Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 27, 2016, 06:37:49 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: No coverage in your area? If you are near your local airport contact us to learn about becoming a volunteer


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  A320 grounds left wing during aborted crosswind landing in Hamburg today
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: A320 grounds left wing during aborted crosswind landing in Hamburg today  (Read 79478 times)
eppy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« on: March 01, 2008, 05:49:38 PM »

This was so close to a disaster today...

Here's a video of a Lufthansa A320 ripping off its left winglet on the runway at Hamburg earlier today in an aborted crosswind landing.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

And here's a photo of the wing strike.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

And here's a photo of the wing strike.




The A320 has a crosswind landing limit of 33 kts gusting 38 kts

According to the data at the time, the wind was 35kts, gusting 55 kts.

EDDH 011220Z 29028G48KT 9000 -SHRA FEW011 BKN014 07/05 Q0984 TEMPO 29035G55KT 4000 SHRA BKN008
Logged
eppy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2008, 05:58:15 PM »

Further info:

The incident happened at  13:55 local time
The flight LH 044 (D-AIQP),  an A320 from MUC (Munich)
The landing runway was 23 LOC-DME (ATIS gave no other option)
after the go-around the pilots elected runway 33 also LOC-DME approach and landed safely but minus the left winglet...
immediately after the incident ATIS gave runway 23 and 33 as well

Logged
Avanthused
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2008, 06:17:22 PM »

Holy crap. This could've ended real bad. Looks like the exceeded rudder control and had to use a little aileron, which allowed the wind to get under the right wing and...my my.
Logged
athaker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 288



« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2008, 10:03:17 PM »

how the heck do we have both video and high-res photo taken at the exact moment of impact on this incident THE DAY it happened?!
Logged
bigj93702
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2008, 12:45:35 AM »

Im not a pilot; like a lot of you....

But didn't this jet Stall - just before they gunned the engines and take off?

Overall this is an AMAZING video; how scary for all on board.....
Logged
koni
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2008, 08:36:36 AM »

how the heck do we have both video and high-res photo taken at the exact moment of impact on this incident THE DAY it happened?!
That´s easy. During strong storms like that one a lot of spotters are heading towards airports to make shots like those. I was at MUC that time. Great time for spotters!
Logged
Avanthused
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2008, 03:33:18 PM »

Im not a pilot; like a lot of you....

But didn't this jet Stall - just before they gunned the engines and take off?

Overall this is an AMAZING video; how scary for all on board.....

A stall that low would've likely been unrecoverable. With this kinda cx, They were probably coming in at a much higher landing speed, so they had some to burn off during the flare.

In the classic crosswind landing, the pilot angles the wing into the wind, and keeps the ac aligned with the rwy via rudder control, but the rudder can only correct for so much...the pilots obviously knew this, but they either underestimated the gusts or overestimated their and their ac's abilities...which is clear from eppy's weather info.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2008, 03:39:29 PM by Avanthused » Logged
tov
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2008, 03:34:06 AM »

Pilots did a grat job!

http://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/video/video284096.html

tov
Logged
aevins
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



« Reply #8 on: March 03, 2008, 04:38:05 PM »

Made it to CNN today
Logged
RedOct
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #9 on: March 03, 2008, 06:54:53 PM »

I would rate it as pilot error. There was too much left rudder, and the crew failed to utilize partial spoilers on the right wing to force it down. See Korean Airline crew successfully land a 747 in extreme crosswind - notice the partial spoilers engaged on right wing to force it down.

