EK521

[HJ1an]

What are the options? End of runway... Gear up... Sounds definitly like a go around going horribly wrong. Did they stall in go around? Was there windsheer? Or did they simply do the wrong things? Maybe gear up too early? Or did they forget the gear in the first place, causing the go around?

I forgot where I read it from, but it was suggested that the airspeed actually increased to about 180knots on impact from data they gathered.. this might suggest windshear interefring with their go-around . Or loss of control to pitch up somehow..

[KL-666]

Here is a passenger report with some interesting information in it:

I was a passenger on EK521.Landing was normal (not an emergency) and the landing gear was initially deployed. The plane touched down normally but nose remained in the air as it started to climb again. It appears undercarriage was retracted at that stage. If turnaround situation no thrust was applied (bizarre??) and the plane continued to glide along the runway until it crash-landed on its belly, with rhs engine separating from wing and catching fire but continued to be dragged along with the plane. The plane skidded with wing and fully extended flaps dragging on the runway with clearly visible sparks along the length of the wing until its final resting place towards the end of runway 12L. A fellow passenger had videoed the entire landing (which I have seen) and had offered the footage to the authorities and Emirates. Could this be Pilot error? Emirates were clearly not prepared to manage an incident of this nature judging by the chaos that ensued but the airport emergency team were very quick to respond.

http://avherald.com/h?article=49c12302&opt=0 (one of the comments at the bottom of the page)

Two things went wrong:

1) Engines did not spool up for go around
2) Gear retracted before strong and consistent positive climb

External factors can be excluded now. Windshear may have caused the decision to go around, but if you do not apply thrust you will not go anywhere.

Ad 1) Why no thrust applied?

- Could be a mechanical defect.
- Could be as well a company policy. There are pilot who are taught to trust automation more than themselves. Never touch the yoke and throttles, but push a little toga button and hope for the best. On the other hand there are companies that know that buttons work differently in different flight modes. They teach that you may find yourself in an unexpected flight mode, so do not bother with the buttons, but grab the yoke and slam the thrust levers forward before anything else.

Ad 2) Why was the gear retracted way before it should?

This is clearly a mistake in any case. Yet why was it done?
- To help the thrust-less plane climb? Wrong! The gear doors hurt you more than leaving the gear out.
- Or again a company policy? Instructing their pilots to do things in a certain order without cross verifying their instruments. After hitting the little toga button you "should" be climbing, so you can safely retract the gear.

Given that the gear retraction is definitely a training error, it makes the training error explanation of applying no thrust more likely, than it being a mechanical problem.

The final report in a year may become a very interesting read, pointing at major flaws in the companies training policies.

Kind regards, Vincent

[jwocky]

Okay, lets look at this the other way around:

- why, if everything was normal, did the crew decide to go around? You decide to go around, if either the wind is too too strong in a gust, you got windshear or you messed up, for example too high speed or altitude in end approach, right? What else comes to mind? Windshear would mean, it happened seconds earlier to make it the reason to go around in the first place.

- If you decide to go around, you give throttle and pull your gear in and climb. Now, what the passenger describes is the main gear touched down, the nose wheel not. And the gear was retracted then and the plane glided along the runway without additional thrust till it finally crashed at the end of the runway. So it had a lot of lift, which indicates the speed had to be relative high and allegedly the speed even increased to 180 knots before the crash. Given that a 777 has roughly 135-145 knots touch down speed and 160-170 V1 depending on the load, this is a lot. Does that mean, the speed at touch down was high and got even higher when, by retracting the gear, the drag was reduced? That would mean, the auto throttle was not active because in that case, the system would reduce throttle to get to the set speed instead of accelerating.

- There is something, I miss in all reports, the sound or visual of active reversers. Nobody tells, the reversers were used at any point. Normally, I would expect the pilot to get thrust to zero, then engage the reversers and push thrust forward to reduce speed. Honestly, as nice as autobreaks are, they don't cut it with a heavy bird, especially not, if they are set to the recommended 2.

Soooo, if I see it from that angle, autothrottle and AP as two separate systems, it appears, autothrottle was off or even disarmed, which makes sense, if the pilot is about to use the reversers in the next few seconds, the AP is on and in autoland mode. But the thrust is too high, the AP can set down the main gear, but the pilot doesn't reduce thrust and engages the reversers. Instead, he presses the GA button. But while the AP goes in GA mode and also someone retracts the gear, the thrust remains constant and thus the speed increases when the drag of the gear is gone.
Does that sound like a communication problem? Like pilot and copilot try two different things at the same time? I think, this will come down to the black box data telling the investigators who pressed which button at which time.

