FDX MD-11 special training the new standard
07-13-2011, 04:46 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
FDX MD-11 special training the new standard
WSJ BUSINESS JULY 13, 2011.
U.S. Cites Dangers in MD-11 Jet Landings
By ANDY PASZTOR
Despite more than a decade of efforts to improve the safety of McDonnell Douglas MD-11 jets, U.S. accident investigators on Tuesday called for stepped-up pilot training world-wide to counter landing incidents that continue to plague the widely used cargo planes.
Prompted by seven serious MD-11 landing incidents over the past two years—including a pair of botched touchdowns overseas that resulted in a loss of both aircraft—the National Transportation Safety Board said it is concerned that cockpit crews aren't effectively trained to cope with the MD-11's difficult handling characteristics.
In its recommendations, the board called on U.S. air-safety regulators to mandate enhanced training to help pilots keep the three-engine jets from descending too rapidly and then bouncing during landings. "Despite the corrective actions taken" by the Federal Aviation Administration and MD-11 operators over the years, the NTSB concluded, pilots still need additional training to make appropriate adjustments to engine thrust and flight-control surfaces to prevent accidents.
Since going into service in 1990, MD-11s have suffered a total of 14 serious landing incidents, including four accidents that ended with the complete loss of the aircraft, the NTSB said.
In March 2009, a FedEx Corp. MD-11 crashed and burned after landing hard, bouncing twice and snagging a wingtip on the ground at Japan's Narita International Airport, killing both pilots. In July 2010, the fuselage of an MD-11 cargo plane operated by Deutsche Lufthansa AG broke apart in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia after the jet touched down hard and bounced twice, injuring both pilots. In both accidents, the planes experienced excessive vertical forces and steep, nose-up maneuvers that exceeded normal safety guidelines
Since the late 1990s, regulators, pilots and accident investigators around the globe have been aware that the MD-11's computerized flight controls produce finicky handling that can make the planes tricky to land. From the start, pilots worried about controlling the long fuselage in crosswinds, and documented a tendency of the nose to pitch up at critical moments of touchdown. The MD-11's control column, or yoke, is considered to be more sensitive than those on other large jets, so pilots are prone to over-control the planes in certain situations.
Introduced by McDonnell Douglas Corp. as primarily a passenger jet, the MD-11 quickly gained a reputation as an unforgiving airplane. The FAA and Boeing Co., which inherited the aircraft when it took over McDonnell Douglas, devised various steps over the years to improve MD-11 handling, including software changes to dampen flight-control commands.
The planes are now used almost exclusively to carry cargo or to fly charter trips.
But the latest NTSB recommendations highlight that some of the original safety issues persist, largely because of the MD-11's handling problems close to the ground. According to the safety board, "enhanced operational guidance and recurrent training will provide near-term improvements" to reduce MD-11 risks.
Once MD-11 operating manuals are updated, the safety board also wants pilots to receive special training in "bounce recognition and recovery" procedures as part of their routine simulator-training sessions. The board's recommendations aren't binding on the FAA or operators.
U.S. Cites Dangers in MD-11 Jet Landings
By ANDY PASZTOR
Despite more than a decade of efforts to improve the safety of McDonnell Douglas MD-11 jets, U.S. accident investigators on Tuesday called for stepped-up pilot training world-wide to counter landing incidents that continue to plague the widely used cargo planes.
Prompted by seven serious MD-11 landing incidents over the past two years—including a pair of botched touchdowns overseas that resulted in a loss of both aircraft—the National Transportation Safety Board said it is concerned that cockpit crews aren't effectively trained to cope with the MD-11's difficult handling characteristics.
In its recommendations, the board called on U.S. air-safety regulators to mandate enhanced training to help pilots keep the three-engine jets from descending too rapidly and then bouncing during landings. "Despite the corrective actions taken" by the Federal Aviation Administration and MD-11 operators over the years, the NTSB concluded, pilots still need additional training to make appropriate adjustments to engine thrust and flight-control surfaces to prevent accidents.
Since going into service in 1990, MD-11s have suffered a total of 14 serious landing incidents, including four accidents that ended with the complete loss of the aircraft, the NTSB said.
In March 2009, a FedEx Corp. MD-11 crashed and burned after landing hard, bouncing twice and snagging a wingtip on the ground at Japan's Narita International Airport, killing both pilots. In July 2010, the fuselage of an MD-11 cargo plane operated by Deutsche Lufthansa AG broke apart in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia after the jet touched down hard and bounced twice, injuring both pilots. In both accidents, the planes experienced excessive vertical forces and steep, nose-up maneuvers that exceeded normal safety guidelines
Since the late 1990s, regulators, pilots and accident investigators around the globe have been aware that the MD-11's computerized flight controls produce finicky handling that can make the planes tricky to land. From the start, pilots worried about controlling the long fuselage in crosswinds, and documented a tendency of the nose to pitch up at critical moments of touchdown. The MD-11's control column, or yoke, is considered to be more sensitive than those on other large jets, so pilots are prone to over-control the planes in certain situations.
Introduced by McDonnell Douglas Corp. as primarily a passenger jet, the MD-11 quickly gained a reputation as an unforgiving airplane. The FAA and Boeing Co., which inherited the aircraft when it took over McDonnell Douglas, devised various steps over the years to improve MD-11 handling, including software changes to dampen flight-control commands.
The planes are now used almost exclusively to carry cargo or to fly charter trips.
But the latest NTSB recommendations highlight that some of the original safety issues persist, largely because of the MD-11's handling problems close to the ground. According to the safety board, "enhanced operational guidance and recurrent training will provide near-term improvements" to reduce MD-11 risks.
Once MD-11 operating manuals are updated, the safety board also wants pilots to receive special training in "bounce recognition and recovery" procedures as part of their routine simulator-training sessions. The board's recommendations aren't binding on the FAA or operators.
07-13-2011, 06:25 AM
#2
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: 757
Posts: 42
It’s common knowledge that all pilots need more tail. Frequent speculation suggests that part of the MD-11’s landing reputation comes from its horizontal tail being much smaller than the DC-10 series which have an excellent landing history. Just an idea, but maybe spend the bucks to put a DC-10-30 horizontal stab and elevator control system on one MD-11 and flight test it under various payload/CG variations and gusty wind conditions so test pilots can see how it compares. Yes, the new configuration would burn more gas, but if it proves to be a significant safety enhancement it will be worth it. Just an idea.
07-13-2011, 06:40 AM
#4
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 798
It’s common knowledge that all pilots need more tail. Frequent speculation suggests that part of the MD-11’s landing reputation comes from its horizontal tail being much smaller than the DC-10 series which have an excellent landing history. Just an idea, but maybe spend the bucks to put a DC-10-30 horizontal stab and elevator control system on one MD-11 and flight test it under various payload/CG variations and gusty wind conditions so test pilots can see how it compares. Yes, the new configuration would burn more gas, but if it proves to be a significant safety enhancement it will be worth it. Just an idea.
PIPE
07-13-2011, 01:19 PM
#7
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
