You would think Boeing would have put a sensor in the tail strike skid so when contact is made it is immediately reported to the cockpit, including the strength of the strike.
Also if there were a built in computer control that wouldn't let the angle get too steep when taking off, unless overridden by the pilot, that could prevent this.
the sensors they could use would not last or work. the sensors would be the weak point. the sensors cant handle the impact force plus it would not be as usable in determining damage or risk. the system they picked takes the damage to a point and direct it to less important location.
Steve Cornell Multiple sensors? Even my phone can detect force in 3 axis simultaneously. It certainly is possible to make robust sensors and even to isolate them from the actual physical force. Probably was a cost thing rather than a technological difficulty.
Since I was a kid I heard how difficult a job it is to be a pilot. But I had no idea it is such an incredibly difficult and responsible profession. It's great people like yourself make it easier for us to understand. Also, thank you and all other pilots for their dedication and hard work in hauling our assess around the world safely. You all are doing an amazing job!
I've actually been on a stretch 777 which experienced tail strike on both takeoff, and landing. The strikes were quite hard. Thanks for explaining how the craft is protected from damage due to minor strikes. :)
I love how some old german world war 2 era planes use ground effect to the tailplane to avoid tailstrikes It doesn't make it impossible to tailstrike, but you feel the resistance of the ground effect pushing, which tells you that you are too close to the ground It even sometimes pushes you out of the danger zone of tailstrikes
I guessed about 1ft, which is only 5mm away from the actual clearance. It's impressive how precise these things are, and also a testament to the skill of the pilots that they don't have incidents more often with such a small margin of error.
Frankly speaking, making a separate video concerning calculations of mass&balance is a great idea. Please, don't forget about that !!! As always, your video is awesome.
Around 1980, I met a young newly graduated pilot in Kuwait. He was flying a Jumbo Jet with one main passenger. The Amir of Kuwait himself. Country was proud of him. While taking off tried to show off by climbing too steep. Hit the tail on the tarmac. Made a round and landed back on emergency basis. All were safe.
DC-3 pilots NEVER get tail strikes. There was a 747 that had a tail strike and the aft pressure bulkhead was damaged. However they didn't follow the recommended guidelines to repair it. However it was several years (hundreds or maybe thousands of cycles) before the bulkhead finally failed. When it did it blew most of the tail off the airplane. Not a good day at all.
@@rasmealem9796 Yep. RIP and all the respect in the world to those pilots. They kept that plane in the air for a LONG TIME afterwards in a battle they couldn't win. But man did they try. An amazing effort. Supposedly a lot of people actually survived the crash but died during the night. The US military found the crash almost right away the same night and had rescue teams ready to go right then and there but the Japanese military told them "no thanks" and waited to go out til the next morning. A lady who did survive said that she heard many people crying out in the dark, but by morning they had gone quiet... Very sad.
This is actually what caused the biggest aircrash in history (involving "only" one plane) : Japan Airlines flight 123, in 1985. The rear bulkhead was torn apart after a bad repair. It had been damaged in 1978 by a nice tail strike (sorry if my english sucks).
This happened to a 767 at work (ESGG) the day before yesterday, they went straight back to the airport and landed... technicians said that there was no damage due to tailstrike, however they had landed with too much weight so they had to inspect the wings and frame, possibly the landing gear as well.
I did a tail strike on my check ride in a Cessna 150 back in 1972. The inspector was a stickler on Full Stall landings which I had practiced over and over again both solo and with my instructor. I had that horn blowing loud and strong with a nice settle in place but I did not realize my angle of attack was so high (in ground effect) that I scraped the tie down ring. It scared the heck out of me because the tail cone is like a megaphone and boy was it loud. So loud in fact I thought I broke the tail off. Feeling broken and sad, I let the inspector out at the gas pumps, topped off the tanks and walked with my head low back to the FBO. As I walked in, they were all laughing. I looked around like "how could they be laughing at me like that?" As I almost started to cry, the inspector said that was the best damn Full Stall landing he had ever seen! Needless to say, I passed my ride. Looking back now, I do have to laugh. One thing is for sure, when you are at or near a full stall in ground effect, you're not likely to bounce. Just thought I would share. Marc
If a pilot is known to become stressed by a bounced landing, just require them to fly a Mooney for a while. They will become quite comfortable with bouncing.
Thanks Mentor! Loved the video. Very pleased to see your channel is growing much faster than before. I've been with you since October 2016, when you were around 25K subscribers. Your channel is a big favorite of mine :) Edit: Mentour**
If anyone is curious about how dangerous a tailstrike can be to an aircraft (and improper repair), look up what happened to Japan Airlines Flight 123. Very tragic.
Or also china airlines flight 611 , a boeing 747 which just broke apart in the air because the damage of a landing tailstrike hadn't been repaired properly for years.
@@AeroMaster-xy8eo China Air was the one where there was nicotine stains found where the pressurized air came out from the years when smoking was legal on planes. I think it was another improper repair. NTSB which assisted sent in a metal fatigue expert which proved to be extremely valuable.
I remember an Air Crash Investigation program about a plane which had been repaired after a tail strike, in which the repair patch failed a decade or more later. The patch was improperly applied (from memory one less rows of rivets than required), and eventually came apart. There was an early indication, with brown stains around the edges of the patch due to nicotine leaking out (how did they survive all that smoking), but it wasn't acted on, eventually resulting in the total loss of the aircraft.
yeah i saw it recently. patch was too small and needed double rivets.. also the documentation on repair wasnt thorough. the sheet metal fatigued over time around the rivets and sudden failure blew the back end of the plane off
You have mixed JAL123 up with CAL611. JAL123 is the one that with one less roll of rivets (actually the rivets were there, but they were not bolted onto the same doubler plate as required), while CAL611 is the one with nicotine stains (patching doubler being too small)
No offense... but pilots seem to have titanium carbon-fiber balls, a memory like an elephant, and intelligence of Einstein... oh, and nerves of steel. I have total complete respect and admiration of pilots, and first officers and all of flight crews.
