A Routine Emirates Takeoff Quickly Turns into Every Pilot's Nightmare | Terror in Johannesburg
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 жов 2024
- Find out how a routine takeoff performed by an Emirates Airbus A340-300 (operating as Emirates Flight 764) nearly turned into a near disaster.
Get early access to future videos and support the channel here:
• / theflightchannel
Check out the Official Shop with merchandise here:
• teespring.com/...
Follow TheFlightChannel
• Facebook: / theflightchannel
• Instagram: / tfc_aviation
Business Enquiries
• Email: contact.theflightchannel@gmail.com
This video has been recorded and edited in 4K resolution and 60FPS.
A further contributing factor would be to transfer two pilots who are both new to the aircraft there simultaneously instead of having each fly with someone who already knows that type for a bit first.
My first thought, exactly! Everything else might not have happened if there was just an experienced pilot on this plane sitting in the cockpit!
I would certainly hope that this near catastrophe prompted a change in policy to ALWAYS have an experienced pilot on board whether they are flying or observing. Seems like a no-brainer.
Definitely seems weird to have 2 newbies!
Yes, but that can be difficult if the aircraft type is new to the entire airline, meaning that the airline has NO pilots experienced with the new aircraft.
That is standard practice with airlines.
File this under "responsible but not guilty" - they clearly made mistakes BUT everything their training and experience provided them reinforced that mistake. I'm glad no one was hurt learning this lesson.
Yeegads, what ever happened to 'fly the airplane'...Rotate on gyro, get nose to where ya want it, keep it there, and lift off. yikes.
@@OldGlaseye-gf7si They did "fly the airplane" - and jargon aside, your list o' stuff to do wasn't what they (apparently) were taught/trained to do.
And since they were current and qualified on that type I don't doubt their choices were based on what the understood were the right decisions.
They just learned bad techniques and applied those poor techniques at the worst possible time.
Like I said, I'm glad the lessons learned in this instance didn't come at the cost of anyone's life
The first indication should have been when they both said hello to the cabin crew, turned right and walked the length of the cabin to look for the cockpit door.
@@a24396 Too many airline guys show an amazing lack of air sense and basic flying skills. And yes, I am a pilot...20 years flying fighters in the USN...Before you say it, I took off from a concrete runway more than from an aircraft carrier.
@@pomerau 🤣🤣🤣
Glad everyone survived, that was a close one.
Despite apparently doing everything by the checklist comfirmation bias, combined with no actual flight hours between the two pilots was nearly a recipe for disaster. Boggles my mind that they would not have an experienced PIC in the cockpit.
Most of the commentators on this channel I'm sure have plenty of experience and are aware of many aspects regrading aircraft management but even for me as ignorant as I am of such matters it is totally engrossing and addictive. Great job thank you✌️
I'm so glad no one got seriously hurt in this one. The Flight Channel always gives us great visual stories. Thank you.
Taking off at Jo-burg is terrifying enough due to the thin air / altitude …. I honestly couldn’t believe how long it takes to get up enough speed to rotate. It’s a seriously long runway and most of the planes are big and heavy and going a long way to Europe or the US.
Our runways are 11155 and 14495ft respectively in length, flights operating in hot & high conditions (widebodies and narrowbodies) typically do not have an issue as the runway is long enough for rotation. This would be an isolated case as we haven't had any similar incidents in Joburg since the EK near disaster
I agree the dipshit pilot should have been looking out the window and not at the instruments and he would have known he wasnt lifting off quick enough, i was a pilot on the space shuttle so i know my stuff@@flywithAC2312
Imagine being a passenger and seeing the runway finish, yet your plane didn't lift off!
@RobloxianSora Nice!
a very scary thought
@RobloxianSora wtf? When?
Or landing i was on a plane that keep going on a winter, i should say i dint fly when is cold. Not anymore
We are going farming. 🥹
"We pay for all of runway, we use all of runway!"
Airlines love to set the minimum power settings, fuel saving and noise abatement. Many pilots no longer are able to bring themselves to fly an aircraft by hand in an emergency, especially using an emergency application of Power. Student days, Power, Attitude, Trim.
Indeed. Add to this, too much trust in technology. Pilots become systems managers rather than pilots.
Things have changed a lot since this, and similar incidents. Hand flying is encouraged and the notion that pilots can’t fly is, generally, wrong.
