Centurion Cargo MD-11 Gear Collapses After Landing at Sao Paulo
Centurion Cargo MD-11
A Centurion Cargo MD-11 jet had its gear collapse after landing at Congonhas International Airport in Campinas in Sao Paulo, Brazil on Saturday.
The incident to Centurion Flight 425 from Miami damaged its left landing gear and engine.
There were no reported injuries but the damaged is reported as substantial.
Category: Airnation
RULES FOR COMMENTING BELOW: Profanity, inappropriate comments, NAME CALLING, racial slurs and attacking others on this blog will not be tolerated. Breaking these rules will first get your posts removed and then you will be banned. In other words, spirited debate is always encouraged here but be respectful doing it. :)
The incident aircraft (N988AR) was built in 1991, so it will most likely be repaired rather than being written off. What a sad sight to see…
My favourite aircraft and I too am sad to see this beauty in distress.
I also await the reports of investigators but as a cargo carrier I have a feeling that sometimes aircrew are thinking a harder landing is okay as no regular fare paying passengers ( couriers excepted )are involved and cups of coffer shall not be spilt onto sensitive laps etc. thus no law suits shall follow!! However, if I was the pilot I would have greater regard for the flight data recorders in such events.
Sad site. Successor of my favorite aircraft the DC-10. I feel bad for the bird.
Would be nice to know the specifics. Maybe also nice to see where the maintenance and inspection was accomplished on the landing gear.
This incident happened in campinas, not in congonhas airport. Congonhas airport do not support an aircraft of this size.
Indeed, the incident occurred at Sao Paulo-Viracopos Intl AP (SBKP), Campinas
São Paulo is about 100 km from campinas.
I’ll have to see if I can dig the specifics up, but I read somewhere that this aircraft has been involved in a hard landing in the past that sheared the RH landing gear. It had a different tail number at that time, but it’s still possible to find the info.
http://avherald.com/h?article=457695b2
I haven’t been able to independently verify this information. Maybe in the morning.
Phil, you’re correct. This aircraft (though branded a different tail number) did have a failure of the right main gear during taxi in 2009.
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20091028X64921&key=1
I wonder if the events could be connected? I looked up any service difficulty reports for MD11 gear failures and it is NOT common…
Just for all you MD jocks out there on Pprune an Azul pilot who was at the hold line said that he witnessed the event and said that the gear collapsed AFTER the second or third touchdown. Big no no in the MD…
Time will tell. just glad no one was hurt. no harm intended to anyone including the crew…
Cheers
That’s definitely a big no-no! The MD11 doesn’t have a good history when put through “awkward” landings. In my mind i’m imagining a FedEx MD11 tumbling down an Asian runway…
May I ask why this is? Is it the tricycle midship landing gear, the number of wheels upon each wing assembly or upon the centre installation to distribute the weight or is it perhaps how the pilot decides to touch down?
B777′s and A380′s and even that Soviet relic TU 154 has 6 wheel structures and I guess for a good reason but if the pilot can forget that he/she is no longer landing upon a floating airport in the China seas then perhaps many of these incidents could be avoided. Just my view but it keeps me awake at nights sometimes…
yes fed ex had a bad landing. However, the Md-11 has several great “awkward landings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zpsKI6hGwk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbss9eDXFSs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFloyyEBblQ&playnext=1&list=PL5C2A231C58E638C4&feature=results_video
FDR first
It is good that Jennifer is so enthusiastic about airplanes. It appears that she also has a VERY active imagination coupled with not being very knowledgeable….which has resulted in two very strange posts ref. this MD-11 incident. It would be good if she could find a mentor to help her along with her aviation knowledge
Roger, no offense but what’s your problem? I think Jennifer raises a valid question- not exactly a trivial question. If you think you’re so ‘knowledgeable’ then why don’t you try to answer it for us? I’d be interested to know myself.
Seriously, that was uncalled for.
Jennifer doesn’t need a mentor. You need to relax.
Agreed, Lee!
My bad. Did not mean to portray that as mean. Yes Jennifer raises a valid point. Does landing gear # have an affect on how it lands. That Is something I would like to know about. As this may have had an effect on the accident.
Appogies if I offended anyone.
Well, well, well… It looks like someone made a little slip up when typing in their usernames!
“Quinn” or “Roger Baker”? Why would Quinn be taking the blame for something “Roger” said?
What is it with people adopting multiple identities on here? I’ve belonged to numerous forums, but never have i heard of someone doing such a thing… I wonder if they’re all linked… hmmm
In reference to Jennifer I believe cargo aircrews are not as careful as try should be. This is an issue cargo carriers need to deal with. Hopefully this would prevent accidents like this.