Pilots certainly had a very impressive calm about them. As far as memory goes though, its mostly through repetition. To the point id suspect a pilot who's been flying many thousand hours could probably preflight their aircraft blindfolded. Do it the same way every time and you don't forget. It just feels, weird if you miss something.
sparkplug1018 which is quite dangerous, if you are so used to doing something eventually you might get sloppy. That's why airlines change their checklist routines every now and then, I believe.
Jan Peter Yeah, checklists are wonderful. Atul Gawande, M.D. a surgeon, wrote an entire book (The Checklist Manifesto) on why their invention was so important to many professions, especially to his own, and how to write a "proper" checklist that you won't be inclined to skip, since airlines and hospitals were forced to figure that out for the reasons you wrote.
I believe most if not all commercial jets have skid plates under the tail to protect the tail and body from ground impacts from tailstrike incidents. It's not a good thing but it does happen.
WOW...I called that tail clearance exactly! When you asked the question at the beginning I thought, "1 foot," and sure enough, when I checked with my conversion app, 31 cm was exactly 1 ft. Not a pilot or planning to be, but I guess I've watched enough takeoffs to be able to eyeball it anyway. XD
Hi mr mentour. Regarding your question i think flap one,departure should be performed below 10 degrees pitch up at most to avoid a tail strike. Once the rwy is left below then increase to 15 degrees for take off climb as the flight dorector indicate.
Is there a reason why they can't put a small wheel at the back in case this happens? I believe Concord did that, it had a forth Bumper wheel. I think the additional complexity would be made up for by decreased chance of damaging the hull.
OMG, I was wondering about this question for a long time but I don't have any pilot friends so I don't have a chance. Now I found this video and all my doubts are gone. Thank you Mentour !!!
I'm surprised you don't have any electronic sensors inside the shoe that can tell you if there was a tailstrike. Also, having little cameras all over the plane (like those in back of some cars) would be extremely helpful.
While it's a good idea in theory, you have to think of what the chances of the sensor being faulty are. Did it detect a tailstrike when there wasn't one? Did it NOT detect a tailstrike when one happened? The sensor has to be so reliable that you can confidently answer both of those questions with a NO 99.99999% of the time. If you took care of the cheapest brand-new car you can get as well as airlines have to take care of their airplanes, it would last until the manufacturer stopped making spare parts for it. However, a camera pointing at the green/red stripe on the skid would be useful, provided you can ensure that it's not scraped off the aircraft by a tailstrike. Maybe mount it on one of the horizontal stabilizers.
I think sensor is still more reliable than stewardess (and would work additional to stewardesses). If camera would be scraped of by tailstrike then you don't need a camera to tell you if you tailstriked ;)
You dont even need a camera on the aircraft. Have a camera on the runway, and send the video to the aircraft. Have the lead cabin crewmember watch the video during takeoff, so the pilots can focus on their normal tasks, but still get pinged if the viewer saw a strike and/or crew heard or felt something weird.
This was a revelation, that an aircraft can be designed and built with so little tolerance in regard to fuselage clearance on take-off, and so little information available to the pilot (relying on reports from the cabin crew), and so much depending on the pilot's skill to avoid disaster in a common procedure (rotating). The Mentour Pilot spoke almost as if tail strike from time to time was to be expected. Pretty shocking . . .
"If I pull the stick back too hard, the tail will hit the floor, thus ripping the toilets out the back. Now, with 500 people on board, for 7.5 hours....we could be knee deep by the time we get to New York..."
In regards to the Max MCAS system, I've been very critical of Boeing for turning the 737 into something it wasn't designed to be. This video gives me another reason. I don't know how Boeing and the airlines thought they could convert a short/medium haul plane into a long range high capacity plane without consequences. Considering the length of the 737-800 with it's potential for tail strikes, I can only imagine how susceptible the Max 10 must be. It's probably a good thing the Max 8 got grounded before the Max 10 entered service.
Holy crap that's a lot closer than I guessed 😐 Interesting on the "return to your seat"... I always assumed it was purely a "that way you're strapped in" thing... But weight distribution makes absolute sense!
Great explanation, as usual :), I guess 1 meter on flap 1 departure. I see that the plane you are in is configured for short field operations. could you make a video to explain that more?
Pretty good vid, glad you discussed FL 1 vs FL 5 for T/O at the end. The vast majority of guys I have worked with prefer FL 5, though not just because of reduced tailstrike risk. The aircraft flies off nicely at FL 5 while it tends to struggle off sometimes at FL 1.
I'm pretty sure that happened in one of my last flights, departing from Arizona. I noticed when we were about to get airborne, i felt a bump noise on the back everybody was looking to each other but no one said anything. Let me ask you this captain, if that does happen even a small tail strike, is it common to continue the flight? Or should a Captain should land the plane right away? The flight departed from Arizona to New Jersey . Thank you sir, and hands down for you guys.
Really like the way how didactic but still in a relaxed and easy-to-understand way you explain these issues, e.g. tail strike, and other topics on former videos. You have the mentor/instructor attitude. Much appreciate all the effort you put into your channel. Thank you and keep it up.
