| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:39 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
More awesome pics - pardon the large size, but they give a great picture of a widebody belly landing:
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G-BYGB
Member
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 1813
Location: Bangalore/Delhi
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yup I saw this footage on NDTV just now.
Thank God everyone were fine and the acft looks to be ok.
Credit has to go to the pilot for not panicking and landing the B767 safely.
What could be the reason behind the landing gear problem?
_________________
www.flickr.com/G-BYGB photos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HAWK21M
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why did the alternate extension not function...any details on the snag leading to the decision.
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| G-BYGB wrote: | | What could be the reason behind the landing gear problem? |
| HAWK21M wrote: | | Why did the alternate extension not function...any details on the snag leading to the decision. |
http://avherald.com/h?article=4456bd6b&opt=0
About 30 minutes after departure from Newark the crew reported the failure of the center hydraulic system. It is unclear why the gear could not be lowered, this is being investigated.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lot-cites-central-hydraulic-system-failure-in-warsaw-gear-up-landing-364161/
LOT cites 'central hydraulic system failure' in Warsaw gear-up landing
| G-BYGB wrote: | | Thank God everyone were fine and the acft looks to be ok. |
The fate of the airframe has not yet been determined, the damage to the structure and engines will be assessed before a decision is being made.
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Goat
Member
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 3260
Location: South of France
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.airliners.net/photo/LOT---Polish/Boeing-767-35D-ER/2006929/L/
Going by this image, the damage to the fuselage at least, seems pretty minimal. That's one hell of a pilot!
| Quote: | | About 30 minutes after departure from Newark the crew reported the failure of the center hydraulic system. It is unclear why the gear could not be lowered, this is being investigated. |
So instead of returning to Newark, the guy flew across the pond with a dysfunctional hydraulic system and belly landed in Warsaw! I mean , isn't this dangerous, doing such a flight without a functional hydraulic system?
Does not the 763ER have a RAT?
_________________
I don't know which is the more pampered bunch : AI's widebodies (the aunties) or Jet's widebodies (the planes).
-Jasepl |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Goat wrote: |
| Quote: | | About 30 minutes after departure from Newark the crew reported the failure of the center hydraulic system. It is unclear why the gear could not be lowered, this is being investigated. |
So instead of returning to Newark, the guy flew across the pond with a dysfunctional hydraulic system and belly landed in Warsaw! I mean , isn't this dangerous, doing such a flight without a functional hydraulic system? |
After the Capt called it in, LO despatch took the decision of having them make their way to WAW.
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PAL@YWG
Member
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 438
Location: YWG, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Couple of questions for the experts:
- When Hydrolic system malfunctions, does it mean that both front & rear landing gears can't be lowerd?
- Does belly landing mean both set of landing gears (front & rear) need to be retracted?
_________________
Tally Sheet:
41 Countries ||55 Aircraft types ||60 Airlines ||75 Airports |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| PAL@YWG wrote: | | When Hydrolic system malfunctions, does it mean that both front & rear landing gears can't be lowerd? |
Not necessarily. This was a case of "central hydraulic system failure," i.e. the hydraulics used to extend the landing gear had failed.
| PAL@YWG wrote: | | Does belly landing mean both set of landing gears (front & rear) need to be retracted? |
Technically, yes - for it to be a "Belly Landing", the aircraft has to land on its fuselage.
If the rear gear is down, but the nose gear does not deploy, then the crew performs a "landing without nose gear" (with the rear gear deployed), thus not a belly landing.
If the rear gear is stuck, & the nose gear work; the nose gear will not be deployed, but the crew will opt to perform a "gear up landing", thereby making it a belly landing.
If a part of the rear gear is stuck, and part deployed (one side up, one side down), and the nose gear is fully deployed; then it's a "landing with damaged gear", and therefore once again not a belly landing.
If none of the gears work (as in this case), then it's a "forced gear up landing", which makes it a belly landing.
So to answer you question, yes, a belly landing means both set of landing gears (front & rear) need to be retracted.
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PAL@YWG
Member
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 438
Location: YWG, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Many thanks for the clarification 747-237, really appreciate it!
_________________
Tally Sheet:
41 Countries ||55 Aircraft types ||60 Airlines ||75 Airports |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flightgearpilot
Member
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 711
Location: VOBL
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What a landing!!! 
