U.S. military aircraft overshoots runway and lands in Hawaii bay

[NWRMidnight]

Ohman… I'm not seeing @skyking saying he knows everything about this accident nor that it's solely pilot error. *shrug*

that's all he's been saying, is it's pilot error.

 

[iRONic]

Actually he’s said military investigations are not the same as civilian ones among other things.

Arrogant fuck indeed…

smfh

 

[NWRMidnight]

If one Main Landing Gear collapsed, the wing would've impacted the ground the aircraft would have departed the prepared surface to the side and likely ended up with a post event fire. It would've scrapped up the runway and the dirt around the runway as the aircraft departed the side. If the nose gear collapsed, the brakes would've continued to work and the extra drag of scrapping fuselage would've help stop the aircraft quicker.

This is what happens when 1 main gear collapses:

38°43'27.5"N 93°32'55.0"W · 38.724306, -93.548611

maps.app.goo.gl

There might have been some type of failure, but the vast majority of possible failures should've still allowed the crew to abort, and fly to HNL. I've been involved in multiple over run investigations and multiple collapsed landing gear collapses. This has all the general hallmarks of over shoot landing zone with a forced landing. This happens all time but generally only bites the pilot in the ass when there is also a wet runway.

ETA: There was one accident I was involved with where the aircraft lost antiskid, but it was due to the pilot improperly responding an electrical failure. They then ran the aircraft battery all the way out, so they lost all electrical power on the aircraft. Then they failed to realize they wouldn't have antiskid and landed on the shortest runway at the field. Luckily they realized they weren't going to stop and kicked it over to grass and got stuck in the mud.

pay attention to the end where video stops just before it goes off the runway, granted it did not collapse on landing in this video, but it shows that no front landing gear can prevent it from

Fedex skids off after gear fails to deploy:

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

This video in the beginning shows one who lost it's main landing gear going straight down the runway the majority of the way, and when it stopped it was barely off the main runway. He discusses the hard landing that collapses the gear:

 

[iRONic]

TF is your obsession with the specific accident, dude?!

 

[NWRMidnight]

Actually he’s said military investigations are not the same as civilian ones among other things.

Arrogant fuck indeed…

smfh

That's all he has been arguing is it's pilot error.. Unless you have difficulties reading and comprehening..

TF is your obsession with the specific accident, dude?!

I have no obsession with this specific accident. Not jumping to conclusions that it's pilot error, based off of no known facts, and attempting to discuss other possibilities is not an obsession. I have asked questions multiple times, for which he refused to answer. So I guess my obsession is wanting to discuss other possiblities other than pilot error, and maybe learning something beyond assumptions.

 

[skyking]

I can't speculate about systems failures. I'm not going to engage in a discussion about it.
I looked back on your posting history and I agree with many of your social and political views, but your style of calling out people, calling them names and raging on does no good. My best course going forward is to put you on ignore.
I had considered doing so a few times before over the years, and chose not to.

 

[NWRMidnight]

I can't speculate about systems failures. I'm not going to engage in a discussion about it.
I looked back on your posting history and I agree with many of your social and political views, but your style of calling out people, calling them names and raging on does no good. My best course going forward is to put you on ignore.
I had considered doing so a few times before over the years, and chose not to.

This is telling. You can speculate or make assumptions without any known facts, that it's pilot error, but refuse to make any speculations, or engage in a discussion on it being a system failure, even though you claim you have been studying aircraft accidents, since you have been a pilot for 38 years. As a pilot, one of 38 years, you should have some basic knowledge of the systems involved, enough to have a disussion about them. Even a non pilot, who has been studing aircraft accidents for 38 years, should have some knowledge. so what's the reason you refuse to engage in a discussion about those systems, if it has nothing to do with knowledge? If it is lack of knowledge, maybe you should have said you don't have that knowledge up front. But that would discredit your claims of it being obvious, Captain (your words), because nothing can be obvious if you don't have the knowledge needed to consider all possiblities.

My posting history has no relevance to this disussion, so the only reason I can see you needing to look it up, is so you can try and use it as an excuse to avoid talking about other possibilities besides pilot error. That says more about you , than it does me. I'm sorry you are to thin skinned and can't handle someone who is direct and speaks their mind.. Be thankful, you don't know me outside of this board, as I am worse in person, I would probably make you cry. Maybe you should hit that ignore button, won't hurt my feelings..

