Emirates B-777 incident at DUBAI.

[facthunter]

It's happened a few times, (not with you) and I think it's accidental, most of the time, from what I can determine. I was a bit curious, and happy to elaborate if necessary. Thanks Nev

 

 

[Birdseye]

I don't see it mentioned much, but the wind variations that have been reported are a fairly predictable event. When I was working in Abu Dhabi (short hop down the coast from DXB) virtually without fail we'd go from an inland airflow to a sea breeze, just after midday from memory. Typically switching from SE (very hot and dry), to NW (very moist, less than 5000m viz and a drop of up to 10 degrees C or so).

 

In fact the weather in that area is so predicatable its really boring.

 

Did have some fun once when they tried cloud seeding, one successful flight in the whole 9 months or so of the aircraft sitting around, no rain in the UAE, but flash flooding across the border in Oman!

 

 

[facthunter]

Yes, you can almost set your clock by the time the sea breeze comes in, at certain times of the year. Darwin is like that. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

The aircraft was landing and so it would've been a relatively light weight. It was hot, but a light weight B777 with both its engines working has an absolute abundance of power. Bucketloads of it.

 

It should've been able to accomplish a go-round in that heat and cope with wind changes pretty easily.

 

I've heard on the RPT grapevine that the aircraft was witnessed by a crew on the ground to hit the runway very hard and get airborne again before it crashed. The big question is what happened after it bounced, and why?

 

I'm currently betting that this ultimately wasn't the aeroplane's or the weather's fault.

 

 

[alf jessup]

dutchroll

 

In one way or the other the human element contributed in some way shape or form

 

Without the human component it would never have left the ground

 

I'm with you on this one

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Interesting discussion of the carry-on issue:

 

Should overhead lockers be centrally locked? - BBC News

 

 

[SDQDI]

I reckon the idea of having them able to be locked is a good one and certainly worth looking at seriously. If it removes the temptation it surely can't hurt.

 

 

[stickshaker]

Average Joe who is taking valuable time trying to get their bag will probably just take longer.

 

After all, people are told repeatedly not to do X Y & Z but they do it anyway; so everything needs to unfortunately be designed around that.

 

 

[onetrack]

Has there ever been a verifiable instance of pax grabbing their cabin luggage in an actual crash, that has actually created and resulted in fatalities? Haven't seen this in any report I've read.

 

I seem to recall the greatest problem is trying to get 200-300 pax out of the exits in an orderly and rapid manner. Isn't the evac timing supposed to be 90 secs max? Not easy with panicky pax who often behave irrationally.

 

Bodies actually jamming the exit as they try to get through, 4 at a time, would be my main concern - and I note that the large Manchester crash death toll was caused by this.

 

Then there's the problem of obese or unfit people - of whom, I see many, on the commercial flights I take.

 

These people would pose a huge problem in trying to organise rapid evacuation, with fat people getting stuck, and the unfit causing blockages.

 

Personally, I think locking the overhead lockers is a waste of time and $$'s. It would only make those desperate to access their cabin baggage, spend more valuable time trying to break the locking mechanisms.

 

I reckon there's a need for experienced pax with an authoritative manner and abilities, to be selected as additional evacuation controllers, when they board.

 

In a panic situation, you need a few additional competent and authoritative people taking control of panicked pax, and guiding them.

 

The cabin crew are certainly the main force there - but they need helpers scattered through the cabin, who can help prevent the problems of cabin-baggage grabbers, and who can insist authoratively that people just GO! Sort of like a big rough NCO yelling at you!

 

Then there's the problem of footwear. Young women wearing high heels must pose a threat to slides - yet they need decent footwear that protects their feet and which enables them to run from the wreck. 49ºC air temp is 75-80ºC tarmac temp.

 

IMO, suitable covered footwear has to be worn - and this needs to be stated before boarding. Thongs should be a no-no.

 

Then, there's the cultural thing. As a relatively wealthy Westerner, I'm not going to waste time grabbing cabin baggage that I know can be easily replaced.

 

But for someone from a 3rd world country, and of a lower wealth level, it must be very difficult to stop them from grabbing cabin baggage, that represents real loss to them, if burnt.

 

 

[stickshaker]

You'd have to be pretty big to get stuck in a commercial plane emergency exit!

 

 

[onetrack]

Stickshaker, have you seen the size of many people today! The official figures are, 63% of the nation is seriously overweight, and probably 20% is clinically obese - meaning that their obesity is seriously impinging on their health and movement ability.

 

When I said "stuck", I wasn't actually referring to the exits themselves, more along the lines of getting stuck trying to get out of their seats and into the aisles.

 

 

[stickshaker]

Who is that fat moving 20 metres and getting kicked through a 1x1m door is a problem though? Many more concerning scenarios personally.

