Herk hard landing - Afghanistan

[WeatherManC130]

At least they ran TOLD...

At least the gear was down

[Bronco130]

And landed at the right airport

[Tonka]

Touched down 27 knots fast but went off end at 49knots? Me thinks the toldenator needs fixing.

SIB is worth the read... but, WRT to your comment: it's not a linear relationship: a delta of 27 knots above 100 has more kinetic energy to dissipate than a 49 knot delta from 0.

I'm spit balling here: ~on the order of 3x?

http://www.groveairc...wbproducts.html

130,000# acft @ 50 knots (4 wheels with brakes): 3.6 Mil ft-lbs

130,000# acft @ 125 knots: 22 Mil ft-lbs

130,000# acft @ 150 knots: 32 Mil ft-lbs

Difference is about 10 Mil versus 3.6 Mil ft-lbs. At the high speed you dissipate 1/3 of your energy slowing through 1/6 of your speed. Versus at the slow speed you dissipate 1/10th of your energy slowing through 1/3 of your speed.

[xaarman]

Anything happen to the crew?

[moosepileit]

All sent to the C-17?

[HerkPerfMan]

Is the SIB or complete AIB report available to the public anywhere?

Having only read the exec summary, it doesn't sound like a brake energy problem but rather a ground roll problem. They probably didn't plan to land 27 knots high (you couldn't plan for that if you wanted to) or touch down 1500 ft down a high altitude, 6900 ft runway, but both would have significantly impacted any ground roll distance margin they may have had. Glad everyone made it out ok.

[Herk Driver]

Is the SIB or complete AIB report available to the public anywhere?

SIB reports are not ever "available to the public". Talk to your Safety shop.

The AIB is out and I haven't tried, but you should be able to get it here. https://www.efoia.af.mil/palMain.aspx

Edited October 10, 2013 by Herk Driver

[WeatherManC130]

Got out of the legacy just in time...

http://tribune.com.pk/story/616083/parting-gift-us-hands-afghan-airforce-two-c-130-cargo-planes/

[disgruntledemployee]

The Accident Investigation Board (AIB) president found, by clear and convincing evidence, that the causes of the accident were poor Crew Resource Management (CRM) and mishap pilot one's (MPI) late power reduction causing a 27 KIAS fast touchdown at a high altitude airfield (6,809 ft MSL).

Such bullshit men. I highly suggest people to go read the SIB and you will clearly see the main reason why this happened.

Out

[arg]

Such bullshit men. I highly suggest people to go read the SIB and you will clearly see the main reason why this happened.

Out

Inertia?

[Surf70]

Should have had an FE... http://www.c-130hercules.net/showthread.php?t=5038

[stract]

Inertia?

You won't get that answer here. Go read the SIB, as was suggested above.

[arg]

Should have had an FE... http://www.c-130herc...read.php?t=5038

That's always a fun argument. Didn't help the crew in Honduras though. Late 90s. This smells a lot like that.

You won't get that answer here. Go read the SIB, as was suggested above.

I no longer have the privelige so I cant. Read the AIB after I posted that.

[BolterKing]

Touched down 27 knots fast but went off end at 49knots? Me thinks the basic airmanship needs fixing.

FIFY

[Surf70]

That's always a fun argument. Didn't help the crew in Honduras though. Late 90s. This smells a lot like that.

I no longer have the privelige so I cant. Read the AIB after I posted that.

Yeah well if you read the SIB about the Honduras deal. The FE was questioning the approach. And also if you look at the MAFF's 7 incident the FE was informing the pilot of the thunderstorms getting closer. Mistakes in all but if you were to look at all the data and compare with or w/o the FE the numbers for the FE are in the green in the safety margins. Money is on the table fella's. You install the Flight Engineer on the C-17 and the J herk you will see a total decline in Mishaps fleet wide. Not to mention some increased mission effectiveness, CRM and safety numbers and also some relieved Pilots and Loadmasters...

[Hueypilot]

Just what will the FE do besides remind pilots they are exercising bad judgement? I get the idea of more eyes on the flight deck, but aside from being simply an ACM, what's the FE gonna do on a sortie-to-sortie basis?

[Surf70]

Just what will the FE do besides remind pilots they are exercising bad judgement? I get the idea of more eyes on the flight deck, but aside from being simply an ACM, what's the FE gonna do on a sortie-to-sortie basis?

