What happens when a 767 lands just a little bit too hard....

[Gatorrari]

I'm still trying to figure out just what happened, because the first touchdown on the mains looks fairly normal. All I can think is that the pilot pushed the stick forward too aggressively to get the nosewheel down. It reminds me a bit of the X-15 that broke its back upon landing.

[joker57676]

Does anyone else think the rear main brakes were locked for some reason? I'm thinking when the left main touched, the brake was locked, the force of stopping too quickly pushed the pilot forward because he wasn't expecting it and caused him to throw the yoke forward violently. That could be completely wrong, but I'm fishing trying to think of why the initial touchdown looked so normal, but the landing ended up so bad.


Mark

[Bob Parks]

Originally Posted by joker57676

Does anyone else think the rear main brakes were locked for some reason? I'm thinking when the left main touched, the brake was locked, the force of stopping too quickly pushed the pilot forward because he wasn't expecting it and caused him to throw the yoke forward violently. That could be completely wrong, but I'm fishing trying to think of why the initial touchdown looked so normal, but the landing ended up so bad.


Mark

The airplane hit hard on the left main gear and bounced. It appears to me that the pilot pushed forward to get the airplane "planted" and drove the nose into the runway after the bounce. Then there was a series of rebounds that didn't help matters. Not likely that the brakes were applied or locked and even if they were , the airplane would not be affected enough to throw the pilot forward, it would skid while the anti-lock system did its work. This was a pilot induced incident.

[cheesey]

it could be a really messed up cross wind landing...

not enough aileron on the upwind ( left ) wing ... upwind wing rises causing landing on the down wind main first...plane bounces, over correction onto nose gear...clean underwear time for the oh shat moment

tire smoke is caused by a non rotating tire and any sideways motion / skidding... nothing to do with brakes, much too early to have any brakes in play

[Jedi]

So would this incident have been a "tarmac emergency" with evacuation where
the plane stopped rolling? Or would they have proceeded on to a gate or other
holding area?

Just curious... not that it matters.

Jedi

[cheesey]

Originally Posted by Jedi

So would this incident have been a "tarmac emergency" with evacuation where
the plane stopped rolling? Or would they have proceeded on to a gate or other
holding area?

Just curious... not that it matters.

Jedi

the video shows it at the gate

they probably had not idea of the extent damage done, there was no reason not to taxi to gate or anywhere...it quickly became obvious not to fly the plane

[Gatorrari]

Originally Posted by cheesey

they probably had not idea of the extent damage done, there was no reason not to taxi to gate or anywhere...it quickly became obvious not to fly the plane

I'd be curious to see what damage was visible, if any, inside the passenger cabin.....

[Spasso]

Originally Posted by Gatorrari

I'd be curious to see what damage was visible, if any, inside the passenger cabin.....

I'm guessing a few wide gaps around the stowbins and ceiling panels etc....................

[RacerX_GTO]

Yahhooo. Catch the 3 wire.

[LouB747]

I watched the video a few times now. It's too bad we can't see a little more of the approach before the "touchdown". As many of you know, I fly a 747 for Nippon Cargo, which used to be owed by ANA (All Nippon). In the last 13 years I've made just about every other landing in Narita. When the wind blows out of the southwest, as in this case, Narita can and usually does experience a lot of windshear. Even when the winds aren't all that strong. I believe I heard the winds mentioned here were 230/16 gusting to 29. Although that doesn't sound too bad, in Narita that would be one bumpy approach with windshear expected. I'm guessing the ATIS at the time of landing had windshear reports from previous arrivals. As the terrain around the airport is very flat, you wouldn't really expect this. I'm told by local pilots that this is the effect of wind wrapping around Mt Fuji in the distance. I'm not sure if this is true or not.

Typically on windy and gusty days, airliners such as the 767 increase their approach speed to compensate for the possible windshear and airspeed loss. The airline standard is 1/2 the steady headwind component plus all the gust. In this case, the wind was almost a direct crosswind. It's possible the crew didn't add more than the standard +5 knots above VREF because the headwind component wasn't more than 10 knots or so. I would have flown an approach at VREF + 20 (usually the max allowed). The reason I bring this up is that when an airliner such as the 767 flys an approach at VREF +20, it's a very flat approach. In the 747, a typical approach at VREF + 5 is about 2 1/2 degrees nose up. As you watch jets land, they typically approach in a nose high attitude. Some more than others. (L1011, MD11,A330) But on windy days, you'll notice jets approach at a very flat attitude. In the 747, VREF + 20 ends up being around 0 degrees pitch. Anyways, I don't know what approach speed this crew flew at. If we would have seen more of the approach, it would be easier to tell. I will say that the nose is pretty high right before ground contact.

Also, in longer aircraft such as airliners, the distance between the gear makes a big difference. For example, if this plane had windshear and a loss of airspeed as it looks like it did, the natural reaction when the plane sinks toward the runway is to pull up. If done too low, the effect is the aircraft rotated up, but still sank fast due to lack of lift. The nose gear gets further from the runway while the main gear (being aft of the CG) is driven harder into it. As the aircraft bounces, the force upward is from behind the CG, pushing the tail into the air and the nose into the ground. It's doubtful that the crew pushed forward on the yoke. You can't see the elevator position at all on this video. At least I can't.

All the above is just conjecture. I have no details other than the video you've all seen. The Air Japan (a subsidary or ANA) crew stays at the same hotel we do and I know many of the pilots. I fly SFO to Narita on Tuesday. I'll share what I learn....

