37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1344995 |
Time | |
Date | 201604 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | B747-400 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Landing |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Trailing Edge Flap |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Not Flying Captain Check Pilot |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
I was pilot monitoring performing check airman duties with a first officer (first officer) performing pilot flying duties during his line training leg. Flight was routine. We discussed landing issues/terrain during cruise; and checked fom for any applicable restrictions. Only fom restriction that I could find was 'no autoland'. Flap 25 landing at 179 tons (ILS in VMC) with appropriate wind additive for headwind was planned. Landing was not smooth; but I did not consider it to be hard.on post-flight inspection; the right inboard trailing edge flap was found to be not fully retracted; and there was damage to one of the associated flap track fairings/canoes. Flaps had been selected to the up position after landing; and EICAS showed them fully retracted. Cockpit voice recorder was then pulled and systems control; management duty pilot and maintenance control were informed of aircraft damage.in the distant past; I believe there was a procedure for the pilot monitoring to set a different barometer minimums bug to then have him make a callout to help compensate for the lack of radio altitude callouts? This might have been helpful to the pilot flying. In reality; the new first officer undergoing training would have benefitted from some more recent flying experience or a simulator refresher prior to starting line training. In the future; I will delay flap retraction on any landing that is firmer than normal; as this may have prevented some aircraft damage.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B747-400 Check Airman described a hard landing by a new First Officer; receiving initial line training; that resulted in damage to one of the flap track fairings for the right inboard trailing edge flap.
Narrative: I was pilot monitoring performing Check Airman duties with a First Officer (FO) performing pilot flying duties during his line training leg. Flight was routine. We discussed landing issues/terrain during cruise; and checked FOM for any applicable restrictions. Only FOM restriction that I could find was 'No autoland'. Flap 25 landing at 179 tons (ILS in VMC) with appropriate wind additive for headwind was planned. Landing was not smooth; but I did not consider it to be hard.On post-flight inspection; the right inboard trailing edge flap was found to be not fully retracted; and there was damage to one of the associated flap track fairings/canoes. Flaps had been selected to the up position after landing; and EICAS showed them fully retracted. Cockpit voice recorder was then pulled and Systems Control; Management Duty Pilot and Maintenance Control were informed of aircraft damage.In the distant past; I believe there was a procedure for the pilot monitoring to set a different barometer minimums bug to then have him make a callout to help compensate for the lack of radio altitude callouts? This might have been helpful to the pilot flying. In reality; the new First Officer undergoing training would have benefitted from some more recent flying experience or a simulator refresher prior to starting line training. In the future; I will delay flap retraction on any landing that is firmer than normal; as this may have prevented some aircraft damage.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.