I'm pretty late on this but I'm going to guess the clearance is around 30cm. (I totally didn't just watch your video on how to take off a 737 half an hour ago) : )
@Mentour Pilot Sorry for posting this under this particular video but it's about a near wing strike during a landing. I had taken my family and a couple of my daughter's friends on an outing one weekend and noticed that Charlotte's Douglas International was very busy that day so we pulled into a picnic/overlook area to watch the planes land. Most came in normally and touched down perfectly, where the runway was darkest from the tire marks. However one plane came in really fast, touched down well past the 'normal' touchdown area, immediately went to full reverse thrust, then took the very first exit at such a high rate of speed that the airplane rolled considerably to the outboard side (left turn so it rolled to the right) and the outboard wing tip looked to be less than a foot from the runway. This was pre 9/11 so we were very close to the runway about a third of the way between the touchdown area and the first exit so we had a good view of this crazy reckless maneuver. (Most of the 'normal' touchdowns chose to bypass the first exit and take the second or even third exit.) Do landings like this happen often? Or should there be some sort of repercussions for the pilot for something like this?
Im really excited to hear your views about weight and balance! I just passed the EASA ATPL Mass and Balance exam and it would be nice to hear more about the daily ops when loading etc. cheers!
Not Sure about southwest, but the few times ive been on a plane that wasnt quite full without assigned seats the "closed off the first and last rows of seats to ensure people got into the mid section seats. Of course there were still empty seats in between but id guess this ensured the balance wasnt to far off which would be ok, since there should be margins for it anyway.
@@YouTuneIt Reminds me how Airbus squeezed in more seats on their A320neo with their Space Flex option, but then realised those seats couldn't be safely filled up as it'd shift the aircraft's centre of gravity too far to the rear
31 cm is about 1 foot (12") and 51 cm is about a foot and a half, or about 18" but changing your speed or angle of attack can certainly affect the distance. Some aircraft have a tail wheel (besides "tail-draggers") -- like the Concorde. I think the B-52H (Stratofortress) bomber had outrigger wheels too, (beneath the wings) but they only touched the ground when the aircraft was totally fueled and in a "heavy take-off" situation! I loved the Stratofortress, what an impressive aircraft that was! (If for some reason the B-52 would have had to do a touch-and-go, (like at an air show) it would NOT have been fully fueled.)
A sensor would be a logical addition to avoid a possible catastrophic situation but as we have recently seen, Boeing would probably charge close to 100K for that "option" as we can't give away safety features. Just look at not making the MCAS read off one sensor and charging 80K to add a line of text to the display to warn of AOA error.
I guess this is also the reason why 737 landings in general are firm. You can't rotate much with such little clearance at the back. So that is also why the tail of every modern aircraft (777, A350) has a straight taper at the rear.
I experienced a heavy tail strike flying out of Hong Kong. It made a really loud bang. No one seemed fazed and we continued onto our 6 hour journey to Beijing. Unsettling to say the least.
I would think that in such a dicey situation a sensor however flawed or of limited use would be more reliable than the shell-like ears of a pretty stewardess! I have a parking sensor on my car which let's out a hysterical beeeeep when I am less than 0.30 metres from an obstruction. What my car can do Boeing can do better...and considering the gravity of the issue the sensor could even be use and throw basis.
I've been waiting very patiently for that aircraft balancing episode- this is the second episode I've watched where you mention that you will do one. I'll continue to wait patiently as a mouse but if I don't get my curiosity satiated soon I may need to cut myself. ;)
A SAS MD 80 crashed into the runway with the tail first. The engines almost fell off the aircraft which was scrapped after that "landing." Just a couple of months later, on the same airport, the same almost happened to another SAS aircraft with me on board. The aircraft just fell down on the runway when it seemed like it was stalling.
@@MentourPilot With an airplane full of sensors the pilots relying on what or what not might be heard or felt by the aft sitting cabin crew sound a bit antiquated to me. That so called shue ( honeycomb material) mentioned has really no sensor fitted ? Hard to believe........
Ok so you're telling me that I this day and age of technology, that there are no sensors in the tail that can tell that there was a tail strike? Even cheap cars have bumper sensors than can sense an object within a few feet. I don't get it?
@@cesarquintana9034 If it was my plane there would be no second guessing. A mechanical switch, non electronic type , would be fail safe. Still I bet tail strikes are one in 10000 takeoffs. But, wouldn't want to be in the air guessing either way!
Don't forget that those cars have raised in price significantly over the last several years. A big part of that increase is those extra sensors and computers
I know of 2 tail strikes that occurred with Ryanair aircraft at STN airport in the last 10 years. On both occasions a mistake was made by the dispatcher when calculating the load sheet; which wasn't spotted by either Captain. On at least one of these occasions the load sheet was out by 10,000kg.
“Most of the weight put over the Center of gravity” that sounds confusing because the center of gravity shifts when the weight does, therefore the center of gravity isn’t a definite point. Of course you have your envelope. Talking about the BEW center of gravity? Because the plane I fly is out of CG until you put weight (pilots and equipment) in the front of the plane, thus shifting the center of gravity. If we loaded the plane at it’s empty CG, it would be out of tolerance. We had a few tail strikes this year, one of which was from a former 737 captain. He would always do a huge flair, so it was just a matter of time. We operate the BAE-146-200. THat aircrafts ideals landing attitude is about 5 degrees nose up. The other one was due to a mis calculated landing weight (bugged lower than actual), so the plane came in hard and had excessive flair trying to lower the rate of descent. It actually led to a belly strike as well. I know you’re dumbing down your explanations, just something I noticed.
no they fly relative to the gravitational normal and the air they are moving through. the rotation is only 15 degrees per hour, it is irrelevant. it does affect the Gyroscopes, but they correct for it.
Yes; if you’re flying a long distance (perhaps cross-continental) then over time, your linear flight path will curve instead of your intended straight line, so you’ll end up many miles off your intended flight path if you don’t account for it. This is called the Coriolis effect and is due to the rotation of the earth. Other than that, no not really because planes fly in relation to the air.
Landed a few days ago at Mahon in a Boeing 737 Max8. This was by far the heaviest landing I have ever felt. The aircraft seemed to slam onto the undercarriage so violently accompanied with a loud "Crack" behind me in the rear of the aircraft (sitting in seat 20a close to the trailing edge). I know the undercarriage is designed to take a fair bit of punishment but this seemed way too excessive and violent with the crack sounding very structural.