When Emirates had the A340’s, their fleet was pretty cool, and that’s coming from a Boeing guy. For a brief period they had:
- A380-800’s
- B747-400F’s
- A340-500’s
- A340-300’s
- A330-200’s
- B777-300’s
- B777-200/ER’s
- B777-200LR’s
Their fleet was pretty diverse for a bit but now mostly consists of 2 types until they get the A350’s, B787’s, & 777X’s.
I wish they had bought like 20 747-8's maybe have 10 for passenger only and 10 for Freighter use
@@Plqnes they clearly love their long haul double deckers, so it was interesting to not pick those up.
apostrophes aren't needed for making plurals, only for possession
cant imagine what the passengers went through awhile this was happening..
the passengers went through the runway beacons
Sit back and enjoy the movie!
Prob a little poo in the shorts :)
That really Depends.
@@georgeedward1226 Good pun, lol! I'm glad they could land on whatever remaining tires they had or they might have skidded off the other end of the runway.
They ended up being 'trained' into making an error.
OMG..!! It seems really a miracle!
Never mind of an aircraft that managed to get airborne after running on the grass passed the runeway…😓😓😓😓😓
Excited for this! Can't believe we are so early! Your video on the parachute jump really was powerful. Great work as always.
Thanks!
Thanks you guys/girls. Love your channel!❤❤
I found this AND your Emirates Flight 407 video next to each other in my recommended
I remember taking a BA 747 (unusual because I managed mostly to avoid BA's ridiculous pricing and snotty attitude 35 years of long-haul business travel) from Nairobi and I remember the pilot announcing that due to the altitude and the full load of PAX, fuel and cargo the plane would take one minute to get airborne but not to worry as NBO has one of the longest runways in the world. So I timed it and he was right, one minute then a very gentle climb indeed.
Excellent channel. Love every one of these videos. Haven't been off the ground in 40 years, except on my simulator. Peace.
I presume you're an American without a passport. Just joking.
No joke it's true. If I had want or reason to travel outside of here, I'd see you on the next flight. Come stay with you for a bit? Peace.@@Tafa-Mapa
stop flying 15 years ago and let my son fly while i hang in the back with the grand kids--never have loved flying so much since i do that.....had as many as 3 of em sleeping on me on the couch...heaven
Emirates do really well keeping all the incidents out of the media , thanks for making this
You are very right. They hate bad publicity. A similar one like this was EK407 from Melbourne involving an A340-500 where Pilot entered wrong takeoff data. He entered 262,000 instead of 362,000. Wrong takeoff calculation by FMS, little power on takeoff
Apparently the aircraft had enough unburst tires and undamged flap drive mechanism remaining to enable it to land safely upon its return to the airport. Once again, everyone was lucky. But they certainly had an exciting take off with lots of extra noise from colliding with various objects beyond the end of the runway.
Exciting 😂😂😂😂. More like a horror ride!
Tech does NOT excuse you from reality...Fly the Plane! If what you see isn't right react!
I recall a super long takeoff at the old Denver Stapleton airport. Thought we would never get off the ground. Scary. BTW, Emirates is now rated as the 4th best airline in the world.
yes thats because they only fly boeing planes now
Apart from the largest fleet of A380s of any carrier @@petercarter2925
Yeah the A340-300 is equipped with 5 APUs
arw imagine the captain taking so much time and precaution full in length briefing and every caution but still almost couldn't lift the plane. just glad that everyone was safe!
The quality of TheFlightChannel"s videos never ceases to amaze me!
Aerosource moment😮💨
Following the training and still ending up with this
"This is the first time either pilot has operated this plane outside of simulations."
Jumping Jesus on a Christmas cookie!😱
I agree ………what were they thinking? And , how was the landing I wonder if the tyres had burst ?
Emirates has been seen a number of times on this channel showing their pilot's amazing lack of skill. Every private pilot I know thinks this is nearly unbelievable. Due to their load and the aircraft's previous poor performance, they should have used full throttle from the start.
It does make you wonder if and where that is still allowed. It's certainly not a sentence any passenger wants to read. You'd expect at least one to have flown it enough before to have become accustomed, always.
What if the aircraft type is new to the entire airline, meaning that the airline has NO pilots experienced with the new aircraft?
Things are busy, and COVID...
very lucky people
Interesting video, thank you very much.
amazing goodjob bro
So, an odd instance where training actually worked against the pilots?
similar too the full rudder kick the pilot was told to do in training for AA crash in new york a few years back for wake turbulance if my memeory is correct ?
