Air Canada 777 tail strike

An open discussion of aviation safety related issues.

Moderators: FrankM, el, Dmmoore

User avatar
Verbal
Posts: 3576
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Planet Bacterion

Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby Verbal » Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:05 pm

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 77-455730/

Ironing alert: the airplane's registry is C-FITW.
Air Canada tail-strike pilot was conducting first 777 flight
13 February, 2019 SOURCE: Flight Dashboard BY: David Kaminski-Morrow

Investigators probing an Air Canada Boeing 777-300ER tail-strike at Hong Kong have disclosed that the landing was the pilot’s first on the 777, outside of a simulator.

The first officer, the flying pilot, had obtained a type rating on the 777 five days earlier and was under the supervision of a training captain, with over 6,400h on type, during the flight from Toronto.

Hong Kong’s Air Accident Investigation Authority states that the first officer had not previously flown the aircraft, other than through simulator training, nor previously carried out a Hong Kong approach as an operating crew member.

Two cruise relief pilots were also in the cockpit at the time of the event on 11 December last year.

The crew briefed for the approach but, while the pilots had expected to land on runway 07L, the arrival runway underwent a late switch to the parallel 07R.

Weather conditions for the approach included a crosswind of up to 12kt from the left.

Investigators state that the aircraft was “marginally above” the glideslope for 07R, but stabilised, and the first officer disengaged the autopilot at 400ft. The captain provided verbal guidance during the descent towards the runway.

But as it passed through 200ft the twinjet commenced a series of, initially minor, roll deviations before entering a “pronounced” roll to the left and then the right, the inquiry says in its preliminary findings.

“The [first officer] introduced large control inputs into the aircraft to control the sudden and unanticipated roll behaviour,” it adds. “The aircraft was not wings-level at the touchdown point as it was rolling to the right.”

Its right-hand main landing-gear contacted the runway first, and the combination of a high descent rate and nose-high attitude resulted in a hard landing and allowed the aft fuselage underside to strike the runway surface. The aircraft bounced before settling.

Inspection of the jet (C-FITW) showed that it had suffered substantial damage to its lower fuselage. “The aircraft is currently unserviceable and is undergoing a major repair process,” the inquiry says.

None of the 376 passengers and 17 crew members was injured during the event. The inquiry stresses that the findings are preliminary and it has yet to reach conclusions over the circumstances.
"I'm putting an end to this f*ckery." - Rayna Boyanov

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby Gabriel » Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:52 pm

Every pilot always has a 1st landing in every new type they fly. And it never ends like this one did (i.e. in a good but not perfect landing).

User avatar
Verbal
Posts: 3576
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Planet Bacterion

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby Verbal » Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:00 am

How does smashing the airplane's fuselage into the runway qualify as a "good" landing? Please explain in 10,000 words or less.
"I'm putting an end to this f*ckery." - Rayna Boyanov

User avatar
flyboy2548m
Posts: 4383
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:32 am
Location: Ormond Beach, FL

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby flyboy2548m » Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:26 am

Every pilot always has a 1st landing in every new type they fly. And it never ends like this one did (i.e. in a good but not perfect landing).
Never?
"Lav sinks on 737 Max are too small"

-TeeVee, one of America's finest legal minds.

User avatar
Not_Karl
Previously banned for not socially distancing
Posts: 4126
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Bona Nitogena y otra gaso, Argentina

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby Not_Karl » Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:09 am

How does smashing the airplane's fuselage into the runway qualify as a "good" landing? Please explain in 10,000 words or less.
Everybody walked away + aeroplanie can be reused (after some duct tape and zip ties) = pretty good landing.
International Ban ALL Aeroplanies Association, founder and president.

"I think, based on the types of aircraft listed, you're pretty much guaranteed a fiery death."
- Contemporary Poet flyboy2548m to a Foffie.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby Gabriel » Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:28 am

Every pilot always has a 1st landing in every new type they fly. And it never ends like this one did (i.e. in a good but not perfect landing).
Never?
Ok, never is a bit too much and not demonstrable. Almost never.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 3659
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby Gabriel » Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:30 am

How does smashing the airplane's fuselage into the runway qualify as a "good" landing? Please explain in 10,000 words or less.
You know, the old joke that a good landing is where everybody walks away from it, and a perfect landing is a good landing where the plane can be re-used without needing repairs.

You know, the old joke that a good landing is where everybody walks away from it, and a perfect landing is a good landing where the plane can be re-used without needing repairs. This pilot performed a landing where nobody was injured but the plane was damaged and will need repairs before further flight. Hence, by the above definition, a good but not perfect landing.

EDIT: Or what not_karl said.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 8133
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby 3WE » Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:23 pm

How does smashing the airplane's fuselage into the runway qualify as a "good" landing? Please explain in 10,000 words or less.
Everybody walked away + aeroplanie can be reused (after some duct tape and zip ties) = excellent landing.
Fixed.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Verbal
Posts: 3576
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Planet Bacterion

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby Verbal » Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:26 am

You know, the old joke that a good landing is where everybody walks away from it, and a perfect landing is a good landing where the plane can be re-used without needing repairs.

You know, the old joke that a good landing is where everybody walks away from it, and a perfect landing is a good landing where the plane can be re-used without needing repairs. This pilot performed a landing where nobody was injured but the plane was damaged and will need repairs before further flight. Hence, by the above definition, a good but not perfect landing.
Right now would be a good time for you to just stop talking.
"I'm putting an end to this f*ckery." - Rayna Boyanov

User avatar
monchavo
Site Admin
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:21 am

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby monchavo » Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:18 am

- Abnormal conditions
- Lack of experience
- Inadequate supervision

Unfortunate combination
____
Join the airdisaster Discord - https://discord.gg/A59Vdw73ET

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 8133
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Air Canada 777 tail strike

Postby 3WE » Mon Feb 18, 2019 9:13 am

Interesting that this reads like a PIOish roll problem more than excessive pull up.

Are people sometimes prone to getting into PIO problems in big aeroplanies?

I thought the problem was more with small, high performance planes like Lear jets and MU-2s...
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.


Return to “Aviation Safety Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests