No discussion of the Narita crash?

[Ron Garret]

Or did I just miss it?

[John Clear]

In article >,
Ron Garret > wrote:
>Or did I just miss it?

What is there to say? FedEx has had a bunch of similar MD-11
incidents and crashes (Since 1990, just FedEx MD-11s: Subic Bay:
a hull loss and tail strike*2; Memphis: tail strike; Anchorage:
tail strike*2; Newark: hull loss). The MD-11 is said to be very
pitch sensitive on landing, and the video of this crash seems to
indicate that.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
(John Clear) wrote:

> In article >,
> Ron Garret > wrote:
> >Or did I just miss it?
>
> What is there to say?

When has that ever stopped people on this NG?

> The MD-11 is said to be very
> pitch sensitive on landing, and the video of this crash seems to
> indicate that.

Looked like a normal landing to me. Nose came down a little hard. Then
all of a sudden it's airborne again, the nose drops, it porpoises, then
flops over onto its side. I have a hard time believing that was just
pilot error.

Note that some of the videos have the first part of the landing edited
out and start only after the plane is airborne again after the initial
touchdown.

rg

[Berry[_2_]]

In article >,
Ron Garret > wrote:

> In article >,
> (John Clear) wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Ron Garret > wrote:
> > >Or did I just miss it?
> >
> > What is there to say?
>
> When has that ever stopped people on this NG?
>
> > The MD-11 is said to be very
> > pitch sensitive on landing, and the video of this crash seems to
> > indicate that.
>
> Looked like a normal landing to me. Nose came down a little hard. Then
> all of a sudden it's airborne again, the nose drops, it porpoises, then
> flops over onto its side. I have a hard time believing that was just
> pilot error.
>
> Note that some of the videos have the first part of the landing edited
> out and start only after the plane is airborne again after the initial
> touchdown.
>
> rg

An airline pilot friend told me the MD-11 has an undersized tail and an
automated system to augment tail trim by pumping fuel around in the
back. That system is supposed to be turned off during landing. If not,
it can make the aircraft susceptible to PIO's, especially if there is
turbulence or shear.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 26, 10:43*pm, (John Clear) wrote:
> In article >,
> Ron Garret > wrote:
>
> >Or did I just miss it?
>
> What is there to say? *FedEx has had a bunch of similar MD-11
> incidents and crashes (Since 1990, just FedEx MD-11s: Subic Bay:
> a hull loss and tail strike*2; Memphis: tail strike; Anchorage:
> tail strike*2; Newark: hull loss). *The MD-11 is said to be very
> pitch sensitive on landing, and the video of this crash seems to
> indicate that.
>
> John
> --
> John Clear - * * * * * * * * *http://www..clear-prop.org/

Well, its nickname is the MD-911...

[[email protected]]

> In article >,
> > Ron Garret > wrote:
>
> > >Or did I just miss it?
>

This is from one of my closest friends, who is a FEDEX Captain and
knows the MD11 quite well:

"There is no consensus yet about the MD-11 crash, all we know is that
the conditions were very windy with high gusts. My own questions run
around the issue of the known or suspected lack of pitch authority in
the landing regime and/or whether they may have landed with the
engines unspooled because of the gusts. Either way I stand by my
initial and long standing feeling that the MD-11 is a snake bit piece
of sh*t. Like Dennis Miller says, "That's just my opinion I could be
wrong"."

Pogue