@@hachimaru295 Yeah, unfortunately that instance the pilot was following what training was telling him to do, which sadly resulted in too much stress being put on the horizontal stabilizer
"Hairdryer" A340. That model was under-powered.
Captain: Hey did you play simulator last night?
FO: Yeah, did you?
Captain: Yep played it too, nice graphics!
FO: Sweet, I think we're ready to fly!
LOLL
The A340 was notorious for being seriously underpowered.
Having had to fly in than multiple times I can say that they scared the hell out me. They used consume far more runway that I have experienced in any other airliner, take far longer to reach cruising altitude and also fly slower than other aircraft. The slow speed was actually apparent in the schedule, being about 45 minutes longer for a transatlantic than in say a 747 or MD-11.
Not surprising when you see that it is powered by 4 hairdryers.
Also Johannesburg is no joke - hot & high. For that reason, most long distance flights are schedule for long after dark.
Quick question that I've had for a while from watching many of these videos... when an aircraft overruns the runway on takeoff or landing, and damages the lights and antennas that are there... can that runway then no longer be used until these have been replaced? And how long would that take, and who would bear the cost of that?
Unless it is something that is actually required for the runway, like the actual surface itself, almost everything else can be listed as being failed. They took out some of the localiser antenna. The airport just lists (NOTAM) the LOC, and therefore ILS, as being unserviceable. Aircraft can still land on the runway, they just need to fly a different approach.
@@EdOeuna Yeah, reminds me of Air Canada 769 at San Fran.
Mistake #1. Pairing two pilots with zero experience on the type. Just WOW.
Agreed, but wow is a stupid comment!
They had plenty of experience with other types of Airbus with the same type rating requirement. It’s no different to current EK pilots flipping between the 77L and 77W.
@@rossbrown6641Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Nah that was smooth as hell at 11:18 nicely done.
nice and clear animation
Handsome Canadian Captain. 😅
Never heard of a Emirates A340. Thats new.
Actually the A340 was part of Emirates' initial fleet..they retired most aircraft in their fleet and only kept Boeing 777s and A380s in service..they even once had A330s, A310s and other similar aircraft
No wonder why some people have called the A340-200/300 models “trash” due to being underperforming of takeoff. 😂
Why is no one talking about how the exact same thing happened with a emirates a340 in melbourne and its also on the flight channel
I LOVE THIS CHANNEL 👍👍
& we love you too !
Flying is safe until something goes wrong
Facts
my heart beat slows down toward the end of the video when the plane landed without hurting anyone...in the plane and on ground.
So, I have been watching your videos for quite some time, and here are some that i am requesting that you add.
Day 2.
Pulkovo Aviation Enterprise flight 612
Korean airlines 858
1983 Chosonminhang Ilyushin Il-62 crash
TAN 414
Pulkovo Aviation Enterprise Flight 9560
Ural Airlines Flight 178
Libyan Arab airlines flight 114
Libyan Arab airline flight 1103
TWA 800 (Not the one that crashed in New York, but the one that crashed in Italy)
Kenya airways flight 431
Aero flight 311
LOT Polish airlines flight 007
LOT Polish airlines flight 5055
Delta airlines flight 723
World airways flight 30
Eastern airlines flight 375
Air Greenland 3275
Ariania airlines 701
Air Canada 621
Vnukovo flight 2801
UTA 120
UTA 772
United airlines flight 227
OMG. Well OK. LOL.
As long as airlines compute and use the minimum speed for takeoff to use the minimum amount of fuel, anything out of the ordinary will cause serious trouble. Risking lives to save money is always unacceptable.
Doing takeoffs constantly at TOGA thrust also has its risks. You could end up with more engines blowing up in flight like that Southwest airlines one. And having an engine failure during takeoff at TOGA means more thrust to push you off the runway if you don’t counter it in time
@@tomstravels520 Takeoff/go around thrust isn't necessary, but much more than minimum thrust is appropriate. According to your logic, takeoff/go around thrust is never a good idea.
@@perniciouspete4986 I said using TOGA thrust CONSTANTLY. I never said using it is bad. It just comes with its own risks and if you don’t need to use it then reduce the risks by not using it. Do you red line your cars engine all the time when you accelerate?
@@perniciouspete4986airlines don’t calculate minimum thrust. The aircraft has to be able to more than cope with an engine failure at v1, taking into consideration pressure altitude on the day and all obstacles in the area.
