Southwest Airlines Nose Gear Collapse at LGA

[Highkeas]

More damaged than I first thought,
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...cs-bay-388626/

Looks like either the left section of the FLG crosstube sheared off or the structure supporting the right crosstube failed. Could be a hard landing or fatigue or just a result of the FLG collapsing I'm sure the NTSB will be able to figure out the cause fairly quickly.

[snydersnapshots]

Snyder- Thanks for adding a big dose of insight- with the only question in my mind if the pilots have any idea if there's smoke, fumes or flame in row 30-someting of couse, I hear you that there's a real clear decision process and am guessing that the FA's in the back are empowered to "do what needs to be done."

You're correct that we DON'T know what's going on back in row 30. We can ask the tower or fire command vehicle if they see smoke or flames (or call to the back and ask the F/A's what they see), but beyond that we don't know, so we depend on the flight attendants to make the assessment and use their best judgment with regard to which exits to use and when. And to be honest, the evacuation checklist only takes a few seconds to complete. Then, in a "gray area" situation such as this, we in the cockpit can make the decision whether to command an evac (if the flight attendants have not done so already) or have everyone sit tight and wait for the mobile stairs.

(oh, and just for fun...I'm not going off the leading edge, I dutifully studied the safety card before takeoff...the arrow shows to use the trailing edge and has a big red X over the engine intake )

Aww, come on. If you're going to do that, you're going to take all the drama out of my example!

As I've said in other posts, many (most?) passengers get on an airplane and don't give any thought whatsoever to an evacuation. They're often not dressed for it (shorts, flip flops or sandals, etc), and they're not mentally prepared for it. If you fly a lot (or even if you don't--maybe especially if you don't) it's not a bad idea to take your seat, close your eyes, and mentally go through an evacuation--which exit will you use? Which side of the wing will you go off if you use the overwing exit (you passed that test, by the way)? Where will you go after you exit the airplane? We "fight the way we train," so a few seconds of preparation before hand can be a great asset if things go south in a hurry. As we've seen in the last two accidents, things often happen quickly and without any warning at all.

I know it's kind of off-topic, but if anyone is interested in the physiological aspects of how the mind and body work in a situation like this, two excellent books are David Grossman's "On Combat" and "Extreme Fear" by Jeff Wise.

Both books give a good in-depth look at what happens to your body in an extremely stressful situation as your brain ratchets down from the hi-level thinking mode into the low-level "fight or flight" mode. On Combat is directed more at military and law enforcement, people involved in combat situations, but it gives a great analysis of what happens to your body during an adrenaline dump (loss of fine motor skills, narrowing vision, auditory exclusion, apparent time dilation, and voiding of the bladder and bowels to lighten the body and enable it to run faster). Extreme fear gives similar analysis, though it's directed at a more generic audience. Both books also talk about how you can work around these physiological reactions and keep your the high-level part of your brain in the fight, so to speak.

[Dispatch Dog]

Looks like the spoilers didn't retract, so pax would have had trouble navigating between them to slide down the flaps if someone had bolted through the wing exits and taken panicked passengers with them.

[snydersnapshots]

Looks like the spoilers didn't retract, so pax would have had trouble navigating between them to slide down the flaps if someone had bolted through the wing exits and taken panicked passengers with them.

I looked at the pictures and it looks like some of the panels did retract, though not all of them for some reason. It looks like the ground spoilers and some of the flight spoilers have retracted. I'm wondering if that was a function of the loss of the A system quantity due to a break in the line to the landing gear (also on A system).

It's hard to tell if the flaps are all the way down at 40 or not (I don't know if they landed at 30 or 40), but you can see it's quite a drop to the ground from the trailing edge of the wing. That's why I was assuming people would take the shortest path to the ground in my earlier example...

[Gabriel]

Gabriel- Are you sure that "THE" touchdown is on the video??...

How was that about absolute statements being wrong almost 100% of the times?