Well for one if worked into the checklist the FE would call all the verbal checklists in the airplane and also Emergency Procedures. He or she is the front end EP expert. The pilot could go back to being a pilot leave the weight of the EP's on the FE shoulders and also not worry about the preflight, fuel management, systems, pressurization, aircraft condition, or if they have the data for the approach if they are so many knots hot on their approach, landing, etc.. The FE would be the one checking the TOLD the computer is putting out inputting the data or saying it doesn't jive with these numbers etc.... Just for starters...This would also relieve the Load's on what they are required to do as well and they can go back to just being loadmasters and concentrate on weight and balance and their other duties. Also when you go to the SIM all are tailored to the FE, the pilots just do what the FE tells them and take note during the rest of the Emergency Procedure part...

Edited October 15, 2013 by Surf70

[Azimuth]

Yeah well if you read the SIB about the Honduras deal. The FE was questioning the approach. And also if you look at the MAFF's 7 incident the FE was informing the pilot of the thunderstorms getting closer. Mistakes in all but if you were to look at all the data and compare with or w/o the FE the numbers for the FE are in the green in the safety margins. Money is on the table fella's. You install the Flight Engineer on the C-17 and the J herk you will see a total decline in Mishaps fleet wide. Not to mention some increased mission effectiveness, CRM and safety numbers and also some relieved Pilots and Loadmasters...

I fly on a jet older than E-Model Herks, that never had an FE, and it flies just fine. In fact the BUFF flies with all O's, lost the only E back in the early 90's, and still flies fine.

I watched the AWACS crash at Nellis in 2009 when the Copilot landed nose gear first. Where was the FE then? Or the JSTARS crashed at the Deid. Where was the FE? The only people that miss FE's are FE's.

[arg]

Yeah well if you read the SIB about the Honduras deal. The FE was questioning the approach. And also if you look at the MAFF's 7 incident the FE was informing the pilot of the thunderstorms getting closer. Mistakes in all but if you were to look at all the data and compare with or w/o the FE the numbers for the FE are in the green in the safety margins. Money is on the table fella's. You install the Flight Engineer on the C-17 and the J herk you will see a total decline in Mishaps fleet wide. Not to mention some increased mission effectiveness, CRM and safety numbers and also some relieved Pilots and Loadmasters...

Yep, and the eng called go around(I think twice) in Kuwait, still didn't help. You have to make sure the guy driving heard what you said and it registered in his brain. A pilot fighting with the plane to get it to do something and not saying anything was concern for me. In those situations I always tried to get them to say something, let us know what your thinking, let us help you, this is a crew airplane. Eighteen of my twenty-one years of flying was as an FE so I am pro FE. I think I earned my pay when I was doing it. I wish all of us did. My best compliment from a pilot was that if all FEs were like you they would never have designed the J model, then he bought me a beer.

[tunes]

I fly on a jet older than E-Model Herks, that never had an FE, and it flies just fine. In fact the BUFF flies with all O's, lost the only E back in the early 90's, and still flies fine.

I watched the AWACS crash at Nellis in 2009 when the Copilot landed nose gear first. Where was the FE then? Or the JSTARS crashed at the Deid. Where was the FE? The only people that miss FE's are FE's.

I went from an airplane with a FE to one without....and i definitely miss my FE.

[Hueypilot]

Well for one if worked into the checklist the FE would call all the verbal checklists in the airplane and also Emergency Procedures.

The J has a checklist flow, much like an airliner. You do, then you call the checklist. It doesn't take long. For EPs, there is a pretty neat checklist that runs you through most without having to pull out a -1. It's nothing like the older checklists.

All pilots should be "EP experts". I can tell you've grown up in an older airframe, because taking care of EPs, navigating and communicating are ALL things pilots should know how to do and do well. It's just in older airframes, the lack of technology made it too task saturating to do it all from the pilot seat, so they put FEs and Navs on board. But welcome to 2013...most modern airplanes do not need an FE or Nav, and there is a ton of things on the flight deck that enhances the pilots SA so that during EPs or low level flight they can focus on the task without losing track of where they are.

[itsokimapilot]

At least they ran TOLD...

At least the gear was down

And landed at the right airport

If they had a FE this would've never happened!

Glad they crew and pax made it out safely.

[JS]

Good reply, Huey. Saved me the trouble of saying the same things.

The FE doesn't have to monitor all those systems because they are automatic. Plus, in this accident, the pilots had the correct TOLD target speed and the airplane's actual airspeed staring them right in the fucking face through their HUDs. This accident is a case study of bad decision making, not of a FE not being there to manually work the automatic systems or to read off a correct airspeed number to the pilots that they already knew about and could see in their HUDs.

[WeatherManC130]

The J has a checklist flow, much like an airliner. You do, then you call the checklist. It doesn't take long. For EPs, there is a pretty neat checklist that runs you through most without having to pull out a -1. It's nothing like the older checklists.