The Airbus A340-300 was equipped with CFM-56 turbofans, the same type used in the 737 and A320. This made the A340-300 badly underpowered. The reason for this engine selection was that Rolls Royce's geared turbofan prototype was not making enough progress for Rolls to put it into production. Ultimately, Rolls' experiment failed, and today, Pratt and Whitney's GTF rules that market. Later models of the A340 had substantially more powerful engines. It is essential that flight crews know their engines. They should know what thrust to expect at varous settings, and how long it takes for a given engine to spool up to the requested thrust. A B-52 's TF-33 engines require eight seconds to spool up; an F/A-18's GE engines can spool up from idle to full afterburner in three seconds. A pilot's using a "tip" first demands that he know the maneuvering characteristics of the aircraft without the "tip."
How much was this to repair? Whoops. Full throttle my G!!!
Considering that they were aware of the "High density airport" and the "sluggish performance" of the aircraft from the beginning, why not take off with full TOGA?
If you can reduce maintenance costs by using reduced power and still be able to climb away safely then it’ll be done
Thank you for your reply. I am aware of the reduced takeoff power and engine de-rate techniques that airlines use to reduce wear and tear and extend engine life, but since the pilot is the last authority over how the airplane will be flown and specifically if things don't add up and in doubt of the performance of the aircraft, maybe better be on the cautious and safe side than worry about company policy that might fly you to the ground and kill everyone onboard. Thankfully it didn't end bad this time. Again, I am not to judge the pilots actions but just my thoughts.
@@connectpro1264- they didn’t doubt the thrust they calculated. For them everything added up correctly.
@@connectpro1264 I'm still wondering how this damaged plane was able to land?
This is a hypothetical question as no pilot would do this knowing the damage but if they had decided to continue on with this journey would they still have made it to their destination?
theres not enough info on the damage to the flaps etc
Likely the pressure hull was compromised by tire debris and flaps would not stow properly. So, no. They would have to fly low and slow and run out of fuel.
They couldnt know the extend of the damage. They did the safe thing and returned to the airport. If they would have made it to their destination or not is something that has to be tried out, with possible catastrophe as an answer.
Blimey! What a fright.
An FedEx plane had to do an emergency belly landing at Chattanooga, Tennessee someone time this month
Why would they pair two pilots, neither of whom had any actual experience flying the aircraft type?
They did. Both were experienced on A340’s and A330’s. It’s a common rating.
That first takeoff engine sounded like my blower powered helium balloon lawn chair experimental excursion craft . . . just saying
Still, he should have checked the oleo twice, ie, after full lading
At 11:08 I think you mean to say that the captain moved the side stick back, but failed to maintain it at the 2/3 back position.
I’m not a pilot, but I took that to mean he should’ve increased it instead of keeping in at 9°, as he was too scared about a tail strike
@@hachimaru295no, he should have pulled back to the 9 degree mark then held the sidestick. What he did was hold it a 9 degrees then as the nose lifted up he slowly lowered the sidestick so the mark stayed at 9 degrees causing the nose to drop
@@tomstravels520 Exactly. I still can’t wrap my head around how an Airbus pilot in the left seat could just let the stick go back to neutral on rotation.
@@tomstravels520 thanks for the update !
@@tomstravels520 the narrative failed me regarding stick order vs pitch command. 9° of back stick obviously didn't give 9° of rotation, but I watched that part 3 times and it never got clearer.
That is a problem of cockpit communications which is likely to continue. Better an incident than a catastrophe . . .
At least they noticed their mistake and heading back to the airport.. I've seen so many case where they've tried to fly with damage and it's been catastrophic!
how many cases precisely?????
Scary ship very lucky.
This is what happens when computer nerds try to tell pilots how to fly.
Re: The Air France Airbus crash at the European Air Show several years ago.
When 4.4 km of runway length are not enough to take off, you know that you are doing it wrong! Using up the entire runway may save you some fuel but it is not the safest way... So how much thrust did they use? 80%?
It was enough to take off. The pilot didn’t rotate correctly. Did you actually pay attention to the video?
they only had 28% throttle he pushed the toga button too slowly
@@petercarter2925 you don’t push a TOGA button on Airbus. You just push the levers to the FLX or TOGA detent
Come on if you think the aircraft isn't performing well ....PUNCH IT.....give it full throttle immediately and don't wait till you're at the end of the runway.
Yes, a favorite saying of mine: pin it, to win it! Works every time!
There has been a long running concern that relying on technology has drawn down basic piloting skills or put another way, what to do when things go wrong. I think that this is less of a problem with former military pilots.
0:03 & 0:05 aerosourse moment
In memory of the 25 runway lights lost.
