A Boeing 737-200 had to abort a landing after heavily damaging its right wing. The impact was so harsh that it ripped off part of the wing and damaged a flap. The plane recovered at the last second, when it seemed that a fatal impact was imminent. Skip to minute 2:11 to see the moment of the landing. You will see the plane tilting heavily to the right, moving to the left of the runway as if it were being pushed by extreme crosswind. You can then see the bump when the wing hits the runway. (gizmodo.com) More...
So do I C172. It's easier that way, I has less pucker factor and it helps your career in the long run. This was a very elementary mistake made by student pilots. Perhaps the pilot was getting a lap dance at the time!
Yeah -I would say it was pretty ugly - the right engine was well left of the centerline, in fact it was almost left of the left "piano bar" How much more of a bank would it have taken to cartwheel the airplane, another 03 degrees?
That has to be the worst approach I have ever seen. Cripes, I am just a Private pilot and I am sure I could do way better than that. Maybe I will send them my resume..LOL
I totally agree! There is no way this should have been a visual approach. Notice also the sun appers to be on the nose which would obscure the runway through the obvious low scattered layer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAGAzvNi594&feature=related Very poor quality, but you can see just how tilted it was at a certain point. Almost full belly is visible.
Obviously, the pilot was not lined up and it appears that he/she used aileron to correct the situation. Bad idea! The damage tells the story. They overcorrected to make things worse. I say... no line up...no control...no land! Go around.
All US airlines have a "stabilized approach criteria" that should be used. I know many times we fudged it a little. Basically, below 1,000 feet AGL all you do is fly and land--no checklists, all configured and lined up. Yeh, right.
You did say U.S. Airlines, of which this was not.lol. As I told somebody else here, even though he was in IMC, it looks like he saw a break and just tried to lay it in and missed it bad. He went Way around so I figure he caught the marker to come back in on as his landing was normal. He probably wasn't even aware of that wing damage.
In almost 35 years in the Cockpit I have NEVER had a landing THIS SCREWED UP. I'm afraid this is going to be the quality of the Pilot in cockpits in the near future!
Unfortunately, you are probably correct. It almost looks like that he had the runway and was just going to lay it in VFR but then the fog or whatever got him as he was coming around, but unless he just got totally disoriented, even that wouldn't account for the lineup and wing scrape. It's a testament to the 737 to hold togethher like that and make a go around. As the 2nd try was normal, I'll bet he found the marker on that one and followed it down as he went W-A-A-Y around. They probably had to replace at least one of those cockpit seats to get the pucker out,LOL
No FOG, watch the other videos here that show it from different angles. The visibility was at least 2 miles. Just a Pilot that thought he/she was a HOTSHOT!
I don't think its fair for you to judge the next generation of pilots in a negative manner like that, especially since the fact that this incident occurred in South America.
Nothing more than very poor runway alignment. A case of the "Get-There" syndrome. He/She should be grounded until they can show some sort of proficiency in handling an a/c with souls on board! ...Just my 2.5 cents.
Sure looks like some fog in the area to me - combined with sun glare, could have been a problem. By the time he was on the runway he was way out of shape - the decision should have been made to go around earlier???
Peter, I hate to think of what could have happened if they didn't go around. The visual I'm getting is...a tipped wing making contact on the pavement and I see a mini UAL Flight 232 all over again.
Once again..."Common Sense"! I find it hard to believe that a pilot would wait that long to pull up and go around! When things don't look right..."Go Around"! He was too low to make any corrections.
Yes Stefan. Aircraft are forgiving in many situations. Just look at Aloha flight 243. B-737 flying from Hilo to Honolulu. The roof ruptured resulting in a explosive decompression. The decompression ripped off the large section of the roof. Do to the many cycles that airplane was subjected to with humid weather conditions, the fusalage gave way. Boeing alerted the airline of the inevitable problem but unfortunately Aloha's maintenance did not address the problem in time. Result...you have one Flight Attendant blown out and lost at sea and several passengers injured. The amazing thing is, is that 737, maintained it's airworthiness with half of it's roof torn off! That says a lot about the quality and workmanship of Boeing Aircraft!