The main thing I'll say is that I wouldn't trust it too much, but my interpretation is that we see them rolling around the moment of the nose gear setting down and then clunk...definate chance I'm wrong.

Look at the white runway edge line. It moves towards to the "top" of the frame in the moments previous to the collapse (that in my interpretation coincide with the touchdown). That "movement" means either that the airplane is moving left, that it's moving down, or that the runway is getting wider.

[Dispatch Dog]

How was that about absolute statements being wrong almost 100% of the times?


Look at the white runway edge line. It moves towards to the "top" of the frame in the moments previous to the collapse (that in my interpretation coincide with the touchdown). That "movement" means either that the airplane is moving left, that it's moving down, or that the runway is getting wider.

Final resting place has starboard engine on the grass and its a wide runway. Methinks he drifted right from centreline. No wonder with a landing gear stuffed up the pilots' jacksie

[Evan]

NTSB is saying they landed with -3° pitch, nose gear first.

No flare? Altitude error?

[Dispatch Dog]

NTSB is saying they landed with -3° pitch, nose gear first.

No flare? Altitude error?

And a speed error.
Usually a nosewheel first touch down triggers the hops as the nose shoots back up... unless it absorbs the energy by pushing through the cockpit floor making the pilot blush in more ways than one.

Sorry, just can't get over that pic and the image of the pilot with imprints of the fuse panel on his forehead...

[Gabriel]

NTSB is saying they landed with -3° pitch, nose gear first.

No flare? Altitude error?

Strange. -3° is too low even before starting the flare.

They were either too fast, or in a steep approach, or below 1G.

[snydersnapshots]

Strange. -3° is too low even before starting the flare.

They were either too fast, or in a steep approach, or below 1G.

Pure speculation here. I have no inside information and no knowledge of the accident other than what I've read on here.

A) I wonder if there has been a much stronger emphasis on pitch attitude during landing since SWA started getting -800's. The -800 is much more pitch critical on landing than the -700 in order to keep from dragging the tail. Perhaps they were overly conscious of keeping a low pitch attitude during landing. I realize this was a -700, but still....

Or, more likely,

B) High approach and/or extra speed, coupled with a short runway. Maybe they tried to force it onto the runway rather than float and use up runway. That being said, flying for SWA, they should be used to short runways since they routinely fly into Midway, Hobby, and Love...

Those are my thoughts on the matter. We'll have to wait for the final report to see what really happened. I'm not going to point fingers though, because there but for the grace of God go I.

I find it ironic that, at opposite ends of the month of July, we've had two accidents in opposite ends of the country that crunched opposite ends of the airplane because, possibly, they were flying at opposite ends (relatively) of the airspeed spectrum.

[Evan]

I find it ironic that, at opposite ends of the month of July, we've had two accidents in opposite ends of the country that crunched opposite ends of the airplane because, possibly, they were flying at opposite ends (relatively) of the airspeed spectrum.

And (pure speculation) two incidents of continuing an unstabilized approach.

[3WE]

And (pure speculation) two incidents of continuing an unstabilized approach.

Can't wait to hear if ATC set them up kind of high...

[brianw999]

?..........

.........Bet the pilots didn't have as much headroom as before.

I'd stab a guess at them not having a huge amount of bum room either !

( ooooh, sorry, I forgot the blue text !! )

[Evan]

Can't wait to hear if ATC set them up kind of high...

3WE, I think you're still confusing this forum with your bowling forum...

[Vnav]

Can't wait to hear if ATC set them up kind of high...

I don't get a whole lot of legs into SFO, but I can recall several times finding myself high on the damn FMS Bridge visuals to the 28s.

On the other hand, I consider myself a damn near expert on LGA and can't recall ever being placed in a bad situation by NY TRACON at LGA, particulalrly on the ILS to 4. The airspace is such that they have to get you down for coordination with the other airports and departures. Crossing GRENE at 2700' is pretty standard. With the possible exception of the rare visual to 13, If you find yourself high at LGA, it's probably of your own making.