- Член од
- 17 март 2005
- Мислења
- 11.493
- Поени од реакции
- 1.584
За малку и тоа на полетување.......погрешни податоци внесени во компјутерот значело дека авионот не можел да полета на време. Првиот офицер додал гас, пак исто, а авинот полетал сосема на крајот од пистата кога капетанот “нагазил’’ до даска. При полетувањето авионот ја удрил опашката од пистата два пати како и закачил дел од опремата во тревата после пистата...
Computer error caused Emirates A340 tail strike
Steve Creedy, Aviation writer|April 30, 2009
Article from: The Australian
AN incorrect entry into a computer resulted in an Emirates jet struggling to take off at the end of a Melbourne runway as its tail struck the ground.
The wrong figure meant the jet – with 257 passengers 14 cabin crew and four flight crew – failed to take off when expected as it approached the end of the runway at Melbourne Airport.
This prompted the first officer to apply more power and caused the tail to hit the runway but the aircraft still failed to climb until the captain called for maximum power.
The Airbus A340-500’s tail scraped the runway twice more and twice after it left the runway before it became fully airborne. It also hit equipment on a grassed area at the end of a runway.
An Australian Transport Bureau report released today found that the aircraft already taking off on reduced power when the crew used a weight that was 100 tonnes below the jet’s actual weight to calculate take-off performance.
“The result of that incorrect take-off weight was to produce a thrust setting and take-off reference speeds that were lower than those required for the aircraft’s actual weight,” the ATSB said.
The aircraft dumped fuel over Port Phillip Bay before landing safely back at the airport and there were no injuries reported.
But the lower skin panels had been abraded by the contact with the runway surface and a service panel was ripped off. The rear pressure bulkhead was also damaged and fuselage ribs were deformed and, in some cases, cracked.
The airline said today it had yet to decide whether the plane would be repaired in Australia or sent back to the manufacturer in France.
Both pilots have since resigned and the airline has put in place additional procedures to guard against a recurrence of the event.
Computer error caused Emirates A340 tail strike
Steve Creedy, Aviation writer|April 30, 2009
Article from: The Australian
AN incorrect entry into a computer resulted in an Emirates jet struggling to take off at the end of a Melbourne runway as its tail struck the ground.
The wrong figure meant the jet – with 257 passengers 14 cabin crew and four flight crew – failed to take off when expected as it approached the end of the runway at Melbourne Airport.
This prompted the first officer to apply more power and caused the tail to hit the runway but the aircraft still failed to climb until the captain called for maximum power.
The Airbus A340-500’s tail scraped the runway twice more and twice after it left the runway before it became fully airborne. It also hit equipment on a grassed area at the end of a runway.
An Australian Transport Bureau report released today found that the aircraft already taking off on reduced power when the crew used a weight that was 100 tonnes below the jet’s actual weight to calculate take-off performance.
“The result of that incorrect take-off weight was to produce a thrust setting and take-off reference speeds that were lower than those required for the aircraft’s actual weight,” the ATSB said.
The aircraft dumped fuel over Port Phillip Bay before landing safely back at the airport and there were no injuries reported.
But the lower skin panels had been abraded by the contact with the runway surface and a service panel was ripped off. The rear pressure bulkhead was also damaged and fuselage ribs were deformed and, in some cases, cracked.
The airline said today it had yet to decide whether the plane would be repaired in Australia or sent back to the manufacturer in France.
Both pilots have since resigned and the airline has put in place additional procedures to guard against a recurrence of the event.