All pilots should be "EP experts". I can tell you've grown up in an older airframe, because taking care of EPs, navigating and communicating are ALL things pilots should know how to do and do well. It's just in older airframes, the lack of technology made it too task saturating to do it all from the pilot seat, so they put FEs and Navs on board. But welcome to 2013...most modern airplanes do not need an FE or Nav, and there is a ton of things on the flight deck that enhances the pilots SA so that during EPs or low level flight they can focus on the task without losing track of where they are.

Again, due to automation all of those things can be easily accomplished from the pilot seat, and all can be easily monitored from those seats as well. The airplane will tell the crew what's going on faster than an FE can, I promise you that. And everything is much more user-friendly than the older legacy airplanes...it's really very simple.

The MC is fully certified to calculate TOLD...it's been tested and tested again to verify accuracy. There is no "checking the TOLD" in a J like you did in the legacy birds...because on the E/H, a human ran the charts so a human (copilot or another FE) would double check the TOLD. That's not necessary in the J since its a certified TOLD calculator.

The loads do the preflight, but that's all they need to do aside from their normal LM duties. Sitting on the flight deck and helping out is only done if they have the time to do so and are bored, it's certainly not required for a load to be on the flight deck.

Look, I know you feel that's how it works in legacy airplanes but even there the pilot can override the FE and choose another course of action...the PIC is under no obligation to "do what the FE tells him" to do. That's why they have the A-code and the FE does not. Unfortunately I've seen many legacy ACs that don't realize they have the authority to make decisions without getting the FE's head nod. I'm not saying you don't take their experience and opinions into consideration, but you don't let the other crew members run the airplane either.

Bottom line, I flew the E and H model Herks for many years, then flew Js. Now I'm back to flying H models. And I never missed the nav or FE in the J. Coming back to the H, I kept thinking how little SA I have in the legacy as compared to the J, plus I feel that pilots in the legacy Herks are raised to be lazy...that is, they just fly the bus and look over their shoulder and ask "hey nav" or "hey eng". One day, if they keep flying for a career, they'll have to do all of those things and not rely on someone else to do it for them.

I definitely agree with being lazy as a legacy pilot. I recently made the switch to the J and found myself behind the power curve when it came to PFPS.

WxMan

[arg]

The J has a checklist flow, much like an airliner. You do, then you call the checklist. It doesn't take long. For EPs, there is a pretty neat checklist that runs you through most without having to pull out a -1. It's nothing like the older checklists.

All pilots should be "EP experts". I can tell you've grown up in an older airframe, because taking care of EPs, navigating and communicating are ALL things pilots should know how to do and do well. It's just in older airframes, the lack of technology made it too task saturating to do it all from the pilot seat, so they put FEs and Navs on board. But welcome to 2013...most modern airplanes do not need an FE or Nav, and there is a ton of things on the flight deck that enhances the pilots SA so that during EPs or low level flight they can focus on the task without losing track of where they are.

Again, due to automation all of those things can be easily accomplished from the pilot seat, and all can be easily monitored from those seats as well. The airplane will tell the crew what's going on faster than an FE can, I promise you that. And everything is much more user-friendly than the older legacy airplanes...it's really very simple.

The MC is fully certified to calculate TOLD...it's been tested and tested again to verify accuracy. There is no "checking the TOLD" in a J like you did in the legacy birds...because on the E/H, a human ran the charts so a human (copilot or another FE) would double check the TOLD. That's not necessary in the J since its a certified TOLD calculator.

The loads do the preflight, but that's all they need to do aside from their normal LM duties. Sitting on the flight deck and helping out is only done if they have the time to do so and are bored, it's certainly not required for a load to be on the flight deck.

Look, I know you feel that's how it works in legacy airplanes but even there the pilot can override the FE and choose another course of action...the PIC is under no obligation to "do what the FE tells him" to do. That's why they have the A-code and the FE does not. Unfortunately I've seen many legacy ACs that don't realize they have the authority to make decisions without getting the FE's head nod. I'm not saying you don't take their experience and opinions into consideration, but you don't let the other crew members run the airplane either.

Bottom line, I flew the E and H model Herks for many years, then flew Js. Now I'm back to flying H models. And I never missed the nav or FE in the J. Coming back to the H, I kept thinking how little SA I have in the legacy as compared to the J, plus I feel that pilots in the legacy Herks are raised to be lazy...that is, they just fly the bus and look over their shoulder and ask "hey nav" or "hey eng". One day, if they keep flying for a career, they'll have to do all of those things and not rely on someone else to do it for them.

They won't be doing it they'll be relying on a computer to do it for them. It is the new flying world yall live in.