Usually any 'stretch' version of an aircraft is susceptible to a tail strike and so are fitted with tail stike sensors, or at least everyone i have worked on has, for example 737-800, 777-300, 747-400, 787-8 and c130 stretch.
I was in my last duty in a SH-3 Sea King as Sea Air Rescue Corpsman in summer of 1973 when we were practicing auto-rotation. I was only aboard to get my "flight hours" of course, $80 per month. So etc. etc. etc. until "power-power-power" was called for by pilot. I did not see the first officer reach-up for the throttles for at least five seconds. Hard tail strike. Wet undies. Parts of the craft flying away from me visible through the side window, most notably the drive shaft. Pilots were just barely behind me when we jumped out. Navy asked me what happened and ignored what I told them I saw. "Component Failure" they declared. Officers stick together. Another time we landed on our fuel tanks because gear had not been lowered. But the Navy gave me far more than it demanded in return. Including a nice college education. Do not thank me for my service, I should thank YOU.
The 777-300 has a strut on the rear wheel sets to stop the pivot about the wheel carriage, this effectively makes the plane rotate on the rear wheels on takeoff lifting the plane up slightly to reduce tail strike...
You would think Boeing would have put a sensor in the tail strike skid so when contact is made it is immediately reported to the cockpit, including the strength of the strike.
That would be a good idea, wouldnt it.
Also if there were a built in computer control that wouldn't let the angle get too steep when taking off, unless overridden by the pilot, that could prevent this.
the sensors they could use would not last or work. the sensors would be the weak point. the sensors cant handle the impact force plus it would not be as usable in determining damage or risk. the system they picked takes the damage to a point and direct it to less important location.
plus sensors are only able to measure impact in one direction and it has to be in line with the sensor. tail impacts have the impact and a dragging.
Steve Cornell Multiple sensors? Even my phone can detect force in 3 axis simultaneously. It certainly is possible to make robust sensors and even to isolate them from the actual physical force. Probably was a cost thing rather than a technological difficulty.
Since I was a kid I heard how difficult a job it is to be a pilot.
But I had no idea it is such an incredibly difficult and responsible profession.
It's great people like yourself make it easier for us to understand.
Also, thank you and all other pilots for their dedication and hard work in hauling our assess around the world safely. You all are doing an amazing job!
How comfortably you speak about tailstrike. Respect to pilots. Never felt any strike during flights.
I've actually been on a stretch 777 which experienced tail strike on both takeoff, and landing. The strikes were quite hard. Thanks for explaining how the craft is protected from damage due to minor strikes. :)
I love how some old german world war 2 era planes use ground effect to the tailplane to avoid tailstrikes
It doesn't make it impossible to tailstrike, but you feel the resistance of the ground effect pushing, which tells you that you are too close to the ground
It even sometimes pushes you out of the danger zone of tailstrikes
Good explanation, for our knowledge, as we're normally simple passengers from point A to B.
Tnx a lot
You're always updating our minds
Hi! Thank you for watching! Great to hear that you like it!
Thank you for always very welcoming me. It's linguistic quirks like that really add to a man's character.
I guessed about 1ft, which is only 5mm away from the actual clearance. It's impressive how precise these things are, and also a testament to the skill of the pilots that they don't have incidents more often with such a small margin of error.
Frankly speaking, making a separate video concerning calculations of mass&balance is a great idea. Please, don't forget about that !!! As always, your video is awesome.
Thank you! I’m glad you liked it!
@@MentourPilot I liked it.
"...about 31 cm." Thank you for using the metric system!! :)
allmost my Wienersize... LUL
Yeah that's like 1 feet but i'm glad he used metric to lol
I believe that if people will stop using English system there will be peace in the world. no more misunderstanding
@@kentuckypausal Do you mean the Winchester Units or the Exchequer Standards?
metric didn't put a man on the moon
1-2 meters...
EDIT
and i was wrong again... 30 cm seems too small gap for the size though.. GREAT VID AS ALWAYS!!!
Happened to me on the way to Rome from Abu Dhabi. It was incredibly loud.
TheMASDrummer on take of or landing?
An ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC video, Mentour...Great job, sir! 🇺🇸😀👍🛬🛫✈
You talked about repairs/costs due to tail strikes. What kind of career impact etc would that have on the pilot-assuming it was an error?
Every employee s/b profits conscious
Makes me think about this cute little wheel they had under the tail of the Concorde ^^
Around 1980, I met a young newly graduated pilot in Kuwait. He was flying a Jumbo Jet with one main passenger. The Amir of Kuwait himself. Country was proud of him. While taking off tried to show off by climbing too steep. Hit the tail on the tarmac. Made a round and landed back on emergency basis. All were safe.
DC-3 pilots NEVER get tail strikes.
There was a 747 that had a tail strike and the aft pressure bulkhead was damaged. However they didn't follow the recommended guidelines to repair it. However it was several years (hundreds or maybe thousands of cycles) before the bulkhead finally failed. When it did it blew most of the tail off the airplane. Not a good day at all.
JAL 123
@@rasmealem9796 Yep. RIP and all the respect in the world to those pilots. They kept that plane in the air for a LONG TIME afterwards in a battle they couldn't win. But man did they try. An amazing effort. Supposedly a lot of people actually survived the crash but died during the night. The US military found the crash almost right away the same night and had rescue teams ready to go right then and there but the Japanese military told them "no thanks" and waited to go out til the next morning. A lady who did survive said that she heard many people crying out in the dark, but by morning they had gone quiet... Very sad.
This is actually what caused the biggest aircrash in history (involving "only" one plane) : Japan Airlines flight 123, in 1985. The rear bulkhead was torn apart after a bad repair. It had been damaged in 1978 by a nice tail strike (sorry if my english sucks).
yeah and an incorrect repair if i am not mistaken
31cm !! It must take incredible skill to control a plane to such a close tolerance!