Y'all see an awful lot from an over wing passenger passenger window. I could see the corrections looking at the runway markings but couldn't tell the AC was damaged. Some of you must be looking at another video.
Even if the guy had a straight in approach, he wasn't in alignment with the runway. I think he should have aborted way before he did. There may have been circumstances that occurred that we are not aware of.
I think they are fortunate the wing scraped the runway and not the earth on either side. The asphalt/concrete is much more forgiving where with earth/dirt the wing probably would've dug in and caused a lot more yawing.
Granted the pilot should have aborted the landing as the approach was not atabilized. However, the aircraft was not "heavily damaged". Basically broke the light and scraped the paint. The wing tip is mostly fiberglass and is not a structural part. Couple of days in the shop and back on the line. The video does not give any indication of the wing hitting the ground, there is no sound, bump, or exclamations from the passengers. Pilot probably sweated a bit on the go-around, but also probably didn't think he hit anything.
A number of years ago an engine fell completely off an AA MD80 while in cruise flight. The crew knew the engine stopped operating, but did not know the engine was not present until the control tower at SFO told them after they landed. I don't recall if the engine was ever found. This just illustrates that airplanes are tougher than you might think.
Yes, Peter. It appears on the video that he wasn't struggeling from a crosswind nor visual problems. He cut the base leg way to the left and tried to compansate his final with the ailerons to get himself on track but he was too low...Therefore the "right" wing dipped and created the damage. You know...he knew he screwed up! How can a pilot not know that his or her wingtip hit the runway?
Noise in the cockpit. Earphones on and probably a lot of concentration on just flying the aircraft. Maybe they knew but what could they do? Fly the airplane!! Who cares about a position light and a little fiberglass? Yes, they screwed up but chose to go around and that was the right choice. What if they tried to keep it on the ground?
In the video shot from the airport, he has the belly cocked up pretty high left, which I am sure that's where the right side wing scrape came from, but he had no choice but to spool up and go around and was real lucky he had time for that. I would defintely have to agree with the concentration point at that time as that would have been just about the time he was having an OH S$%^ moment!!!
You are so correct. All anyone needs to do is look at the approach plates for any airport. I guess if you are under 10 grand and VFR that's what you'll want to do or a tower will set you in just to get you into a pattern, but past that it generally don't hold water.lol
Peter, that's how I learned to fly. The fundementals. Makes sense to me. My Flight Instructor was the Chief Test Pilot of the B-777. I'm not "tooting" my horn but I learned from one of the best.
As he said, it is for the schools and basics. Everybody learns that way. As he said, the real world is based on it as a standard but as you have probably found out yourself, it is not all black and white once you get out there. Congrats on your training. You were fortunate. I notice to, that you made the statement that you "LEARNED". Take it to heart and keep those basics in the back of your mind and freshen them from time to time. No matter how much glass is in your cockpit, you will have to draw on those basics from time to time.
It appears that he was drifting from right to left at touchdown. He overcorrected to the right to stay on the runway. The official description is asinine and is without merit. The only fog present was the fog in the cockpit.
The white building seen in the video at 2:06 is 800 feet from the center line with that point being 800 feet from the numbers, putting it at 45 degrees. It appears he's coming in at half that angle. Walk the video back on Google Earth further and the approach is insane.
John, I think these other pilots have convicted and sentenced without being there and knowing all the facts. How many times have pilots come close and have made it happen? There is a tiny fraction of a second separating the successful from the failures. This crew did, however land with only an incident and everyone walked away. Better luck next time.
I've seen worse, unfortunately. There is an MD10-30 formerly belonging to World Airways landed so hard, nose first, at BWI it actually bent the main spar. The pilot got the plane back in the air flew around like this for 20 minutes before making a successful and final landing for that plane. The plane is now property of the Fire Rescue service to practice with.
It is amazing to walk up to the plane and see the ripples in the skin then to look in the wheel well & hell hole and see the actual damage.