Wow!
This is why you don't lend your car to friends.. They always return it all beat up
Correct.
Flying is not dangerous, it's the sudden stop when you hit the ground that is dangerous.
😂😂😂 JAJAJAJA 🤣😁👍
Not necessarily. You could have a mid-air collision for example, you wouldn't have to impact the ground to die.
Anyone else watching from South Africa ? 🇿🇦
I'm from Colombia, North of South America 😮
This plane has no flaps.
I would think the airline wouldn’t allow two pilots who have never flown a certain aircraft, to be the ones to do it. You’d think they’d have one with experience along with the one with no experience. But I’m not a pilot or the controller of an airline so all I have is common sense to go on.
I don't understand why airlines are allowed to write their own training/operation manuals. They should all follow the rules, for aircraft type, set by the manufacturer, who should know better than anyone.
$$$$$ - identify cost savings. Money is the root cause of many issues in the world. In this instance it backfired because of the expense to repair the airplane and damage to the runway.
Even when written out in black and white, there is still some interpretation and nuance required. They do attempt to precisely follow the exact guidelines written, but in this instance the 'tip' was not from the documentation, but was a 'technique' (those in the know will roll their eyes at this familiar term) given to him - NOT official instructions. BUT, it would have come from experience derived from fellow pilots, although he didn't get the full understanding (keeping the SSI at 9 degress in relation to the horizon as opposed to the aircraft nose I'm guessing).
It is impossible to just read the manual and then fly the aircraft perfectly - you HAVE to take instruction from instructors, pick up experience gained by fellow crewmembers etc. What may seem like a glaring error to those not in the industry, is normal practice for pilots around the world. You talk, you share experiences, you share tips. In this case, a combination of environmental factors put an already feeble aircraft into a critical performance zone, and an incorrect understanding of technique pushed the situation over the edge.
Aircraft manufacturers also provide recommendations for how to operate the aircraft, the airlines incorporate their own SOPs with the manufacturers recommendations. All manuals have to be approved by the national regulatory body.
I know it's all about passenger comfort and saving money with fuel but, I'm always fascinated when I hear that maximum thrust wasn't selected for takeoff. I know, I know it's much more complex than that but I'd rather they err on the side of caution and just give that sucker all the beans when they start the takeoff roll. I for one, am not gonna mind the extra acceleration and getting thrown back in the seat a little.
Do you red line your car's engine every time you accelerate even when you don't need to?
@@tomstravels520,
Good point but to clarify, this specific flight and the conditions they were facing perhaps wide open throttle would have been tempting. And the engine/redline thing - can’t say because we ditched ICE vehicles for EVs years ago so can’t relate.
There are different levels of thrust reduction available to the crew, but SOP is usually to reduce thrust as much as possible to get the best life out of the engines. When I was checked out on planes and cut loose, I always chose a thrust reduction that was approximately half way between full thrust and full reduced thrust until I felt comfortable with the handling and performance characteristics of the plane.
There's no way you can feel that right out of the sim, so I used the word safety when question about it....the conversation was pretty short after that.....33 yrs in and Retired now.
I can't believe they'd have a flight crew who'd never piloted that particular model of aircraft before. Usually you should have a pilot/copilot crew where one of them has experience with the aircraft even if it's the other's first time flying it.
What if the aircraft type is new to the entire airline, meaning that the airline has NO pilots experienced with the new aircraft?
Then you have familiarisation flights without passengers and cabin crew, Not exactly rocket science. The error was doing familiarisation solely on sims.@@timonsolus
Emirates are about to receive A350’s and 777X’s. None of their pilots will have experience with these aircraft types beyond the type rating which will be from the sim. Clearly EK can employ pilots from other airlines, for their experience, but there will be a steep learning curve for all those pilots.
ive always found 30 mins max in the simulator is enough for me to get the hang of it, i have buried any in the ground yet@@EdOeuna
Very tragic
Hard to believe two pilots who had never flown the aircraft type before were rostered together!
Haha Emirates did the same thing in Melbourne Australia. Draged the tail off the runway onto the grass before getting airborne
awesome
Why the graphics quality is worse than ur previous videos???
Might depend which sim he’s using. This one is P3D and the black box A340-30 which isn’t the best
@@tomstravels520 but p3d used to be so good until Microsoft flight simulator came…
We were always asked this question when something dumb happened..."Who's flying the jet"?
You gotta slow down the captions just a little bit. For us non-pilots here, it’s hard to grasp the information at that speed.