Logged
bogman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #10 on: March 03, 2008, 08:04:51 PM »




EDDH 011220Z 29028G48KT 9000 -SHRA FEW011 BKN014 07/05 Q0984 TEMPO 29035G55KT 4000 SHRA BKN008


Im no pilot I was wondering could some one explain to me how to read the above,I know it has something to do with the weather but that is it.
Logged
wayne530
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #11 on: March 03, 2008, 09:12:09 PM »




EDDH 011220Z 29028G48KT 9000 -SHRA FEW011 BKN014 07/05 Q0984 TEMPO 29035G55KT 4000 SHRA BKN008


Im no pilot I was wondering could some one explain to me how to read the above,I know it has something to do with the weather but that is it.

google for information on decoding metars.  basically it says the airport's ICAO identifier (EDDH) the day (01), the time (1220Z, z for zulu or universal time), winds 290 @ 28 kts gusting to 48 kts, visibility 9000m, light rain showers, few clouds at 1100' AGL, broken clouds at 1400' AGL, temp 7*C, dew point 5*C, the local altimeter in hectopascals.. TEMPO = temporary deterioration of conditions.. winds 290 @ 35kts gusting 55kts, 4000m visibility, rain showers, broken cloud layer at 800' AGL.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2008, 09:15:56 PM by wayne530 » Logged
Avanthused
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #12 on: March 03, 2008, 09:40:43 PM »

I would rate it as pilot error. There was too much left rudder, and the crew failed to utilize partial spoilers on the right wing to force it down. See Korean Airline crew successfully land a 747 in extreme crosswind - notice the partial spoilers engaged on right wing to force it down.



Left rudder seemed alright...they had to align the plane...but they may not have balanced it with enough right aileron along with spoilers as you said.
Logged
zenwick
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #13 on: March 03, 2008, 09:49:05 PM »

The guy was sideways coming over the fence.  Don't you all agree that such an unstabilized approach should have been abandoned without a second thought?  He took a heck of a risk trying to put that thing down.
Logged
cessna157
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708



WWW
« Reply #14 on: March 03, 2008, 09:59:57 PM »

The guy was sideways coming over the fence.  Don't you all agree that such an unstabilized approach should have been abandoned without a second thought?  He took a heck of a risk trying to put that thing down.

Armchair quarterbacking here, but that approach looked as stabilized as they get.  It didn't get out of hand until he got down on the runway and the wind got under the right wing and lifted the whole airplane.  A trait with the airbus is that sidestick movement doesn't command airleron deflection, it commands rate of roll.  So they cannot just put in crosswind correction once down, like every other normal airplane does.  As I do not fly the airbus, I do not know what the specific technique for crosswind correction once on the ground is.  But all looked good up until the point the aircraft rolled. 

And yes, the pilots did take a risk.  It was an unnecessary one.  The media is crowing these guys as heroes.  But if they had followed their limitations and ops specs for the airplane and their company (they landed over their crosswind limitation), this would have never have happened.
Logged

CRJ7/CRJ9 F/O, Travel Agent
kaktak1
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54



« Reply #15 on: March 03, 2008, 10:08:18 PM »

going to have to agree with zenwick a little. When I first saw it, it looked unstable.  But then again it could be the camera angle.  So me personally, it looked unstable if the camera was at a correct angle, which I doubt.  But at least they made it down fine after the Go-around.
Logged

If black boxes survive air crashes — why don't they make the whole plane out of that stuff?
cessna157
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708



WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 03, 2008, 10:26:06 PM »

What part of it does not appear to be stable?

Upon further review, they may be a little bit high, as it appears they might have touched down a little long.  But from that camera angle, it is hard to tell.

But otherwise, it appears as a stable approach.  They look configured, on centerline, thrust up, etc.....
Logged

CRJ7/CRJ9 F/O, Travel Agent
RedOct
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #17 on: March 03, 2008, 10:50:40 PM »

I hate to disagree, but what you have is a very typical crosswind approach. You could have as many as 10% of the air traffic diverted each day if pilots avoid situations such as this one.