American pilots can do it to one foot, which is even more precise.
@@stevek8829 LMAO
When a plane bounces off the ground it sounds like a bouncy ball. BOE-ING! 😂😂
And all the passengers sue the pilot
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAH GOOD ONE!!!
Overused joke
Bruh
If it's a *Boeing-* nobody's *going.*
This happened to a 767 at work (ESGG) the day before yesterday, they went straight back to the airport and landed... technicians said that there was no damage due to tailstrike, however they had landed with too much weight so they had to inspect the wings and frame, possibly the landing gear as well.
Yes, so they had a suspected tailstrike. Then we always go back to inspect for damage, just in case.
The see-saw analogy explains weight and balance perfectly.
Basically you are the captain joe of 737 and captain joe is the mentour pilot of the a320 😂
He now flies a Boeing cargo plane
@@SF-li9kh yeah a 747 for Cargolux
nice
Not even close! Mentour 100-0 :-) ah, Joe is not even a real CPT …
I did a tail strike on my check ride in a Cessna 150 back in 1972. The inspector was a stickler on Full Stall landings which I had practiced over and over again both solo and with my instructor. I had that horn blowing loud and strong with a nice settle in place but I did not realize my angle of attack was so high (in ground effect) that I scraped the tie down ring. It scared the heck out of me because the tail cone is like a megaphone and boy was it loud. So loud in fact I thought I broke the tail off.
Feeling broken and sad, I let the inspector out at the gas pumps, topped off the tanks and walked with my head low back to the FBO. As I walked in, they were all laughing. I looked around like "how could they be laughing at me like that?" As I almost started to cry, the inspector said that was the best damn Full Stall landing he had ever seen! Needless to say, I passed my ride. Looking back now, I do have to laugh. One thing is for sure, when you are at or near a full stall in ground effect, you're not likely to bounce.
Just thought I would share.
Marc
If a pilot is known to become stressed by a bounced landing, just require them to fly a Mooney for a while. They will become quite comfortable with bouncing.
Thanks Mentor! Loved the video. Very pleased to see your channel is growing much faster than before. I've been with you since October 2016, when you were around 25K subscribers. Your channel is a big favorite of mine :)
Edit: Mentour**
If anyone is curious about how dangerous a tailstrike can be to an aircraft (and improper repair), look up what happened to Japan Airlines Flight 123. Very tragic.
Or also china airlines flight 611 , a boeing 747 which just broke apart in the air because the damage of a landing tailstrike hadn't been repaired properly for years.
Man, having to fly a plane with only engine power and the drag from landing gear is a pilot's worst nightmare.
That was more about improper repair as the subsequent accident was some 20yrs later.
I was wondering if someone had already mentioned JAL123 ...
@@AeroMaster-xy8eo China Air was the one where there was nicotine stains found where the pressurized air came out from the years when smoking was legal on planes. I think it was another improper repair. NTSB which assisted sent in a metal fatigue expert which proved to be extremely valuable.
I remember an Air Crash Investigation program about a plane which had been repaired after a tail strike, in which the repair patch failed a decade or more later. The patch was improperly applied (from memory one less rows of rivets than required), and eventually came apart. There was an early indication, with brown stains around the edges of the patch due to nicotine leaking out (how did they survive all that smoking), but it wasn't acted on, eventually resulting in the total loss of the aircraft.
yeah i saw it recently. patch was too small and needed double rivets.. also the documentation on repair wasnt thorough. the sheet metal fatigued over time around the rivets and sudden failure blew the back end of the plane off
You have mixed JAL123 up with CAL611.
JAL123 is the one that with one less roll of rivets (actually the rivets were there, but they were not bolted onto the same doubler plate as required), while CAL611 is the one with nicotine stains (patching doubler being too small)
No offense... but pilots seem to have titanium carbon-fiber balls, a memory like an elephant, and intelligence of Einstein... oh, and nerves of steel. I have total complete respect and admiration of pilots, and first officers and all of flight crews.
Pilots certainly had a very impressive calm about them. As far as memory goes though, its mostly through repetition. To the point id suspect a pilot who's been flying many thousand hours could probably preflight their aircraft blindfolded. Do it the same way every time and you don't forget. It just feels, weird if you miss something.
sparkplug1018 which is quite dangerous, if you are so used to doing something eventually you might get sloppy. That's why airlines change their checklist routines every now and then, I believe.
Jan Peter Yeah, checklists are wonderful. Atul Gawande, M.D. a surgeon, wrote an entire book (The Checklist Manifesto) on why their invention was so important to many professions, especially to his own, and how to write a "proper" checklist that you won't be inclined to skip, since airlines and hospitals were forced to figure that out for the reasons you wrote.
My best friend is becoming a pilot, I'm so proud of her. Shes a complete natural
Can you tell me which airline so I know to avoid it? :)
I believe most if not all commercial jets have skid plates under the tail to protect the tail and body from ground impacts from tailstrike incidents. It's not a good thing but it does happen.
How about the time after the meal when 10-15 people stand in line to the aft lavatory, does autopilot re-trim it or change the stabilizer setting?
Yes it does. That can actually be clearly seen.
Okay, thanks! Hope it's not dangerous :)
Steve Y Only if you've had the fish :D
I always choose chicken
Steve Y Roger Roger, what's our clearance Clarence
WOW...I called that tail clearance exactly! When you asked the question at the beginning I thought, "1 foot," and sure enough, when I checked with my conversion app, 31 cm was exactly 1 ft. Not a pilot or planning to be, but I guess I've watched enough takeoffs to be able to eyeball it anyway. XD
Wow, the channel is growing so fast now. Good job!
