Airbus 320 loses large piece of elevator

Why not complete the flight? The plane is flying.......and if they crash, there will be less fuel to cause a fire.

If successfully landed, no refunds for a canceled flight, so no bad letters in the pilots file.

Win-win, obviously.



(I agree with Greg, below)
 
Last edited:
geezer said:
Why not complete the flight? The plane is flying.......and if they crash, there will be less fuel to cause a fire.

If successfully landed, no refunds for a canceled flight, so no bad letters in the pilots file.

Win-win, obviously.
Click to expand...
I hope that was a “tongue in cheek” post.
 
Flew on an Allegheny BAC-111 from DAY - DCA back in the day. Section of flap departed the aircraft somewhere over Pennsylvania. Successful landing at DCA with no other bombing of ground targets.

Cheers
 
Something about discontinuing flight when an unairworthy condition occurs. Then again, this is the Congo so…
 
How much of the elevator was missing?
 
mandm said:
How much of the elevator was missing?
Click to expand...

Are you referring to the elevator of the aircraft or the elevator of the crew that wasn't going all the way up when they decided to continue the flight in an aircraft known to be damaged? :dunno:
 
Did the crew know? It isn’t something you can see in flight. From the cockpit, I suspect they got a bang, but would the autopilot change? And if they did know, isn’t it easier to keep a plane pointed in the same direct rather than maneuver to return to an airport?
 
bflynn said:
Did the crew know? It isn’t something you can see in flight. From the cockpit, I suspect they got a bang, but would the autopilot change? And if they did know, isn’t it easier to keep a plane pointed in the same direct rather than maneuver to return to an airport?
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, they knew. The article stated that they “became instantly aware that a part of the elevator had been damaged”. And the fact that they elected to make right turns only re-enforces that fact.

As to the pointing the aircraft the same direction, they have to turn eventually. To take off, fly to the destination and land without making a significant turn is EXTREMELY rare.
 
Daleandee said:
Are you referring to the elevator of the aircraft or the elevator of the crew that wasn't going all the way up when they decided to continue the flight in an aircraft known to be damaged? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Ever been to Africa? The plane was airborne and controllable. This is the departure airport:
a81ea9f8495db18bc01b9232434ec5d0.jpg


It’s likely Kinshasa (arrival airport) is the only airport and city in the country capable of responding if things went pear shaped on landing. If everything went ok (as it did) it’s likely the only airport in the country any investigation and/or repairs could take place.
 
Maybe the pilots decided to lean forward.
 
Given where they departed from and where they were headed... honestly, if the plane were still flyable I can understand the decision.
 
They did not have any NASCAR speed tape, so why go back for a part they could not put back on?
 
Palmpilot said:
Maybe flight rules in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are not as restrictive on that subject as they are here. :dunno:
Click to expand...

This takes "PIC determines airworthiness" to a whole new level!! Anyhow this and other past accidents including Nepal, is why I avoid hopping onboard with anyone other than Western Pilots. They fk up too but at least there are more controls to prevent humans from doing the stupid things they are inclined to do. I am pretty sure in the states the plane would fly again but the pilots not so much :)
 
Palmpilot said:
Maybe flight rules in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are not as restrictive on that subject as they are here. :dunno:
Click to expand...
From what I've seen its more in how those rules are enforced from a cultural standpoint. Most CAA rules in similar countries are simply a copy of an existing western system like the FARs, BCARs, etc. and have very similar restrictions. However if the headshed told the pilot to bring it home for repair or the pilot is senior then those rules are simply "overlooked" for the that flight. Happens in quite of few countries in my experience.
 
Bell206 said:
From what I've seen its more in how those rules are enforced from a cultural standpoint. Most CAA rules in similar countries are simply a copy of an existing western system like the FARs, BCARs, etc. and have very similar restrictions. However if the headshed told the pilot to bring it home for repair or the pilot is senior then those rules are simply "overlooked" for the that flight. Happens in quite of few countries in my experience.
Click to expand...
What does "or the pilot is senior" mean in the context of your post? :confused2:
 
Palmpilot said:
What does "or the pilot is senior" mean in the context of your post? :confused2:
Click to expand...
Within the culture of a company "senior" pilots can override any input simply because they are senior in the pecking order and not necessarily skill based. Its the reason CRM was developed here... I'm older so I know more attitude. The Asiana 777 in SF is an example were cultural status entered into the decision process. Unfortunately there are a number of cultures out there that are still "class" based.
 
flyingron said:
Is the elevator on the MEL.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t really matter because the MEL does not apply after takeoff power is added. The decision to continue with a known flight control problem is however bizarre. The decision to climb to FL300 with a damaged elevator is even more bizarre given possible flutter issues.
 
What kind of investigation can we expect from an incident involving an Airbus registered in the Democratic Republic of the Congo? Among others, some of the questions needing an answer would be whether or not the cause was due to some maintenance deficiency or design deficiency.
 
Jeff767 said:
It doesn’t really matter because the MEL does not apply after takeoff power is added. The decision to continue with a known flight control problem is however bizarre. The decision to climb to FL300 with a damaged elevator is even more bizarre given possible flutter issues.
Click to expand...
That was a joke, son.
 
Capngrog said:
What kind of investigation can we expect from an incident involving an Airbus registered in the Democratic Republic of the Congo?
Click to expand...
Whatever the DRC government wants. I don't know that I would hold my breath waiting for that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top