any type of flight near the stall regime. Specifically, if the leading edges were removed, the factory sends a test pilot to make the first test flight because the stall characteristics are considered too much for an untrained test pilot.

 

[Counselair]

You make a great point! They should have used full reverse and maximum braking so they could have shown the world and superior pilots like yourself what 10,000' of remaining runway looks like from the cockpit with a collapsed nose gear while ordering an egress.

Sigh,

Counselair

Plenty of runway because they stopped on the runway... another 800 feet or so and you wouldn't be saying that.

 

[jknight8907]

His comment was tongue-in-cheek. You see, what he was trying to say was that the crew...aw to hell with it, if you're too dense to get it, it's your own damn fault.

Apparently not. He later makes statements attesting that in his opinion the pilots used the autoland for the rollout.

 

[Blue Dude]

Wonder if it occured to some of you Monday morning quarterback geniuses out there that 800 feet was remaining because there was no point in braking earlier - that braking harder would have put more stress on the damaged nose gear? Brakes were available, he just didn't need them much. Looks like good planning and execution to me.

Regarding autolands - the A320 is incapable of performing a manual landing (long, light touchdown and nose high rollout) and then tracking the centerline on autopilot even with a working nose wheel. And what would the autopilot use to track the centerline with, rudder? I think that's what feet are for. The captain has thousands of hours in the left seat and is more than capable of tracking the centerline all by himself. It's not a skill requiring supernatural reflexes you know. But it was good airmanship, not an electronic trick. Give the man credit.

 

[Texasskicker]

Wonder if it occured to some of you Monday morning quarterback geniuses out there that 800 feet was remaining because there was no point in braking earlier - that braking harder would have put more stress on the damaged nose gear? Brakes were available, he just didn't need them much. Looks like good planning and execution to me.

Give the man credit.

Hey pardner, did it occur to you how much runway was wasted in the flare?

 

[chum2]

Hey pardner, did it occur to you how much runway was wasted in the flare?

I had occured to me that the aircraft landed safely. I'll take that any day.

 

[Texasskicker]

And thank the Lord for that

I had occured to me that the aircraft landed safely. I'll take that any day.

Absolutely, and no sane person will deny the ultimate outcome was amazing. Wow!

But are you are inferring is that luck is more important than skill?

 

[haven]

just a student pilot here, but it seems soft field landing practice does pay off..