Did you see the pictures and comments on the ANA 777 a few weeks ago that porpoised a landing at Narita or someplace over there. There was an AA capain on there that said AA did 2 of them, that it was a design flaw or something in some of the early ones. He said they flat steeled them up the side, certified for 1 landing and takeoff, flew them both direct into Tulsa, torem 'em down and put 'em back in the air in about 30 days. Can't nobody figure out what this guy did. I mean, it's obvious what he did but the why is the unexplained part.
Watch the incredible crosswind landings at the old Hong Kong Kai Tak Airport. Google it. Fly to the checkerboard, turn hard starboard, overshoot and correct back all below about 500 feet. One video shows a 74 actually hitting the outboard port engine on the runway as he still was in a bank at 50 feet. Amazing.
I was in the 734 right seat ONCE into Kai Tak. Got the call after the 1st Officer got sick in Manila. I VOLUNTEERED while on a maintenance layover in Manila to make the Ferry Flight. Actually it was a fun day, things are never as bad/hard as you think they will be...lol..
You could've gone all day without bringing up the checkerboard.LOL. That was actually what this reminded me of and that has been years. That's just one of them things you don't never forget though. I went in there several times as FE and later FO on a 707 but the first time you ever do it it yourself brings a pucker and possibly a brown spot.LOL
We were in there in the same time frame. I left USAF in early 72 and had about a 2 month break before starting with my guys. Retired in 07. mid 80's they traded that 707 for a 757. real nice 135 gig. Still doing fill in and private work.
We already had mine planned with that age 60 rule, then it changed just before I did but we left it in place. I don't live about 75 miles from KFSM and it's easy to do fill in. That was one good thing about 135 for a company rather than family or open charter. Those guys liked the house on the weekends too.lol. After 24 years and 3 major upgrades on that 757, they bought a brand new 767-200ER(I helped spec it before I left), sent it down to Weber at Denton for mod, and finally got it home middle of last year. Your type covers both those but a checkride/transition for the 67 is required. Normally don't take about 1/2 hr. Me and Dude went clear out to KABQ on an off day. That was nice.lol
I thought passengers were supposed to have all electronic devices turned off during landing! I see examples like this all the time of people taking videos of takeoffs and landings. In hindsight, it's great to have a video account of what happened in cases like this, otherwise speculation would be prominenet. Maybe they should allow video cameras to be on during takeoffs and landings for this reason. Maybe not. I am not an expert. Just my opinion.
Well, they are supposed to at least in the US, according to the FAA. I think this was in Chile` or someplace down there, and as per another post here, I don't know if those rules apply down there or not.
Ah yes, that is true. Begs the question why we do not allow it if others do, or why they do if we don't. I still question that whole rule. Thanks for the reply.
Passengers in row 20F with camera phone footage of a botched landing somewhere in South America is not a reliable witness to events in a cockpit. No one here as any clue what may or may not have happened and should reserve judgement lest they find themselves in a similar situation with all the experts. Inop or erroneous navigational equipment readings, maybe he was line up for an opposed runway...who knows... Judge, jury, and executioner does not bode well for anyone in aviation...especially when the report was brought to you by Jesus.
I'd sure like to agree with you, but trying to land at a 30-degree angle to the runway is damned hard to explain away, especially in visual conditions. As you say, the camera in 20F doesn't know what happening in the cockpit, but landing wasn't it.
Ex airforce jet jockey forgot he's in a 737? Should have been flying an IFR approach if conditions were marginal VFR. Either way, the pilot needs some Cessna 172 time, bring him down a notch - looks like he's flying the airplane with his ego, not his brain.
It was hardly "terrifying" (disconcerting perhaps) nor was the impact "so harsh".
It wasn't lined up with the runway, as can be seen as the plane flies over the numbers. For whatever reason the left wingtip scraped the runway and there was a go-around.
Andrew, Don't know how much you know about aircraft accidents but that amount of damage to a wing is really serious and it could have gone from what you saw to catastrophic in less than a second. This was clearly pilot error. Exceptionally poor pilot judgement and execution.
