Back to Squawk list
  • 26

Danish Investigators Probing TAP A320 Inflight Reverser-Deployment

제출됨
 
A TAP Air Portugal Airbus A320 had three thrust reverser doors deploy during a go-around at Copenhagen earlier in April, forcing the crew to declare an emergency before safely landing the aircraft on a subsequent attempt, a preliminary Danish Accident Investigation Board report said. The April 8... (aviationweek.com) 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


KicksOnRoute66
I just realized this is a paywall site. Another source https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/30786-tap-portugal-copenhagen-thrust-reverser
cmuncy
Thanks Roger.
dwight666
I don’t think I pay for this site. Just sign up for the email newsletters….
emlouise
He means the site he linked to in the squawk
bentwing60
bentwing60 15
TR deployment in flight is one of the Top of the list OMG fails, especially with a wing mounted twin, and in my history of Sim. flight training (multiple types, multiple recurrent events) it has never been stressed in the curriculum, probably because it is such a rare event.

To occur during a missed approach IMHO is a worst case scenario and this crew apparently did Everything by the QRH. Kudos to the right folks in the right place at the right time! And there is still room for a little Luck or Amen in any game.
avionik99
How is this even possible? I thought this system was mechanically locked out so a electrical issue could never cause this. They never touched ground even?
ewrcap
Not the first time a plane crashed or almost crashed when something impossible happened! Good argument for having a human on every flight.
dwight666
Self-driving cars too
bentwing60
I believe that I read somewhere that they actually did make ground contact. True or not I can't say. the TR system is protected from inadvertent deployment by multiple systems, WOW, ground prox. or target type switches, whatever you wish to call them. Their purpose in part is to unlock the TR mechanical locks so the TR's can deploy. The throttles must be at idle as well! the impossible is always possible when the stars align for 'That can't happen"!
Y2KRene
You confirm my conjecture of a unsettled-undecided landing, one of the gears already in full ground contact before go-around was initiated. This might have deactivated the safety interlock(s)? According to some report, the engine in question was at idle trust at the time the trust reversers (3 of 4) were deployed. I doubt that the engine could have been at 'go-around' trust at the time of the 'aborted' landing.

bentwing60
Both mains must have the prox. switches made to unlock the TR's in any normal deployment. However, a go around decision after a partial TR deploy could well have left an in transit TR in limbo. The left engine with the partially deployed diverter doors, (3 of 4) was at 'IDLE' for the entire go around or the airplane would have wound up on its back and an entirely different story. DAIB prelim. below.

https://samchui.com/2022/04/21/serious-incident-tap-a320-thrust-reverser-deploys-during-go-around/

At any rate, well beyond abnormal or 'Red Box' in any QRH.
Dl8698
The fact that only 3 of 4 doors deployed on 1 eng seems to me it's a purely mechanical failure rather than an uncommanded deployment. A pilot would normally grab both TR levers together to actuate.

We are not told why they decided to GA but if ground observers think they have already touched down wouldn't that mean they were below decision altitude? (200'?) It's hard to belive people can't differentiate an aircaft at Above 200' and think it has already contacted the ground.
So why did they decide to abort? Cows on runway?

Btw the Lauda crash resulted in lots of mods on TR systems to prevent in flight deployment. So I think it's probably a mechanical failure (as in broken locking parts?) rather than uncommanded deployment.
bentwing60
DH, the correct term for an ILS, is a gaslight of you haven't a clue either, so, yes it was more than obvious that they were below mins. if they were doin' anything other than a CAT111 ILS and had the required visuals and were committed to a landing!

Absolute last second aborts usually mean that the captain knew something that we don't, like, OMG, this runway was longer last time! Who knows? In time the DAIB will tell us that they do. You may critique them as well.
augerin
...I guess the 320 didn't want to do the 'go around'...
21voyageur
This has developed into a trend since FlightAware was purchased last year. Would not be surprised in one bit if this click-bait/paywall business model is not a key part of its revenue stream.

Just more annoyance when coupled with part-time amateur contributors and editors (are there any?). Little enjoyment when Fridays are now spent editing poor reporting and questionable business practices.

Sad. Another sandbox for enthusiasts is disappearing before our eyes.

How about a statement from the editorial board? How about a statement by Collins? Be straight with your audience.
emlouise
The poster didn't realize the link was paywalled. He's commented with a free source to correct it
TorstenHoff
I can't wait for MH370 to elucidate this incident...

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

akebonolove
Oh really A-hole? What about this? On May 26, 1991, Lauda Air Flight 004 from Bangkok, Thailand to Vienna, Austria entered an uncontrolled dive and broke up mid-air after the thrust reverser on the Boeing 767’s no 1 engine deployed uncommanded in flight. All 213 passengers and 10 crew died.

로그인

계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
종료
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..
종료