Lou

[Spasso]

Thanks for the input Lou.
It's nice to hear from the experts on things like this.

I've watched many cross-wind landing videos of Narita. Some pretty wild stuff once in a while.


Here's Lou in his Nippon Cargo Airlines on a bad day,

You Tube

You Tube

Check out the wing flex on this one, quite choppy,

You Tube

You Tube

Polar -400F earning his pay,

You Tube

You Tube

[LouB747]

Great videos. Thanks! I used to fly for Polar before moving on to Nippon Cargo. I flew the classic 747 back then. Looks like these are runway 16R arrivals in Narita, with a similar wind direction as the 767.

[Bob Parks]

Originally Posted by LouB747

Great videos. Thanks! I used to fly for Polar before moving on to Nippon Cargo. I flew the classic 747 back then. Looks like these are runway 16R arrivals in Narita, with a similar wind direction as the 767.

Thanks for your expert analysis of this landing incident. It is always better to have someone like you to fill in some of the conjectural guesses on something like this. I recall an explanation of 727 landing difficulties by a stability and control engineer with whom I worked and he said about the same thing that you did regarding elevator inputs close to the ground. In the case of the 727, the up elevator input initially puts a down movement on the main gear before lift is generated. If the plane is close to the runway it pounds the gear into the runway and the rebound will jam the nose gear into the runway and the jackrabbit runout begins. In this case it still looks to me that the pilot helped it. Those videos that Spasso posted are fun to watch and I still get little lump when I see that beautiful airplane doing beautiful things. I worked on getting number one out the door in 1967-68 and continued for several years more. Then as a contractor I worked on the 747-500-600 projects that eventually turned into the 747-8. Thanks for chiming in.
Switches

[LouB747]

I've never flown the 727, so can't comment myself. However, I have flown with quite a few guys who have. First off, they say it's one of the best flying airplanes ever. But they all do mention the landing technique as being very different. Basically you fly normally until right before touchdown. Apparently, the best landings are made by then pushing the yoke forward to raise the main gear as the plane flys on. I'm sure it takes some getting used to.

As far as the 747-8, I'm all trained and ready to go. We're scheduled to get our first plane sometime in July to be in service in August. Being the chief pilot (North America), I'm hoping to pick it up in Seattle. But I'm guessing the Japanese will actually come get the first one. I can't wait to fly it. I'll post a flight report thread when I do. I believe the scheduled routes for our first airplane will be Narita-LAX-SFO-Narita and Narita-Hong Kong-Narita.

My hats off to all the men and women who design and build these beautiful machines!

[tritone]

Lou -
Interesting to see that your new airplane does not have the upturned wingtips....
What was changed on the wing design to eliminate them?
TIA
Tritone (who can't afford that airfreight project to Italy ;-)

[Spasso]

Originally Posted by tritone

Lou -
Interesting to see that your new airplane does not have the upturned wingtips....
What was changed on the wing design to eliminate them?
TIA
Tritone (who can't afford that airfreight project to Italy ;-)

The wing tips are raked aft instead of up. Also the tips are tapered to more of a point.
On the 787 they are the same but more pronounced and turned up slightly at the end.

[Gatorrari]

These look more like the wingtips on the 767-400.

[Spasso]

Originally Posted by Gatorrari

These look more like the wingtips on the 767-400.

The 777 uses the raked tips as well, but with no turn-up at the tip.

[Bob Parks]

Originally Posted by LouB747

I've never flown the 727, so can't comment myself. However, I have flown with quite a few guys who have. First off, they say it's one of the best flying airplanes ever. But they all do mention the landing technique as being very different. Basically you fly normally until right before touchdown. Apparently, the best landings are made by then pushing the yoke forward to raise the main gear as the plane flys on. I'm sure it takes some getting used to.

As far as the 747-8, I'm all trained and ready to go. We're scheduled to get our first plane sometime in July to be in service in August. Being the chief pilot (North America), I'm hoping to pick it up in Seattle. But I'm guessing the Japanese will actually come get the first one. I can't wait to fly it. I'll post a flight report thread when I do. I believe the scheduled routes for our first airplane will be Narita-LAX-SFO-Narita and Narita-Hong Kong-Narita.

My hats off to all the men and women who design and build these beautiful machines!

I had a friend who was an old DC-8 pilot who transitioned to the 727 for a short time and he hated it. Not because it wasn't a good airplane to fly but because he could never brake the old habits and simply could not push forward on a landing. The airplane would ride on ground affect and there was a specific technique in landing it. I was good friends with the late Lew Wallick, Chief of Flight Test , and he had many stories about how the airplane did in initial flight tests and he said that it was a great handling bird. It had a faster roll rate than a P-51 and quick on all three axis's. I worked on that airplane many hours and ended up training over 1000 Boeing people on 727 Familiarization and more in the public sector.
The raked wing tips on the 767-300 and 747-8 are lighter and much more efficient than the winglets. They have the affect of delaying tip vortices until they are tiny out at that small tip. The air flow thinks that the raked portion is still wing and it slides along on the upper surface without separating.
When I look back over the years I worked on some great flying machines, all from the B-52 to the 777, except the737.

[LouB747]

B-52 to 777....wow!

Here's a couple pics of the tips. I really like the looks of the -400. It may take awhile before the -8 grows on me. It sorta looks like a big classic. Like the big engines though..