I still think it's a relatively inexperienced crew, which spends a little too much time perfectly aligning the plane with the runway by applying a hard left rudder. Right wing lifted up because they put it straight into the crosswind. A perfect alignment isn't necessary in this situation. A car or even cessna might roll on it's side if put it down like this, but remember this is an airliner (each wing has independently manuverable control surfaces for balance). They should have (1) put the left wheel down (they had an opportunity), immediately followed by (2) yawing the nose to left, immediately followed by (3) engaging partial spoilers on right wing to keep it or force it down which would have touched down the right wheel.

Stick on fly-by-wire A321 serves the same function as yoke, i.e. control of ailerons, elevators and rudder.

Plane is high because they are still pushing the throtle forward to try and fight the wind with their speed, an unintended consequence (by product) of which is that they are high.

They should have tried again, but the wing strike left them too scared. Hamburg is a busy airport, yet you don't have another remarkable video to go with this. Case closed.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2008, 11:20:11 PM by RedOct » Logged
KASWspotter
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 93


« Reply #18 on: March 04, 2008, 02:38:10 AM »

Quote
Stick on fly-by-wire A321 serves the same function as yoke, i.e. control of ailerons, elevators and rudder.

On what? Flight simulator maybe. Didnt know it controlled rudder movement.

Quote
Plane is high because they are still pushing the throtle forward to try and fight the wind with their speed, an unintended consequence (by product) of which is that they are high.

And how would you know this? Inside information? Flight sim again? By the way it was a 320. I take it you arent that familiar with Airbus systems. You arent juking the throttles back and forth like you would on a Boeing product to maintain airspeed. The throttles have only a couple settings and the rest is computer controlled.

Quote
They should have tried again, but the wing strike left them too scared. Hamburg is a busy airport, yet you don't have another remarkable video to go with this. Case closed.

Again nonsense. Ok forget they had the wingstrike. They should attempt another touchdown more than halfway down the runway after almost going off the left side with the wind blowing them all over the place? Is that what you are saying? I think you need to have some facts before posting. CASE CLOSED.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2008, 02:40:34 AM by KASWspotter » Logged
mhawke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #19 on: March 04, 2008, 06:44:27 AM »


 They should have (1) put the left wheel down (they had an opportunity), immediately followed by (2) yawing the nose to left, immediately followed by (3) engaging partial spoilers on right wing to keep it or force it down which would have touched down the right wheel.

Stick on fly-by-wire A321 serves the same function as yoke, i.e. control of ailerons, elevators and rudder.

They should have tried again, but the wing strike left them too scared. Hamburg is a busy airport, yet you don't have another remarkable video to go with this. Case closed.

Hope I never fly in a plane where you are the pilot.  Stick does not control rudder, unless you are flying flight sim with auto rudder turned on.

Your method of cross wind landing would likely results in what happened here, or worse.  Just before touchdown at flare, rudder is applied to aligne plane with runway and the upwind wing is lowered to prevent incoming wind from lifting it and compensate for cross wind.  Most wing tip strikes on cross wind landings are due to the pilot overcompensating with the upwind wing. (and its ussually the upwind wingtip that strikes)

An added benefit here (sarcasm) is the fly-by wire system on the airbus.  My understanding is that the system tends to dampen the roll input of the pilot, especially if it is applied immediately after a yaw input..

I would rate it as pilot error. There was too much left rudder, and the crew failed to utilize partial spoilers on the right wing to force it down. See Korean Airline crew successfully land a 747 in extreme crosswind - notice the partial spoilers engaged on right wing to force it down.

Partial spoiler input on the 747 is automatic based on amount of roll input from the pilot.  The pilot on that 747 did not 'flip the lever' to input some spoiler.  The 747 is designed to do that automatically during slow speed as an aid to the pilot because of the size of the airlerons.  The 747 has two sets of airlerons, one for low speed, one for high speed, and additional it uses the spoilers during low speed flight with high input.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2008, 06:46:11 AM by mhawke » Logged
RedOct
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #20 on: March 04, 2008, 08:06:41 AM »

My typo. Just as yoke controls pitch and bank, so does the stick. Yaw is of course controlled by pedals.