 

Edit: Stuck in their seats, haha that's a funny image.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I rarely fly, but twice I've had a HUGE person sit next to me- and overflow into my space. I shudder to think how they'd manage an emergency.

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

Well the ones that took their overhead luggage will be laughing now at those that didn't. A bit toasty there.

 

 

 

[Marty_d]

Well, given the conditions of contract for Emirates limits liability to US$400 for unchecked baggage, I'm guessing a lot of Louis Vuitton hand-tooled leather carry-on bags were destroyed in that fire.

 

Perhaps for the loss of a toothbrush and a second-hand novel, the ones who did the right thing and left their luggage will be laughing at those who took theirs...

 

 

[greybeard]

Darwin's Theory -- super glue on the overhead locker handles

 

 

[Spooks]

Well the ones that took their overhead luggage will be laughing now at those that didn't. A bit toasty there.

Wonder if a convertible 777 would popular?

 

 

[flying dog]

So, the question remains:

 

What happened?

 

They landed, bounced, tried a "go round" and stalled, hit the ground and then stayed there.

 

I don't know.

 

Forgetting all the hoo hah about the luggage, why can't we stick to the real question of: WHAT HAPPENED and WHY?

 

As to getting out of a plane, I'd climb over the seat tops. Forget the isles.

 

But anyway: What is the latest of how it happened?

 

 

[Bats]

Short answer, almost nothing new, seems the same guesses are being recycled now. Unfortunately most scenarios point to a degree of finger trouble in the front office whilst executing a go-around - which in that enlightened part of the world is bad news for the crew and likely worse for the Aussie. I sincerely hope that a report emerges in due course exonerating them, however....

 

 

[facthunter]

Overwing... Window exits aren't that big. There's some pretty big people out there these days. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

I believe the Captain was the flying pilot and was a local Emirates native. The F/O as we know was the Aussie.

 

I'd suggest that no matter what occurred, the F/O's time is up and he'll never work for Emirates again. Personally I actually hope he gets out of the country sooner rather than later, in his own best interests. I also believe the Captain, as he was a local, will continue on to have an illustrious career with them despite being the one flying the plane at the time and calling the shots. I realise it's somewhat speculative (though not uninformed) but I wouldn't be surprised if after a heavy landing and bounce, only "half" a go-round was performed (that being the first stage flap retraction and raising the gear) with disastrous results.

 

Cynical yes, but that's the way things work there.

 

 

[facthunter]

I presume the ground spoiler is armed so how would it have behaved in all of this? Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

Yes the speedbrake lever would be in the "armed" position for landing in which case with "on ground" logic (no gear tilt) and the thrust levers at idle, the speedbrake lever gets automatically driven up and ground spoilers will deploy. If those conditions cease to be met they'll retract again.

 

You can recover from a small bounce by just holding the attitude and adding a little brief burst of power, just like any other plane. A high bounce demands an immediate go-round, again just like any other plane.

 

If you go around after touchdown the speedbrakes retract and the autobrakes disarm. Flaps are retracted to 20 and the non flying pilot calls "positive climb" (radar and pressure altimeters increasing) then the flying pilot calls "gear up". Happens pretty quick. We practice go-arounds a lot in the sim (though normally not after touchdown) and they're pretty strict on getting everything done in the right order, for obvious reasons!

 

There's a lot of potential to screw things up in various ways during a poorly executed and coordinated go around, especially when the element of surprise is thrown in.

 

 

[facthunter]

Well it's pretty automatic for you people then. I've never seen a jet airliner bounce. The spoilers pretty much stop that. "Squat switches or wheel spinup activate pre armed spoilers on earlier stuff

 

It's rather hard to land without skipping, IF you don't use the spoilers to pin it down, and that could waste a lot of runway. You also wouldn't get much weight on the wheels for braking. VERY necessary. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

It's rare. Sometimes a super-smooth landing can do it. Not enough weight on wheels to immediately activate the spoilers and it skips off the runway a bit before settling.

 

Alternatively, if you hit the runway hard enough the slight delay in the spoilers being activated allows the plane to get airborne again and they immediately retract, possibly exacerbating the bounce.

 

It's not common, and you're right about them being important. They have a huge effect on braking action.

 

It's funny that when there's a failure of the automatic system the touchdown is often beautifully smooth....until you pull the lever up manually and it thuds down onto the runway! This is the effect of a smooth touchdown on the rear bogies (front bogies if it's a B767 as they tilt the other way) then manual activation is never as smooth as the automatic system so it dumps all the lift quickly and you can thump down on the front bogies as the weight forces the tilt out of them. Though on the Airbus even the automatic system causes this if you don't promptly lower the nose!

 

It's an interesting interaction between all the landing forces and the automatic systems on modern jets. Usually works well though.