 

[Zorba]

pay attention to the end where video stops just before it goes off the runway, granted it did not collapse on landing in this video, but it shows that no front landing gear can prevent it from

Fedex skids off after gear fails to deploy:

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

This video in the beginning shows one who lost it's main landing gear going straight down the runway the majority of the way, and when it stopped it was barely off the main runway. He discusses the hard landing that collapses the gear:

I already referenced the FedEx accident. Loss of a NLG has no real affect on braking, except the extra drag from scrapping and down force on the wing should help. There are no brakes on the NLG on any commercial airliner.

A complete belly flop can cause you to skid of the runway, there is no evidence that happened here. The FedEx incident had multiple hydraulic system failures, meaning at most it had 1/3 of its airbrakes, no TRs and no Brakes. The engines on the 757 keep most of the fuselage off the pavement too.

If the gear weren't down they would've gone to HNL, you don't force a landing on a short runway with gear problems when there is a 12,000 ft runway a few miles away. The FedEx 757 should've also diverted to Memphis or ATL for the longer runways and to burn off fuel, but as I said they were down multiple hydraulic systems and didn't want to leave the Chattanooga area.

 

[NWRMidnight]

I already referenced the FedEx accident. Loss of a NLG has no real affect on braking, except the extra drag from scrapping and down force on the wing should help. There are no brakes on the NLG on any commercial airliner.

A complete belly flop can cause you to skid of the runway, there is no evidence that happened here. The FedEx incident had multiple hydraulic system failures, meaning at most it had 1/3 of its airbrakes, no TRs and no Brakes. The engines on the 757 keep most of the fuselage off the pavement too.

If the gear weren't down they would've gone to HNL, you don't force a landing on a short runway with gear problems when there is a 12,000 ft runway a few miles away. The FedEx 757 should've also diverted to Memphis or ATL for the longer runways and to burn off fuel, but as I said they were down multiple hydraulic systems and didn't want to leave the Chattanooga area.

Sorry, I missed where you referenced the Fedex incident.

To be able to determine if you need to go to another runway due to gear malfunction or rather failure, doesn't the pilot have to know that their is a malfunction or failure while still in the air?

We don't know if there is any evidence of gear failure or if there was any kind of belly flop yet, the bottom of the plane is under water, and there isn't always evidence of gear failure on a runway. A plane going in a straight line till they hit the water is not an indication of it not happening, all though unlikely.

They did get recover the black box today.. Of course it could be months before we find out any information obtained from it.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

US Navy plans to raise jet plane off Hawaii coral reef using inflatable cylinders

The U.S. Navy plans to use inflatable cylinders to lift and roll a jet plane off a coral reef in Hawaii before removal from the ocean waters where the aircraft crashed.

apnews.com

They say they'll be using airbags to 'float' it enough to move it back to shore and that it's in good enough condition that they hope it can fly again. From what I can see in the picture, it looks like most of the body stayed dry, so less chance of wiring issues.

 

[Zorba]

Sorry, I missed where you referenced the Fedex incident.

To be able to determine if you need to go to another runway due to gear malfunction or rather failure, doesn't the pilot have to know that their is a malfunction or failure while still in the air?

We don't know if there is any evidence of gear failure or if there was any kind of belly flop yet, the bottom of the plane is under water, and there isn't always evidence of gear failure on a runway. A plane going in a straight line till they hit the water is not an indication of it not happening, all though unlikely.

They did get recover the black box today.. Of course it could be months before we find out any information obtained from it.

US Navy plans to raise jet plane off Hawaii coral reef using inflatable cylinders

The U.S. Navy plans to use inflatable cylinders to lift and roll a jet plane off a coral reef in Hawaii before removal from the ocean waters where the aircraft crashed.

apnews.com

They say they'll be using airbags to 'float' it enough to move it back to shore and that it's in good enough condition that they hope it can fly again. From what I can see in the picture, it looks like most of the body stayed dry, so less chance of wiring issues.

@NWRMidnight Looks like I was right, it's sitting on it gear in the water.