You’re a little off… The MD11 by design is very unstable during landings, and is especially prone to crosswinds. The weight and balance with the #2 engine in the tail contributes to the instability. Gear has little to do with it.
Thanks. I’ve always wondered why Dc-10′s and md-11′s have trouble in crosswinds. The #2 engine thing does make sense it could push the weight to one side.
Mix up I thought they were talkin in reference to me. I am not roger baker. I’m just Quinn not roger baker.
Thanks. I’ve always wondered why Dc-10′s and md-11′s have trouble in crosswinds. The #2 engine thing does
Make sense it could throw the weight to one side pushin the plane off balance.
Okay Gentlemen, I did not expect a fight to erupt from my comments but I ask again that people actually read what I contribute thoughtfully with as much care and attention that I employ when writing to this board.
I claim no industry expertise, no advanced degrees in engineering or aeronautics but I have a lifetime interest over nearly 50 years in all matters aviation with a special interest in the civil division. I have travelled widely on a great many of the great airliners that many of us celebrate and are no longer in the air. What I do have is a law degree and as such was taught to think before I speak, use words as carefully as possible to avoid mis-interpretation and to be as honest and open with those I engage with at all times. This, I hope and pray, is what I do upon this board.
As for seeking a mentor to educate me where do we begin? I repeat what I asked, are cargo pilots ex- navy? , used to heavy landings on floating airports? To me at least, it would appear so based upon very limited information and again I await the accident reports that may include the flight data recordings and not so much of the suspect media reporting. I thought I made that clear in my original posting!!
The landing gear failed, why did it fail and were the flight crew aware of any issues before landing, if yes, did they mitigate? If no did they employ normal procedures for landing? I am always willing to accept my errors of thought if evidence warrants it. We await such evidence.
What more can I say? I try my best to engage with everyone here but I find it troublesome when some of you jump into my pool without actually knowing why!!
God bless you all and thank you for your comments.
Great post Jennifer! Sometimes people need to puff out their chests and proclaim their expertise from the rooftops. *rollseyes*
Hopefully you’ll come over to the Social Hangar soon and lend your views. :) http://airnation.net/hangar
it is really interesting to view the point of a lawyer, and not only those aviators that seem to not end their eager for recognition, to stand out of the crowd they’ll do the stupidest things, know off course the pilot should be questioned but in my opinion the company is responsible for this problem because look at the records: the same airplane the other gear? its quite questionable what is going on here
At the risk of annoying the ghost of Roger Baker and anyone else that has doubts about my mental capacity to string a sentence together I would submit that the company’s legal team will be trawling through the paper trail and digital evidence to establish who, what, when and where the possible causes of this incident was conceived.
I maintain that we still have to read the reports of the Flight Data Recorders, the investigating authorities are still doing their work and there are pilots shitting bricks about their future employment prospects!
I come back to my original thoughts re: pilots of Cargo outfits being possibly former navy pilots used to landing hard upon floating runways knowing that the passengers happen to be ‘freight’ and not soft and cuddly humans…and would struggle to get the left seat upon the flight deck of a major passenger airline such as United or Emirates!!
Oh! …..indeed, I read Law at University.
Jennifer:
For what it’s worth, I am not a ghost nor am I annoyed. I am amused at your continued pursuit of of the rather bizarre idea that cargo pilots are Navy carrier pilots who won’t or can’t make safe and smooth landings.
My earlier message to you was sincere and I went to some trouble to make my comments positive. I specifically complimented you on your interest in aviation. I did not insult your individual messages….I merely said that your ideas were “strange”. I further suggested that you could probably profit from some interaction with someone who knows something about aviation. My point in suggesting that is that you then might be able put your indifferent/incompetent cargo pilot and landing gear geometry theories to rest on your own. What I didn’t do was to proclaim in any way any qualifications that I might have. I didn’t “puff up my chest and proclaim my qualifications” (as Lee Ferrara suggested) or my knowledge….I didn’t do ANYTHING to “toot my own horn”. I was simply attacked by Ferrara.
This leads me to believe that persons who might have a basis (in education and experience) are not welcome in this discussion or on this site….
May I also point out that I did not “express doubts about your mental capacity”. I leave it up to you to do that.
Roger Baker
Jennifer, you don’t have to prove yourself to anyone. This Roger Baker may think he has some “gift” for aviation but he lacks the appropriate communication skills and respect to be taken seriously on the public domain. He seems to lack the art of a teacher.
Hi Chris,
You too are a wonderful fellow….just oozing aeronautical wisdom (and misinformation). Are you some kind of official pit bull of this site? If so, let me know.
I don’t think I’ve implied that I have any “gift” for aviation nor have I claimed any particular experience, wisdom or education. But, I know a foolish statement when I see it, and I am not so wishy washy as to not say something.