Hi mr mentour. Regarding your question i think flap one,departure should be performed below 10 degrees pitch up at most to avoid a tail strike. Once the rwy is left below then increase to 15 degrees for take off climb as the flight dorector indicate.
Is there a reason why they can't put a small wheel at the back in case this happens? I believe Concord did that, it had a forth Bumper wheel.
I think the additional complexity would be made up for by decreased chance of damaging the hull.
Or have a sensor that prevents the aircraft from pitching up too much unless overridden
There would be aerodynamic penalties for adding another wheel, and no airline wants to pay more in fuel costs if they can avoid it.
The wheel would simply be crushed and still transmit the same or similar amount of energy to the rear structure.
OMG, I was wondering about this question for a long time but I don't have any pilot friends so I don't have a chance. Now I found this video and all my doubts are gone. Thank you Mentour !!!
I'm surprised you don't have any electronic sensors inside the shoe that can tell you if there was a tailstrike. Also, having little cameras all over the plane (like those in back of some cars) would be extremely helpful.
While it's a good idea in theory, you have to think of what the chances of the sensor being faulty are. Did it detect a tailstrike when there wasn't one? Did it NOT detect a tailstrike when one happened? The sensor has to be so reliable that you can confidently answer both of those questions with a NO 99.99999% of the time.
If you took care of the cheapest brand-new car you can get as well as airlines have to take care of their airplanes, it would last until the manufacturer stopped making spare parts for it.
However, a camera pointing at the green/red stripe on the skid would be useful, provided you can ensure that it's not scraped off the aircraft by a tailstrike. Maybe mount it on one of the horizontal stabilizers.
Some really good points!
I think sensor is still more reliable than stewardess (and would work additional to stewardesses).
If camera would be scraped of by tailstrike then you don't need a camera to tell you if you tailstriked ;)
You dont even need a camera on the aircraft. Have a camera on the runway, and send the video to the aircraft. Have the lead cabin crewmember watch the video during takeoff, so the pilots can focus on their normal tasks, but still get pinged if the viewer saw a strike and/or crew heard or felt something weird.
@@volvoxpl Oh stewardess, when will the 🚭 be switched off?
This was a revelation, that an aircraft can be designed and built with so little tolerance in regard to fuselage clearance on take-off, and so little information available to the pilot (relying on reports from the cabin crew), and so much depending on the pilot's skill to avoid disaster in a common procedure (rotating). The Mentour Pilot spoke almost as if tail strike from time to time was to be expected. Pretty shocking . . .
"If I pull the stick back too hard, the tail will hit the floor, thus ripping the toilets out the back. Now, with 500 people on board, for 7.5 hours....we could be knee deep by the time we get to New York..."
Your English is better than most Americans’ English
In regards to the Max MCAS system, I've been very critical of Boeing for turning the 737 into something it wasn't designed to be. This video gives me another reason. I don't know how Boeing and the airlines thought they could convert a short/medium haul plane into a long range high capacity plane without consequences. Considering the length of the 737-800 with it's potential for tail strikes, I can only imagine how susceptible the Max 10 must be. It's probably a good thing the Max 8 got grounded before the Max 10 entered service.
Forget about hitting the tail. The real question is why does it hit the nose???
The B3KM has a redesigned landing gear that can supposedly jack the whole plane upwards as it rotates, to reduce the risk of a tail strike
Holy crap that's a lot closer than I guessed 😐
Interesting on the "return to your seat"... I always assumed it was purely a "that way you're strapped in" thing... But weight distribution makes absolute sense!
Great explanation, as usual :), I guess 1 meter on flap 1 departure. I see that the plane you are in is configured for short field operations. could you make a video to explain that more?
31cm clearance for NORMAL operations?? WOW. You guys operate on thin margins. Amazing stuff. Props! (no pun intended LOL)
Great video mate, a great topic to talk about, catch you on the live
RS Aviation ou
Pretty good vid, glad you discussed FL 1 vs FL 5 for T/O at the end. The vast majority of guys I have worked with prefer FL 5, though not just because of reduced tailstrike risk. The aircraft flies off nicely at FL 5 while it tends to struggle off sometimes at FL 1.
I'm pretty sure that happened in one of my last flights, departing from Arizona. I noticed when we were about to get airborne, i felt a bump noise on the back everybody was looking to each other but no one said anything. Let me ask you this captain, if that does happen even a small tail strike, is it common to continue the flight? Or should a Captain should land the plane right away?
The flight departed from Arizona to New Jersey .
Thank you sir, and hands down for you guys.
Really like the way how didactic but still in a relaxed and easy-to-understand way you explain these issues, e.g. tail strike, and other topics on former videos. You have the mentor/instructor attitude. Much appreciate all the effort you put into your channel. Thank you and keep it up.
I'm pretty late on this but I'm going to guess the clearance is around 30cm. (I totally didn't just watch your video on how to take off a 737 half an hour ago) : )
@Mentour Pilot Sorry for posting this under this particular video but it's about a near wing strike during a landing. I had taken my family and a couple of my daughter's friends on an outing one weekend and noticed that Charlotte's Douglas International was very busy that day so we pulled into a picnic/overlook area to watch the planes land. Most came in normally and touched down perfectly, where the runway was darkest from the tire marks. However one plane came in really fast, touched down well past the 'normal' touchdown area, immediately went to full reverse thrust, then took the very first exit at such a high rate of speed that the airplane rolled considerably to the outboard side (left turn so it rolled to the right) and the outboard wing tip looked to be less than a foot from the runway. This was pre 9/11 so we were very close to the runway about a third of the way between the touchdown area and the first exit so we had a good view of this crazy reckless maneuver. (Most of the 'normal' touchdowns chose to bypass the first exit and take the second or even third exit.) Do landings like this happen often? Or should there be some sort of repercussions for the pilot for something like this?