I highly doubt that aircraft will ever fly again, or if it does it will be a constant maintenance dog with insane amounts of corrosion. I can't think of another incident with a plane in salt water were it was wasn't an obvious hull loss otherwise, so can't think of a real comparison. The pressure vessel looks intact, but the outflow valve would've been wide open, so that would be a roughly 1' x 1' hole open in the back of the plane letting in water. There is a lot of mission equipment on the bottom of the aircraft that is likely toast. Tons of electrical wiring that runs through the wheel wells, leading and trialing edge of the wing, and lower lobe. All those connectors are shot.

Knowing the DOD though, they will cannibalize all the parts, and install them all over the fleet resulting in constant reliability problems for years to come.

Outflow Valve is #1 in this image:

 

[Zorba]

pay attention to the end where video stops just before it goes off the runway, granted it did not collapse on landing in this video, but it shows that no front landing gear can prevent it from

Fedex skids off after gear fails to deploy:

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

This video in the beginning shows one who lost it's main landing gear going straight down the runway the majority of the way, and when it stopped it was barely off the main runway. He discusses the hard landing that collapses the gear:

BTW: That Youtube video of the 747-8 is fake.

 

[skyking]

@NWRMidnight Looks like I was right, it's sitting on it gear in the water.

I highly doubt that aircraft will ever fly again, or if it does it will be a constant maintenance dog with insane amounts of corrosion. I can't think of another incident with a plane in salt water were it was wasn't an obvious hull loss otherwise, so can't think of a real comparison. The pressure vessel looks intact, but the outflow valve would've been wide open, so that would be a roughly 1' x 1' hole open in the back of the plane letting in water. There is a lot of mission equipment on the bottom of the aircraft that is likely toast. Tons of electrical wiring that runs through the wheel wells, leading and trialing edge of the wing, and lower lobe. All those connectors are shot.

Knowing the DOD though, they will cannibalize all the parts, and install them all over the fleet resulting in constant reliability problems for years to come.

Outflow Valve is #1 in this image:

View attachment 89778

Fresh water I could see it, but not the salt. They mill the wing lower skins and spars to eliminate those lap joints that are so prone to corrosion, in a plant that I helped build and drive by every day in Fredrickson. That does not mean there are not other laps down low and the salt in there will be devastating, let alone the harness and connectors, etc.

 

[Zorba]

Fresh water I could see it, but not the salt. They mill the wing lower skins and spars to eliminate those lap joints that are so prone to corrosion, in a plant that I helped build and drive by every day in Fredrickson. That does not mean there are not other laps down low and the salt in there will be devastating, let alone the harness and connectors, etc.

Yeah, you still have the fuselage laps. But there are plenty of other faying surfaces that are getting packed full of salt water right now. All the trunnions and landing gear support beams, pressure bulkheads, etc. If this was a B-2 or something insanely expensive and irreplaceable they might try to make something work, a P-8 isn't that expensive and is still in production. If they do return it to service, I'd love to see the it's first PDM (4C Check) after it returns.

 

[NWRMidnight]

@NWRMidnight Looks like I was right, it's sitting on it gear in the water.

I highly doubt that aircraft will ever fly again, or if it does it will be a constant maintenance dog with insane amounts of corrosion. I can't think of another incident with a plane in salt water were it was wasn't an obvious hull loss otherwise, so can't think of a real comparison. The pressure vessel looks intact, but the outflow valve would've been wide open, so that would be a roughly 1' x 1' hole open in the back of the plane letting in water. There is a lot of mission equipment on the bottom of the aircraft that is likely toast. Tons of electrical wiring that runs through the wheel wells, leading and trialing edge of the wing, and lower lobe. All those connectors are shot.

Knowing the DOD though, they will cannibalize all the parts, and install them all over the fleet resulting in constant reliability problems for years to come.

Outflow Valve is #1 in this image:

View attachment 89778

Did we have this information two weeks ago? Nope! That was the point, you and others where all going off assumptions with no actual known facts at the time. You could have been also been wrong.

Edit: that video shows full weight on the front landing gear, with it having to be dug out, less weight on the right main geat(not barried like the front, and barely touching the bottom) and the left rear not touching at all, it's up in the water. So, I'm not sure if it proves anything about the landing gear not being the cause yet.