Wonder which is more difficult -- water landing like on the Hudson river or belly landing on a hard surface.
Does the 767 have the ability to dump fuel or was it burnt off? If it is the latter, maybe that explains why the pilot flew to WAW and not return to EWR.
And is not the runway coated with foam to facilitate such landings? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sumantra
Member
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Two magnificient landings of late- the Iran Air 727, and this one! Kudos to the crew and the airline manufacturer, too. I hope this does not give the Ryanair boss some ideas as to how to pack in a few more seats at the cost of a few sets of landing gear items!
Cheers, Sumantra. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ameya
Member
Joined: 09 May 2007
Posts: 3671
Location: Pune,Maharashtra
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flightgearpilot wrote: | What a landing!!!
Wonder which is more difficult -- water landing like on the Hudson river or belly landing on a hard surface.
Does the 767 have the ability to dump fuel or was it burnt off? If it is the latter, maybe that explains why the pilot flew to WAW and not return to EWR.
And is not the runway coated with foam to facilitate such landings? |
Probably it was only later in the flight that the crew realised that the landing gears arent working. On the other hand, its always better to land at a airport you are more familier with and is your hub for obvious reasons.
The crew would have definitely landed many times more at WAW than at EWR and it makes a huge psychological difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimish
Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 9757
Location: Bangalore, India
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ameya wrote: | Probably it was only later in the flight that the crew realised that the landing gears arent working. On the other hand, its always better to land at a airport you are more familier with and is your hub for obvious reasons.
The crew would have definitely landed many times more at WAW than at EWR and it makes a huge psychological difference. |
I hear they knew in 30 minutes from take off - but the LOT dispatch instructed them to continue to WAW - probably there was no danger to the flight itself, plus the facilities would have been better/ more suitable at WAW.
_________________
We miss you Nalini! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ameya wrote: | | Probably it was only later in the flight that the crew realised that the landing gears arent working. On the other hand, its always better to land at a airport you are more familier with and is your hub for obvious reasons. |
| 747-237 wrote: | | After the Capt called it in, LO despatch took the decision of having them make their way to WAW. |
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flightgearpilot wrote: | | And is not the runway coated with foam to facilitate such landings? |
It was - airport firefighters had covered the runway with fire retardant foam in preparation for the emergency operation. In the first pic of the second post, you can see the foam fly as the fuselage touches the ground.
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aseem
Member
Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2841
Location: YYZ
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
shot this bird 3yrs back at YYZ
_________________
[url=http://openflights.org/user/aseemsjohri]
 [/url] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HAWK21M
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Still not clear why the Alternate extension did not work......
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Recovery operations underway.
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
More pics:
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HAWK21M
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Great Job folks.....
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
747-237
Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 11349
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
_________________
11000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
me111993
Member
Joined: 04 Sep 2009
Posts: 3225
Location: MAA/AMD
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I must admit, from the latest picture it seems as though the plane went through a terrible tail strike, that's it!
Btw, thanks a lot 747-237 for the continued updates and pics! 
_________________
Causal Determinism : We are hardwired to need answers. The Caveman who heard a rustle in the bushes and checked out to see what it was, lived longer than the guy, who assumed it was just a breeze.
- Greg House |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HAWK21M
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like a few weeks in the hangar replacing a few stringers & frames
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flightgearpilot
Member
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 711
Location: VOBL
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Talk about happy endings in aviation crises.. Hats off |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yash777
Member
Joined: 12 Jun 2007
Posts: 901
Location: Chicago, IL
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HAWK21M
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nice Video....
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stealthpilot
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 2325
Location: BLR, DXB
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Goat wrote: | So instead of returning to Newark, the guy flew across the pond with a dysfunctional hydraulic system and belly landed in Warsaw! I mean , isn't this dangerous, doing such a flight without a functional hydraulic system?
Does not the 763ER have a RAT? |
I'm sure it has a RAT, but that's for emergency electrical generation and provides limited hydraulic pressure (dunno to which system on the 767)
The failure of a single hydraulic system doesn't have to be dangerous, or necessitating an air turn back for that matter. Once in the air the crew would have assessed the situation after looking at the books and talking to maintenance, then made the call or continue or return.
The hydraulic systems help control/actuate a lot of control surfaces, most have backups. Even if the central hydraulic system controlled the LG normal operations, the backup system (gravity extension?) should have worked.
_________________
eP007 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