Im really excited to hear your views about weight and balance! I just passed the EASA ATPL Mass and Balance exam and it would be nice to hear more about the daily ops when loading etc. cheers!
Cool! That video will take some research but I am on it! Congratulations to your exam!
Mentour Pilot
Cap. explain to these people the VMU!!
Again, no idea why I keep watching these. I'm not a pilot and never will be. But I love information and minutiae.
You mentioned a load sheet: how does it work for airlines like Southwest where there is no assigned seating?
i guess depending where people seat they will hold the luggage on different places in the cargo to balance the weight, just guessing tho!!
sixspeeddeath I notice SWA uses the 737-700...maybe it's got a bigger tail clearance?
Not Sure about southwest, but the few times ive been on a plane that wasnt quite full without assigned seats the "closed off the first and last rows of seats to ensure people got into the mid section seats. Of course there were still empty seats in between but id guess this ensured the balance wasnt to far off which would be ok, since there should be margins for it anyway.
@@YouTuneIt Reminds me how Airbus squeezed in more seats on their A320neo with their Space Flex option, but then realised those seats couldn't be safely filled up as it'd shift the aircraft's centre of gravity too far to the rear
I was a crew chief on the C-141 in the USAF. New pilots doing touch and goes always scraping the tail on the takeoff!!!
If you can takeoff and land SO.8000 Narval without tailstrike you are qualified for any modern commercial jet.
31 cm is about 1 foot (12") and 51 cm is about a foot and a half, or about 18" but changing your speed or angle of attack can certainly affect the distance. Some aircraft have a tail wheel (besides "tail-draggers") -- like the Concorde. I think the B-52H (Stratofortress) bomber had outrigger wheels too, (beneath the wings) but they only touched the ground when the aircraft was totally fueled and in a "heavy take-off" situation! I loved the Stratofortress, what an impressive aircraft that was! (If for some reason the B-52 would have had to do a touch-and-go, (like at an air show) it would NOT have been fully fueled.)
why no put some sensor to detect tailstrike with 100% accuracy?
mkonvisar123 it might detect clouds rains etc.
@@peerbrent no, when you turn it off just after take off
Witold Tomczyk yes great idea
These videos are very valuable for self-taught airline pilots such as myself.
Just one question: did you, Mentour, ever tailstrike your own aircraft (not in a simulator)?
A sensor would be a logical addition to avoid a possible catastrophic situation but as we have recently seen, Boeing would probably charge close to 100K for that "option" as we can't give away safety features. Just look at not making the MCAS read off one sensor and charging 80K to add a line of text to the display to warn of AOA error.
Do they add some extra protection coating at the tail region to absorb the heat and damage being caused in case of a tail strike?
Probably..
I guess this is also the reason why 737 landings in general are firm. You can't rotate much with such little clearance at the back. So that is also why the tail of every modern aircraft (777, A350) has a straight taper at the rear.
How much Tail Clearence does an A340-600 or 747-400 have
Mentour?
I experienced a heavy tail strike flying out of Hong Kong. It made a really loud bang. No one seemed fazed and we continued onto our 6 hour journey to Beijing. Unsettling to say the least.
Why does the cabin crew have to rely on hearing a noise? Couldn't a sensor be used?
That would be a good idea, yes.
I would think that in such a dicey situation a sensor however flawed or of limited use would be more reliable than the shell-like ears of a pretty stewardess!
I have a parking sensor on my car which let's out a hysterical beeeeep when I am less than 0.30 metres from an obstruction.
What my car can do Boeing can do better...and considering the gravity of the issue the sensor could even be use and throw basis.
You will hear a tail strike, in fact most of the passengers will.
Im pretty sure the ppl in the back are gonna hear a plane dragging on concrete lol thats not very quiet
I've been waiting very patiently for that aircraft balancing episode- this is the second episode I've watched where you mention that you will do one. I'll continue to wait patiently as a mouse but if I don't get my curiosity satiated soon I may need to cut myself. ;)
Can you do a video explaining trim and the trim wheel?
Already done my friend! Look for it!
found it, thank you.
A SAS MD 80 crashed into the runway with the tail first. The engines almost fell off the aircraft which was scrapped after that "landing." Just a couple of months later, on the same airport, the same almost happened to another SAS aircraft with me on board. The aircraft just fell down on the runway when it seemed like it was stalling.
What would the penalty be for a pilot who damages a plane due to tailstrike?
Retraining
Gets skinned alive!
He would be sent to the eastern front.
They would probably investigate and maybe send to retraining.
Take it out of your paycheck.
I often wondered about a tail strike thanks for your explanation on the issue
Well illustrated
1 meter? :)
Almost. :) check the whole video for the answer, I hope you like it!
I had guessed that too...
@@MentourPilot
With an airplane full of sensors the pilots relying on what or what not might be heard or felt by the aft sitting cabin crew sound a bit antiquated to me.
That so called shue ( honeycomb material) mentioned has really no sensor fitted ? Hard to believe........
Great Petter! As allways. Thank you for using the picture I sent you.
Do you need to land always on the touchdown zone of the runway?
Yes, we do.
Nice job on this one. Easygoing and natural!
1.5 meters
Less-than-full flap configurations during landing (flaps jammed, crosswinds etc.) will also increase the risk of tailstrikes.
how old do you have to be to start learning to fly and how can you start learning to fly??
I believe there is no minimum age limit on learning how to fly in the USA, but you have to be a certain age to take your solo flight
what is the best way to start learning to fly?
Fantastic video. The cockpit of 737 looks soooo gracious. That windshield behind you😍😍😍 Yeah, the iconic Boeing windshield
Ok so you're telling me that I this day and age of technology, that there are no sensors in the tail that can tell that there was a tail strike? Even cheap cars have bumper sensors than can sense an object within a few feet. I don't get it?