[SHM]

Yesterday was the hot day for DXB, temperature was 48°C and QNH was 994. 12L was for arrival and 12R for departure.

We (IX-384) were at E2, and we taxied out via P2 and holding at N2 to cross 12L after the arriving aircraft. We saw our A321 PPB or E coming in, and at around 200 feet becoming unstable. Her attitude & wings went up down and immediately she went around. As advised, we cross the runway and proceeded to M2 L3 for further taxi. After that A321, another Emirates' 777 went around. Both the birds did go-around, around 200 feet, so I guess the winds at that height were unfavourable.

We continued our taxi on L4, briefly held at L4B, took a left turn at K for K4 intersection departure. During this time and after those two go arounds, we saw one more EK 777 landing on the runway 12L. We were on Kilo so couldn't see her approach, but we saw her landing at the normal touchdown zone.

When we were turning left on Kilo for K4 departure, and after completion of our checks, we saw her - EK521. They were sightly ahead of the perpendicular position on 12L - with respect to K4 of 12R. She was about 30/40' from the ground with nose up attitude, her attitude confused us thinking if ATC allowed parallel take off from 12L. We were discussing this, and we saw she is struggling to climb (landing dear were down). At a point around 150/200 feet, the struggle to climb stopped, for s brief moment leveled out, and then slowly she came down.

Those chain of events: from 50' feet, to level out, and coming down, looked like a slow motion for me. May be because of the unusual that happened, or, because of the thrust versus weight struggle, or, my perception - I don't know. But that was unreal for me to see 777 struggling and then succumbing to engines' fight with temperature + pressure.

Pilots went around (very low height) post windshear alert and so didn't take the gear up as per the required actions, OR, deliberately left the gear down following a normal go around and would have realised that rate of climb is insufficient. Whatever is the reason - but their decision of keeping the gear down was indeed a remarkable decision. IMO, a boon for all of them.

I wish, media won't put the blame again for "Pilot's Error", and shall appreciate their reflexive actions.

I guess the happenings after she came down, you all know.

We were stuck inside the AXI for more than three hours, were at airport until evening, had brief rest, and using our split duty clause operated 384 and came back around 6am. Haven't read the reports, or the posts, so above mentioned narration was as raw as it happened yesterday afternoon.

[jwocky]

So ...

the planes were already in approach at about 200ft in trouble with the windshear and not only EK521. Others went around as well. So this explains the decision to go around.
What makes me wonder is this obvious thrust problem. Okay hot air, low pressure, that takes some power, but a 777 should have still enough left to climb, even at a moderate climb rate, not just drop. Or am I missing something? And what about the gear? This pilot saw the plane from the outside, so his statement, the gear was out is more credible than that of a passenger inside the cabin who actually couldn't see it, only may have heard the retracting, if there was any. But in the end, the plane was on her belly.

[HJ1an]

So ...

the planes were already in approach at about 200ft in trouble with the windshear and not only EK521. Others went around as well. So this explains the decision to go around.
What makes me wonder is this obvious thrust problem. Okay hot air, low pressure, that takes some power, but a 777 should have still enough left to climb, even at a moderate climb rate, not just drop. Or am I missing something? And what about the gear? This pilot saw the plane from the outside, so his statement, the gear was out is more credible than that of a passenger inside the cabin who actually couldn't see it, only may have heard the retracting, if there was any. But in the end, the plane was on her belly.

I'm not sure about B777s, but the retracting/extending gear on the newer 737s had no sound at all, other than the aerodynamic drag 'bump' and wind noise (and, keeping in mind this at about 3000ft agl at who knows what speed).

Based on the other pilot's account, keeping the gears down made sense especially that low and with a wind shear alert.. ? The gears could be entirely sheared off, but I did not really look into the pictures and details of this crash so I don't know if the gears were actually still in the aircraft or outside of it... and the other odd part is seemingly lack of engine spooling up .. what engines are Emirates using? RR?

[KL-666]

What makes me wonder is this obvious thrust problem

The passenger answered that by not noticing any engine spool up:

If turnaround situation no thrust was applied

http://www.thejabberwocky.net/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=686&p=12063#p12009

Making it a no brainer, or actually a dual brainer. Either there was a mechanical problem, or the pilots did not know how to spool them up. I argued the last in my previous post.