Precisely why flying the numbers is discouraged. Rotation and flare are entirely visual manoeuvre’s. Given the length of the fuselage, tail strikes are a possibility, but a consistent 3 degree/second rotation will ensure they achieve V2 by 35 feet and tail strike margins are maintained. Rostering has a role here too, when they decided to put two inexperienced pilots on type together. Another reason why we have minimum cockpit experience.
Shouldn't they always have at least one of the pilots be familiar and experienced with the aircraft? Glad it didn't end badly!
On the bright side… he didn’t get a Tailstrike😳🤣🤦♀️
very similar to the Brisbane incident, also with an a340 300.
Hadn't heard of either of these incidents with the A343, I knew of the A345 incident at Melbourne.
Yeah pretty unknown, but the flight channel had a vid on the Brisbane one
So they had a problem flying an Airbus "pig". But nobody dares touch Airbus!
A) I would not do a flex power take off high and heavy. B) The instruments are there to help fly the airplane, not the other way around. C) So afraid of a tail strike that you don’t pitch up when rolling OFF THE END OF THE RUNWAY? D) This was a failure of training, normal SOPs (flex power) and basic piloting skills.
I'm not a pilot but how could you not pull UP on the stick when you saw the runway ending? After the warning from the co-pilot don't you think he would have looked up from his instruments.
The co-pilot should have pulled back on his own side stick himself, instead of only warning the captain.
@@timonsolusno, only one person flies the plane at a time. If both sidesticks were moved back that would add the 2 inputs together and likely result in aircraft pitch up hard and tailstrike.
@@tomstravels520 : No, the Airbus computer averages out the inputs from the pilot’s and co-pilot’s sticks.
@@timonsolus it doesn’t average. If that was true then both sidesticks half back would mean a combined half back input…..but it doesn’t. They are summed so both half back means an input of full back. If one is full left and other is fully right this adds to 0 input.
“The system adds the signals of both pilots algebraically, the total is limited to the signal that would result from the maximum deflection of a single sidestick”
@@tomstravels520 : Sorry, I don’t believe you.
It's 10:30 similar of incident 407 accident
Both pilots in an aircraft type neither had ever flown before? With passengers? Who made that decision?
Someone sitting behind a desk who hasn't flown an airplane ever 😮😮😮
It’s a common rating, so no different to Emirates pilots swapping between the 77L and 77W.
Why wasn't full thrust selected from the start, if the aircraft was known to be underpowered and sluggish. I don't get it.
Increase engine life and reduce maintenance costs
@@tomstravels520 money over safety then....figures
@@michaeldowd8422 who says it’s over safety? Did you pay attention to the video? The computer calculated they had enough room to takeoff with reduced thrust and they did. It was the pilot who made a mistake by messing up the rotation. Full thrust was not required to get the plane airborne. Using full thrust at takeoff can come with its own potential safety issues including increased likelihood of another SWA1380 incident. If they used TOGA all the time…..guess who is paying for the maintenance…..yeah…you as the paying customer
@@tomstravels520 at full power, the pilots error would not have led to the aircraft being damaged, did you study physics at school??
@@michaeldowd8422 if the pilot had done the rotation correctly it also would not have led to damage. Did you go to flight school? There is absolutely nothing wrong with using reduced power takeoff if your performance calculator says you can do it. It’s done all the time on probably 80-90% of takeoffs
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TWO PILOTS WITH NO ACTUAL FLYING EXPERIENCE ON THE TYPE WOULD EVER BE ALLOWED IN THE SAME COCKPIT!!
The T/O data should have taken care of all of this. You just don't push the throttles and hope for the best.
As a low time private who hasn't flown in decades I have to wonder if excessive focus on procedures has dulled the stick and rudder "feel" of commercial pilots.
It would seem logical that if the aircraft is in the proper configuration with adequate airspeed and is still not lifting off one would increase the angle of attack before reaching the end of the runway.
I suppose one could say fly the airplane not the procedure.
Am I off track here?
2000+ jet takeoffs and I’ve never seen the nose come down once and stay there. Seems like common sense you’d pull the nose up. Training must have terrified these guys about a tail strike. Can’t imagine such unacceptable performance
It's just a game of seconds and everything is over.
Hey man, i have a question, how did you make the BB a340 works properly, i have it but does not "follows" the inputs as the fslabs or any other airbus addon
But the question is, did he avoid a tail strike?
Like Gene Krantz said about Gemini 8: "they did it wrong because we trained them wrong".