The purpose of that is, so they have to visually inspect the tail area of the aircraft, to avoid a sensor second guess.
@@cesarquintana9034 If it was my plane there would be no second guessing. A mechanical switch, non electronic type , would be fail safe. Still I bet tail strikes are one in 10000 takeoffs. But, wouldn't want to be in the air guessing either way!
Don't forget that those cars have raised in price significantly over the last several years. A big part of that increase is those extra sensors and computers
Excellent video Captain! 👍🏻
Is it easy to tail strike or is it one of those things a pilot doesn't want to admit to when it happens?
It can happen if you are not careful but its quite rare. We have maybe 3-5 every year in thousands of flights.
Mentour Pilot thankkyou sir.
Mentour Pilot
ATT: VMU.!
I saw an f16 hit by a rookie
I flew the 737-400 which also had tail bumper. Good video.
Good info,thk you.
I’m glad you liked it!
I know of 2 tail strikes that occurred with Ryanair aircraft at STN airport in the last 10 years. On both occasions a mistake was made by the dispatcher when calculating the load sheet; which wasn't spotted by either Captain. On at least one of these occasions the load sheet was out by 10,000kg.
But isn't the shoe going to protect the tail? Or do you have to land even if you have the protection?
No, it doesn’t protect much, you have to land in any case.
But if you put some soap at the shoe, the strike will be quite smooth :D
I see where your going here, an ounce of prevention = a pound of cure
:-) exactly
“Most of the weight put over the Center of gravity” that sounds confusing because the center of gravity shifts when the weight does, therefore the center of gravity isn’t a definite point. Of course you have your envelope. Talking about the BEW center of gravity? Because the plane I fly is out of CG until you put weight (pilots and equipment) in the front of the plane, thus shifting the center of gravity. If we loaded the plane at it’s empty CG, it would be out of tolerance. We had a few tail strikes this year, one of which was from a former 737 captain. He would always do a huge flair, so it was just a matter of time. We operate the BAE-146-200. THat aircrafts ideals landing attitude is about 5 degrees nose up. The other one was due to a mis calculated landing weight (bugged lower than actual), so the plane came in hard and had excessive flair trying to lower the rate of descent. It actually led to a belly strike as well. I know you’re dumbing down your explanations, just something I noticed.
I was just curious if Pilots are ever taught to take the Earth's rotation into account?
no they fly relative to the gravitational normal and the air they are moving through. the rotation is only 15 degrees per hour, it is irrelevant. it does affect the Gyroscopes, but they correct for it.
Helicopters pilots ?
Yes; if you’re flying a long distance (perhaps cross-continental) then over time, your linear flight path will curve instead of your intended straight line, so you’ll end up many miles off your intended flight path if you don’t account for it. This is called the Coriolis effect and is due to the rotation of the earth. Other than that, no not really because planes fly in relation to the air.
Excellent. Next time when I have to land an aircraft (as a passenger) I know how to avoid tail strike.😉
Why do you say rotate instead of pitch?
You rotate on the gear and on the pitch axis
I'm not into aviation, but youtube suggested me your videos and I watch them, because they are interesting.
What about tail strike between a pilot and the stewardis? 😍😍😍
Landed a few days ago at Mahon in a Boeing 737 Max8. This was by far the heaviest landing I have ever felt. The aircraft seemed to slam onto the undercarriage so violently accompanied with a loud "Crack" behind me in the rear of the aircraft (sitting in seat 20a close to the trailing edge). I know the undercarriage is designed to take a fair bit of punishment but this seemed way too excessive and violent with the crack sounding very structural.
3 bananas high!
Not far off actually!
The fact you replied to my joke made me laugh :)
Are you 9gager sir?
perhaps :)
Usually any 'stretch' version of an aircraft is susceptible to a tail strike and so are fitted with tail stike sensors, or at least everyone i have worked on has, for example 737-800, 777-300, 747-400, 787-8 and c130 stretch.
Did you know Boeing just derived their 10,000th 737!
when
Adrien Diaz today
Today the first 737-700 max is being delivered as I send out this message it’s been a big few days for Boeing
The flying squirrel I'm pretty sure it was the first flight, not delivery
SWA got that baby!
I was in my last duty in a SH-3 Sea King as Sea Air Rescue Corpsman in summer of 1973 when we were practicing auto-rotation. I was only aboard to get my "flight hours" of course, $80 per month. So etc. etc. etc. until "power-power-power" was called for by pilot. I did not see the first officer reach-up for the throttles for at least five seconds. Hard tail strike. Wet undies. Parts of the craft flying away from me visible through the side window, most notably the drive shaft. Pilots were just barely behind me when we jumped out.
Navy asked me what happened and ignored what I told them I saw. "Component Failure" they declared. Officers stick together. Another time we landed on our fuel tanks because gear had not been lowered.
But the Navy gave me far more than it demanded in return. Including a nice college education. Do not thank me for my service, I should thank YOU.
Why airplane doesn’t have CCTV camera?
Your mean like a red light camera, so the airlines can send the pilots a ticket in the mail ?
@@bigtom2808 he means video recording in flight so for evidence like plane crashed NTSB can see the video what pilot doing.
I would like to know that also
I asked myself this question for a long time.
Not to mention that pilots cannot see the engines from the cockpit
The 777-300 has a strut on the rear wheel sets to stop the pivot about the wheel carriage, this effectively makes the plane rotate on the rear wheels on takeoff lifting the plane up slightly to reduce tail strike...
3 feet 1 M
Great guess! Have s look at the whole video for the answer!
I'm only 1 for 2. I got the winglet answer pretty close at a little over your height. :)
But 31 cm, some Jeeps have better ground clearence.
1ft=30 cm 1m=100cm 100/30=3.33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 (not 3 feet)
OK 0.587613 smoots then
oh and its 1 foot = 30.48 cm :)
Great Videos! Thank you!