You probably are still right, but we all should be open to discussing all possibilities, rather than pilot error, even how low the odds are, rather than discounting those possibilities before we have actual, solid evidence and facts.

With that said, How about we wait for some more concrete findings.

Edit 2: as for corrosion, two weeks in water has for sure compromised the structural integrity of all bare aluminum under water. I can't see how they could repurpose any of those exposed parts and stay within legal guidelines.

 

[Zorba]

Did we have this information two weeks ago? Nope! That was the point, you and others where all going off assumptions with no actual known facts at the time. You could have been also been wrong.

Edit: that video shows full weight on the front landing gear, with it having to be dug out, less weight on the right main geat(not barried like the front, and barely touching the bottom) and the left rear not touching at all, it's up in the water. So, I'm not sure if it proves anything about the landing gear not being the cause yet.

You probably are still right, but we all should be open to discussing all possibilities, rather than pilot error, even how low the odds are, rather than discounting those possibilities before we have actual, solid evidence and facts.

With that said, How about we wait for some more concrete findings.

Edit 2: as for corrosion, two weeks in water has for sure compromised the structural integrity of all bare aluminum under water. I can't see how they could repurpose any of those exposed parts and stay within legal guidelines.

Hard to tell how much weight is on the LH MLG because they barely show it. There is none on the RH and almost none on the nose gear (it's almost fully extended). The fact the plane appear to be mostly floating doesn't say anything about the condition of the gear, but says the fuselage and wing tanks are intact.

Hard to tell for sure, but it appears that the TRs are deployed as well.

But I'm not in the investigation team, I can speculate all I want, and all available information pointed to the aircraft going into the drink intact, with no emergency declaration before landing, almost definitely meaning pilot error.

If the TRs are deployed that also means both hydraulic systems were working, so both the primary and alternate brakes would have power and emergency power.

Most importantly, if there had been any known aircraft issues prior to touchdown, the Navy would've released that by now.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Hard to tell how much weight is on the LH MLG because they barely show it. There is none on the RH and almost none on the nose gear (it's almost fully extended). The fact the plane appear to be mostly floating doesn't say anything about the condition of the gear, but says the fuselage and wing tanks are intact.

Hard to tell for sure, but it appears that the TRs are deployed as well.

But I'm not in the investigation team, I can speculate all I want, and all available information pointed to the aircraft going into the drink intact, with no emergency declaration before landing, almost definitely meaning pilot error.

If the TRs are deployed that also means both hydraulic systems were working, so both the primary and alternate brakes would have power and emergency power.

Most importantly, if there had been any known aircraft issues prior to touchdown, the Navy would've released that by now.

What if it's an unknown issue that happened on impact or shortly after?

 

[Zorba]

What if it's an unknown issue that happened on impact or shortly after?

It is possible, although very remote, which is why there should be a full investigation. Whether any of that information is publicly released it's another story, though.

But you have to remember, the P-8 is based on the 737 Next Generation, which has a few hundred million flight hours and landings on it. As far as I know every runway over runs has been ruled pilot error, and I'm unaware of any incident where there was a full loss of braking power.

Even if it is pilot error, that doesn't mean there weren't contributing factors like a wet runway or challenging wind, but it's on the pilot to abort a landing that isn't safe. Like the AA MD-80 in Little Rock, lots of contributing factors, but ultimately it was the decision of the pilots to force a landing in very poor conditions.

Not sure about the P-8, but the USAF aircraft I've worked have you test the brakes at touchdown, if you don't get proper braking power you go around. On this P-8 they would've most likely been using autobrakes which start braking as soon as the main gear are on the ground. So if the brakes didn't immediately engage, TOGA power should've been applied and they should've at least gone to HNL.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

It's outta there!

US Navy plane removed from Hawaii bay after it overshot runway. Coral damage remains to be seen​

ABC News|9 hours ago
Officials say a U.S. Navy jet has been moved from a coral reef in an environmentally sensitive Hawaii bay where it got stuck after overshooting a runway nearly two weeks ago In this image taken from video provided by the U.S. Navy, Navy divers assigned to ...