I would have landed slightly on left side of the runway and after both rear gears touched down, I would have yawed lto the left for alignment, with spoliers fully engaged, before the front wheel touched down.



Do I really need to spell out that I meant going around the pattern and making another attempt at landing.

Now, take a loot at this A321.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2008, 11:03:35 AM by RedOct » Logged
George747
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #21 on: March 04, 2008, 02:48:52 PM »

My first post on this forum. Here are some comments about the comments
:
>>I would rate it as pilot error. There was too much left rudder, and the crew failed to utilize partial spoilers on the right wing to force it down<<
From the video it appears to me the rudder input was fine.  It aligned the acft with the runway in the flare and, there is no independent control to activate the spoilers on an individual wing. It is a function of the aileron input on the "up" aileron side.

>>They should have (1) put the left wheel down (they had an opportunity), immediately followed by (2) yawing the nose to left, immediately followed by (3) engaging partial spoilers on right wing to keep it or force it down which would have touched down the right wheel.<<
(1) The proper technique is to touchdown on the upwind main gear during a crosswind landing.
(2) The nose was yawed to the left with the rudder and the acft appeared aligned with the rwy.
(3) see previous reply

>>Hope I never fly in a plane where you are the pilot.  Stick does not control rudder, unless you are flying flight sim with auto rudder turned on.<<
I have no clue about flight sim but on the bus the rudder does get an input when aileron is applied.  It helps with the coordinating the turn.

<<Plane is high because they are still pushing the throtle forward to try and fight the wind with their speed, an unintended consequence (by product) of which is that they are high.>>
Looking at the video they don't appear high.  The photos show them right in the runway touchdown zone.


<<And how would you know this? Inside information? Flight sim again? By the way it was a 320. I take it you arent that familiar with Airbus systems. You arent juking the throttles back and forth like you would on a Boeing product to maintain airspeed. The throttles have only a couple settings and the rest is computer controlled.>>

Actually the bus throttles can be flown just like a Boeing; push forward, engines produce more thrust; pull back and engines produce less. In the auto-throttle mode they are stationary.

<<Im not a pilot; like a lot of you....  But didn't this jet Stall - just before they gunned the engines and take off? >>

It certainly did not stall else it would't have been able to abort the landing.  For an approach like this with the wind being so strong the crew would have been carring some extra airspeed to compensate for it.  They would have been well above the stall speed.  In fact, the bus' computers would have computed an airspeed to keep their groundspeed constant.  That's what's good about the bus.
Logged
Jason
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1260


CFI/CFII


« Reply #22 on: March 04, 2008, 03:42:57 PM »

I think you need to have some facts before posting. CASE CLOSED.

I understand your frustration, but lets please keep this a mature discussion about the issue at hand.  There is plenty of time for both of you to present your different opinions.  Perhaps requesting an explanation of the ideas presented would result in a more educational discussion.

Respectfully,
Logged
eppy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #23 on: March 04, 2008, 03:43:12 PM »

Made it to CNN today

Finally made to BBC website front page and my local newspaper today - 4 days after I posted it here! Looks like the Internet has overtaken traditional media when it comes to timeliness.

I had to cringe at the errors in my newspaper (UK London 'Metro') this morning. The caption from one still of the video said that the plane was "trying to land in 250 km/h (155 MPH) winds" Another caption stated "Tyres touch down but it takes off again".

Its interesting how almost every time I read a newspaper article in which I have independent information I find factual errors i the newspaper article

(Please forgive this slightly off-topic thread).
Logged
RedOct
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #24 on: March 04, 2008, 04:10:46 PM »

Oh, by no means did I mean thread closed by case closed. It was a way of emphasizing my point, similar to saying "period" at the end of a sentence.

The last time I played on a flight simulator was back when they used keyboards. I have never used a game stick.

Plane is high (period, this time), unless you have it's glide slope in front, you can't convince any differently.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2008, 04:18:28 PM by RedOct » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!