I think there are a few people on this forum that have some insight and experience in aviation (you are so aggressive that it is difficult to tell if you’re all hot air or not)…but there are also some who seem to be wandering around in some kind of peculiar protocol fog that prevents any meaningful discussion from taking place.
So keep up your little Sir Galahad routine “protecting” Jennifer if you like. I simply don’t care. Find yourself a target (like me), lash out, and feel like some kind of hero. Once again, I simply don’t care what kind of little games you must play with yourself to keep your ego pumped up.
Roger Baker
Before I take the trouble to engage with this forum, I take the time to read opinions and comments and then think upon them and if deemed desirable, I respond in a way I think may be of assistance or interest to other members. Never do I seek to impinge upon any persons integrity or knowledge or right to disagree with me.
Mr. Baker seems to find issue with my seemingly colourful theories about the qualities of cargo airline pilots, just a theory mind you and not an assertion, and the circumstances surrounding the Centurion MD-11 landing incident. That is his right and a right I would defend even as a Brit that does not understand why some Americans are genetically hostile to reasoned thought and honest opinions that go against that of the reader!! I assumed Mr. Baker to be a US citizen but if that is not the case I apologise and withdraw my comments.
If someone wishes to be my Knight in armour and defend me then that is his privilege and is a rather nice thing to behold.
What I shall not tolerate is insults flying around the place however disguised because of my contributions to this forum. Just where on earth is the moderator in this place and exactly what is he/she doing? I know, some wise guy will say that this is a response platform and not a forum in the understood form but to me that is no excuse for verbal violence and insulting behaviour.
Can we just stick to the point of this thread about a MD-11 incident and the why’s and wherefore’s etc.?
Thank you Gentlemen!!!
Hi Jennifer,
We do moderate this site. If there is something you feel is offensive and insulting email me at the contact link at the bottom of this site and I will look in to it.
Lee
I do not know, but i predict that maintenance had something to do with this accident. Does anyone know what happened exactly?
I am sorry but you guys have no Idea what you are talking about the #2 engine placement has NOTHING to do with stability. I can land an md11 in horrendous winds and actually do it smoothly. it is all about airspeed and when the wing decides to quit flying. ALL md 11 training incorporates hard and bounced landing training and crews in the heat of the moment forget what they are taught. The procedure is not to salvage a bounced landing and go around which is exactly what they did not do and suffered the consequences.
FED EX did exactly the same thing as well as many others. If the airspeed decays as it does the plane quits flying and the landing gear limits are exceeded causing structural failure. that is as simple as it gets.
read some accident reports and they tell you exactly the amount of force exerted on the landing gear or structure and when it is exceed the inevitable happens. Sad but true. you have to respect limits and the flying envelope of the aircraft. that is all.
Jim, the placement of the #2 engine in the tail of the DC10/MD11 absolutely affects stability during landing. Unlike most aircraft, aircraft such as the DC10/MD11, 727 and L1011 have much different aerodynamic properties due to being more tail heavy. These aircraft (based on my experience with the 727) typically require more attention to prevent the tail from sinking at slow speeds. This effect was made worse on the MD11 as McDonnell Douglas shortened the tailplane in an effort to increase fuel economy. This effect is reflected by the record number of tail-strikes reported in the SDR database for the MD11. As a result, McDonnell Douglas developed a computer controlled fuel ballast system in the tail to help with stability during landing (this was one of the first aircraft to employ such a device). There’s no questioning the fact that the DC10/MD11 is more difficult to handle than most other comparable aircraft.
dear sir once again you do not know what you are talking about. the MD11 is not allowed to land with fuel in the tail tank. it transfers out of the tail if it has not be burned on decent to land with ZERO fuel in the tail tank.
this is in fact a limitation. and as a matter of fact do not lump the dc 10 with the md11. the dc10 is a very docile airplane and does not have tail fuel management. everyone who has flown a DC10 will agree it was a great handling airplane in all flight regimes.
By the way how much time do you have any way. I think not much. upping the ante here.
Good day, I say good day…
PS what is SDR.
The MD11′s tail ballast system was implemented to control the center of gravity. The aircraft can and certainly has landed with the ballast filled or emptied based on the CG. Phase of flight is independent of the ballast system. As fuel is burned on long flights, the ballasts will drain as needed. The DC10 does not need the system due to the larger tailplane, and thus doesn’t exhibit the same instability as the MD-11.
And i don’t fly; my expertise is in engineering systems. And SDR stands for service difficulty reports. There is an inordinate amount of reports clearly illustrating the stability issues with the MD-11 and DC-10, though to a lesser extent.