Boeing 777 Tail Strike "Record"?

I counted 7 or 8 seconds of the tail dragging the runway. Several things could cause that. Load planning mis computing payload, crew screwing up v speed calculations, flying pilot rotated too soon, others I can’t think of right now.
 
Gonna guess that's a three million dollar mistake, not counting lost revenue.
 
Not to throw these guys under the bus, but, man… that’s quite the feat since the 777 has a tail strike mitigation system that automatically reduces elevator deflection if it senses an impending tail strike.
 
Sluggo63 said:
Not to throw these guys under the bus, but, man… that’s quite the feat since the 777 has a tail strike mitigation system that automatically reduces elevator deflection if it senses an impending tail strike.
Click to expand...
Really? I never knew that. 17 years and however many thousands of hour…

Of course, that was all on the -200. The longer models were not on the property when I was flying them. Maybe it is a system on the newer planes.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Really? I never knew that. 17 years and however many thousands of hour…

Of course, that was all on the -200. The longer models were not on the property when I was flying them. Maybe it is a system on the newer planes.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I’m not quite sure about the other models. I fly the freighter version which is basically -200 body with a -300 wings/engines.

IMG_7560.jpeg
It sounds like all other protection systems in the 777, it’ll fight you doing something it doesn’t think you should do, but in the end, it’ll let you do it.
 
I know next to nothing about flying airliners but I was under the impression that you guys rotate to a prescribed angle of attack and hold it there until the bird leaves the runway.
 
Prescribed ANGLE, then wait… can’t really read angle of attack.

More accurately, we rotate at the prescribed speed, calculated for conditions, at a prescribed rate, which will allow the jet to get off the ground and high enough that it isn’t a factor. MD80 mostly coming to mind as it’s long for its height, and climbs at nearly 20 degrees nose up.

No matter, we are ALL taught how to fly so this doesn’t happen. That’s pretty bad. Something went WAY wrong. This is FAR from a little wupsie.
 
Tail strikes are not that uncommon--just not as bad as this one.

The longer you stretch a fuselage, the more susceptible the airplane is to a tail strike. The airplanes that are long enough to make tail strikes a threat have, often, retractable tail skids that cycle up/down with the landing gear. The tail skid has a sacrificial skid plate that can be replaced. That plate will usually have wear marks showing when the plate needs to be replaced. The skid will have a compression leg to absorb the bulk of the forces from minor strikes. An indicator shows if the leg has been fully compresses, when it has, an inspection is required for damage.

It's common to find scraped plates on the 737-800, and longer, ships during preflight. It is uncommon for the strikes to have been severe enough to full compress the skid.

At least on the 737s, strikes are more common on landing than on takeoff and often involve attempts to salvage a bounced landing.
 
So it's a Chilean airline flying out of Italy. Maybe most of the passengers in the back of the aircraft were American tourists, and their airline W&B didn't correctly compensate for the difference between that and normal sized people?
 
That is the most far fetched…

Hmmm…

Crazy conspiracy theory dumb…

But…. No wait….

Ya know, weirder things have happened. Yikes.
 
Sluggo63 said:
Yeah, I’m not quite sure about the other models. I fly the freighter version which is basically -200 body with a -300 wings/engines.

View attachment 131371
It sounds like all other protection systems in the 777, it’ll fight you doing something it doesn’t think you should do, but in the end, it’ll let you do it.
Click to expand...

We have it on the -300ER but not the -200ER. Assuming United is the same, that would explain why Greg hasn't seen it. I had no idea about the freighter version being a -200 body and -300 wing/engines - I bet that thing is fun to fly!
 
Maybe there's magnets in the runway.....Delta just had a tail strike at the same airport yesterday.

The Aviation Herald

Aviation Herald - News, Incidents and Accidents in Aviation
avherald.com avherald.com
 
Mechanic says bird strike caused engine loss and no tail strike. Tail strike reported by non pilot observer.

Grossly over weight landing resulted in excessive brake temperatures, and all main gear tires flat.
 
The main thing to type in correctly is the ZFW, the FMC will take care of the rest. For any of this the term ‘reasonableness’ comes to mind. If one plans to fly Europe to South America, the plane will be heavier. With that heavy weight comes higher power and speeds for takeoff.
Then the other pilot(or two) is supposed to check/confirm everything, another lapse. One could be a little off on the rotation rate, that earlier video wasn’t a ‘little’ of course.

BWTHDIK..
 
Reminds me of the JATO's used for military jets in the 50's.
 
kayoh190 said:
We have it on the -300ER but not the -200ER. Assuming United is the same, that would explain why Greg hasn't seen it. I had no idea about the freighter version being a -200 body and -300 wing/engines - I bet that thing is fun to fly!
Click to expand...
That’s interesting the systems differences between the different model types.

It’s a pretty neat plane. Especially when light. We do a lot of light weight repositioning legs and it’s pretty eye opening what it can do. Almost scary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top