Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 28, 2014, 02:16:20 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: LiveATC.net Flyers Released!  Please click here to download & print a copy and be sure to post at an airport near you!


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Aviation
| |-+  Aviation Accidents/Incidents (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  LOT 767 makes belly landing in Warsaw
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: LOT 767 makes belly landing in Warsaw  (Read 16622 times)
derekjackson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 133


« on: November 01, 2011, 12:55:48 PM »

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=4456bd6b&opt=0

Fine job by the flight crew in performing the gearless landing with no reported injuries on board.

Video available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15543315

I don't like how the media are calling it a "crash landing" - I personally prefer "emergency belly landing"

EDIT: Liveatc does have Warsaw tower recordings at the time of the incident however it's all in Polish and I don't understand the language.
Logged
JarekKor
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #1 on: November 01, 2011, 01:43:00 PM »

Do you have any link to that recordings? I can understand that language Smiley. Best regards
Jarek

BTW: That was the most viewed event today in Poland. Thanks to live TV shows the whole nation was watching the landing.
Logged
notaperfectpilot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 237


Student pilot


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 01, 2011, 02:04:10 PM »

yeah, I saw that this morning on avherald...very, very, good job by the crew...thanks derek
Logged
derekjackson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 133


« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2011, 02:19:53 PM »

Hey Jarek,

According to avherald, the landing took place at 13:40Z, so you should find it at about the 10 minute mark in this clip:

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/epwa/EPWA-Twr-Nov-01-2011-1330Z.mp3

Do you have audacity? the background noise is high on this recording but it can be cleaned up using the supercool reduce noise feature!  grin
Logged
JarekKor
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2011, 02:48:07 PM »

Yes I can listen to it. Thank you a lot!
Logged
owad
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2011, 03:30:39 PM »

For who do not understand Polish

Translate with google translate, but with a few corrected:

TWR: LOT16, Tower?
LOT16: LOT16, establish ILS to 33
TWR: LOT16, cleared to land, wind 100, 4 kts  For information on your short final to disable runway lighting
LOT16: We have cleared to land, thank you.
TWR: LOT16 Report runway in sight
LOT16: We report runway in sight, LOT16.
TWR: Good luck
LOT16: "pressing and releasing the transmission button" - a form of signaling the adoption of information.
LOT16: (unintelligible) check - probably windcheck
TWR: 120 degrees, 5 knots.
LOT16: Thank you.
TWR: LOT16, runway in sight?
LOT16: Yes, runway in sight.
TWR: Turn off lights.
LOT16: Thank you.
TWR: LOT16, no gear.
LOT16: Thank you.



transcription from www.tvn24.pl
Logged
Czechnology
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2011, 06:08:08 PM »

Can the airplane be repaired after such successful belly landing (or to be more precise - is it financially worth it) or will it just be disassembled for spare parts?
Logged
derekjackson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 133


« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2011, 06:24:45 PM »

That's what we'll be finding out in the near future when everything's assessed. The good folks over at airliners.net mostly think it will fly another day with only a couple here and there predicting a write-off.

The bigger issue at hand is why the airplane was permitted to continue the flight to Warsaw under ETOPS conditions when they knew they had a hydraulic issue 30 minutes after takeoff from Newark?
Logged
notaperfectpilot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 237


Student pilot


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2011, 06:43:41 AM »

an update from the av-herald and video

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=4456bd6b&opt=0

I agree with you, derek, It is sorta weird that they knew that their center hydraulic system wasn't working right...and they continued on...
Logged
derekjackson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 133


« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2011, 09:13:14 AM »

The good folks at airliners.net are predictably arguing over that point now. Since we are getting "second hand" information from the LOT website, it is possible the crew received a low hydraulic pressure warning instead of a total failure. In that case (so they say) the flight could have been continued. I think if a hydraulic system had totally failed, they would not have continued the flight to Warsaw "just to calm the passengers" (as some people believe) but they would have dumped fuel and landed back at Newark.
Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2011, 10:19:45 AM »

Excellent job by all involved! Text book belly landing!  cool
Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
jedgar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42



WWW
« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2011, 12:30:40 PM »

I'm a little surprised that LOT dispatch let the plane fly, I realize gear failure isn't vital to the in flight operations of the plane, however, if something else had gone wrong and they had to land sans gear at a less than ideal or rural airport, this story may have been very different.
Logged
notaperfectpilot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 237


Student pilot


WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 02, 2011, 06:01:50 PM »

a new update again...

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=4456bd6b&opt=0

I think that we might see this thing fly again...
"...aircraft was towed to a hangar for further assessment of the damage, which after a first check is said to be surprisingly small."
Logged
NoMad
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #13 on: November 02, 2011, 08:10:16 PM »

The bigger issue at hand is why the airplane was permitted to continue the flight to Warsaw under ETOPS conditions when they knew they had a hydraulic issue 30 minutes after takeoff from Newark?

Recalling the flight back to EWR would have resulted in about $300,000+ in refunds to 220 passenger plus the cost of putting all 220 passengers up in hotels.  It should come as no surprise that they decided to let it continue.  Personally, I would rather have gone as well.  The plane was going to have a gear up landing in EWR or in Poland.  Might as well do it the correct destination.
Logged
kolinab
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2011, 05:11:36 PM »

Recalling the flight back to EWR would have resulted in about $300,000+ in refunds to 220 passenger plus the cost of putting all 220 passengers up in hotels.  It should come as no surprise that they decided to let it continue.  Personally, I would rather have gone as well.  The plane was going to have a gear up landing in EWR or in Poland.  Might as well do it the correct destination.

And in the light of day . . . in a familiar airport.
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 1.1.19 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!