If I were in that seat, and I saw the center line of the runway outside my window 20 feet above ground and still banking right, I guarantee you I would have been terrified... and then lucky after realizing even after striking the wing we haven't crashed. Although after striking the wing and taking damage I would still be somewhat concerned as to how the second attempt will be, especially with these pilots in command.
Watch it a couple of times. You will see that he NEVER was on final. It was all a huge right turn, even seconds from touchdown he was STILL truning right. I have NO IDEA what he was doing! This was NOT a Cessna 172!
Yeah, he did that, and with a damaged aiplane to boot,and made a successful go around and landing the 2nd time around, BUT, what put him there in the first place??????????
He/She was just not as GOOD as they thought they were. Stupid YES, Professional NO! I have started to see MANY Pilots starting to do stupid things like NO Final Landings & wanting to make the FIRST turnoff! I watched an AA Pilot in LAX actually slide the mains trying to make the next turnoff....That is STUPID!
When I first saw the original clip, I said to myself, self he is doing a circle to land with no true final segment. Their is no possibility of a stabalized approach in this scenario. If you nail it you did good and if you don't you had better go around early. The I didn't nail it part didn't occur to him until a little late in the game. In a jet at 140 knots there is scant room for error. Probably not in the company manual!
You are exactly right. Look at one of the clips linked in down here below that was shot from the obsrvation deck. You really can't see the approach but about half way thru the clip, the plane comes up out of nowhere at about a 45dregee to startbord, just before the spool up and go round
Still Can't spell but oh well. I saw the later clip and knew that he never had a chance to level the wings. He was still in the turn when he touched down. Airplane turning, not aligned with runway, runway won't turn. Bad formula. By the way, might disagree with you a touch on the stabilized approach thing. Configured by the marker in Imc I know you know, but not configured and stabilized period leads to AA MD80 KLIT, SWA 737 MDW, questionable, contaminated runway, SWA 737 SMO I think, too many to call, a little long, a little fast and it's off the end you go!
Both them first 2 were contaminated runways, among other things. I lost 4 good friends on that AA at KLIT. Been awhile back but he landed in wx and if I remember correctly, among other things they forgot to engage speed brakes. That may have helped him but the main thing was that they said he just overshot the runway. I think the Southwest at Midway was ice or snow pack on the runway.
Sorry to hear about the loss. Got a few AA friends as well. You are correct MDW was snowy,braking action fair, and LIT was rain and i think no armed ground spoilers. The other was SWA at Burbank, 280 and 3000' 4 miles out. My point was if you are going to be a cowboy hot dog, be sure you are having a good day. Since I can't really tell when those days are, I tend to stick to the configured and stable approach at least a mile or so out.
Well, I guess in some cases you gotta make a Winnebago perform like a vette but in most cases, that old saying about "No old, bold, pilots" comes to mind. I did not know that AA crew. There was a tour group from Russellvile that my bunch was with
I have worked on A/C with more damage than this... I think this can be totally considered pilot error, However, I feel the article title is way to harsh... I do not see it as being that Terrifying.. I did not hear any screams from other passengers or anything like that, the plane did not jump, surge or anything as a result of the impact and I would venture to say the crew never new or felt anything until they got on the ground. I wonder if they declared an emergency.
Interesting that the pax was using an electronic device below 10,00ft, or is it only the FAA that prohibits this? And why did he know to do this, was he expecting trouble?
ive been in an aircraft with one engine on full power while the other one was a dead weight. We got on the ground but it took 2 passes just like this one
Yep. Every PC checkride for a 2 engine A/C has a single engine approach and landing. Also a single engine missed. Actually, a go around (missed) is briefed as a normal conclusion for every approach. It was common for your SE approach to be very normal until short, short final and the checkairman would put a vehicle on the runway. Off you go!
When the Inflight Crew goes away to prepare for landing and sit in their "jumpseat"... the passengers will play...it's out of their control! The Inflight Crew were not trained to be "BabySitters"!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.