The retraction sound of the gear is of course entirely subjective to the passenger. But the way he described the second touchdown gives credibility to a retracted gear:

the plane continued to glide along the runway until it crash-landed on its belly, with rhs engine separating from wing and catching fire but continued to be dragged along with the plane. The plane skidded with wing and fully extended flaps dragging on the runway with clearly visible sparks along the length of the wing until its final resting place towards the end of runway 12L

http://www.thejabberwocky.net/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=686&p=12063#p12009

There is no suggestion of any bump of gear touchdown before it breaks off. Just a sensation of getting on the belly immediately.

Kind regards, Vincent

[HJ1an]

What makes me wonder is this obvious thrust problem

The passenger answered that by not noticing any engine spool up:

The retraction sound of the gear is of course entirely subjective to the passenger. But the way he described the second touchdown gives credibility to a retracted gear:

the plane continued to glide along the runway until it crash-landed on its belly, with rhs engine separating from wing and catching fire but continued to be dragged along with the plane. The plane skidded with wing and fully extended flaps dragging on the runway with clearly visible sparks along the length of the wing until its final resting place towards the end of runway 12L

http://www.thejabberwocky.net/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=686&p=12063#p12009

There is no suggestion of any bump of gear touchdown before it breaks off. Just a sensation of getting on the belly immediately.

Passenger sensations can wildly differ... unless of course, that person is an aviation nerd like me (or us). e.g. Turbulance bumps can turn into a 1000ft drop, a simple, if slightly quick turn can turn into some sort emergency avoidance maneuver, a TOGA can feel like seconds and escaping from death etc. and even so slightly more knowledge than the average person about airplanes, the sensation can still be wildly different to what was actually happening.

If I recall correctly, similar accounts were also heard from the BA 38... and I paraphrase "the plane went down seemingly ordinarily, and then, boom.. we are on the ground skidding".

However, that is not to say I am saying the gear broke off, or not. Because I don't know, and that information is probably available by now, but I am not too interested into that by now.. or at least, not wanting to search for it

[KL-666]

There seems to have leaked a screenshot of the pilots report on this matter. If you are a member of pprune, you can see it here:

http://www.pprune.org/attachments/rumours-news/768d1470894613-emirates-b777-gear-collapse-dxb-ek521.jpg

A few posts further there is an alleged translation of it:

Date of Occurrence: Aug-16
AC Type: B773
From: TRV
To: DBX
Source: SiD
Event Title: Crash Landing

Event Summary:

During flare updraft caused the A/C to float till after the end of the touch downd (sic) zone. We decided to G/A. Normal G/A initiated after that we had positive climb so the gear was retracted. Speed dropped rapidly below the top of amber band due to W/S. W/S proc was done however the A/C crash landed on the RW and skidded off it to come to a complete stop off the RW with fire and fumes covering the whole A/C. Mayday declared and evacuation initiated. All pax and crew survived without serious injuries.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/582445-emirates-b777-gear-collapse-dxb-post9470091.html

Interestingly the alleged pilot report coincides with the passenger report i mentioned earlier in:

http://www.thejabberwocky.net/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=686&p=12063#p12009

The plane touched/flared with wheels, went in go around (also confirmed by atc), and dropped from the sky without gear after that.

The pilot claims he had a "Normal G/A initiated after that we had positive climb so the gear was retracted". Yet he does not mention whether he verified his throttle setting. The passenger however noticed that "If turnaround situation no thrust was applied". The result for the pilot is consistent with the passengers observation of no engine spool up: "Speed dropped rapidly below the top of amber band".

For some reason the pilot wants to believe:
1) He had his engines spooled up (well he did the "Normal G/A initiated", but that proves nothing about engine status)
2) Windshear got him down.

Ad 1) The passengers report contradicts him
Ad 2) A light 777 at the end of a long flight can be pulled through anything. If and only if the engines are spooled up. Which was not the case, see Ad 1).

If these two reports are genuine and correct, then there is only one verdict possible. The pilot went in go around without engines spooled up. This can only be due to inadequate training, omitting to verify if the thrust levers are really full forward after pushing the little toga button.

Kind regards, Vincent

[KL-666]

The interim report is published

https://www.gcaa.gov.ae/en/ePublication/admin/iradmin/Lists/Incidents%20Investigation%20Reports/Attachments/90/2016-2016%20-%20Preliminary%20Report,%20AAIS%20Case%20AIFN-0008-2016%20-%20A6-EMW.pdf

It is pretty much the same as my earlier conclusion above.

- fully operable plane
- touchdown on main gear
- go around initiated with throttle still in idle
- gear up
- sinking back on the rw

Planes do not fly with no thrust. Might be a good idea to tell pilots that too.

Kind regards, Vincent