KLM 737 ran of the runway

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 01 Dec 2004, 15:42

Now I start quoting myself!!!

(I think I need some fresh air?)

Hi FlightSimCrew,
I did not expect you would throw the window open like this!!!!

AN124 · Post by **AN124** » 01 Dec 2004, 15:46

I also read the story about the bird strike at SPL.
It could be that the nose landinggear wasn't centered causing the plane to go off course.
This could indeed be caused by the bird strike and I'm not sure if there is a sensor that detects this error.

@ Flightsimcrew:
Could you please change your avatar. This one is a bit big.

Best Regards,
Yvo

FlightSimCrew · Post by **FlightSimCrew** » 01 Dec 2004, 15:47

sorry.. something went wrong .when uploading the IMG

Falcon_900 · Post by **Falcon_900** » 01 Dec 2004, 17:17

Hello!!!

Once again I'm trying to put the image.

Anyway here it is the link.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/721949/L/

AN124 I also have read something about a bird striking... It sound strange,don't it?

Bye!!

Daurid · Post by **Daurid** » 01 Dec 2004, 21:13

Well yes you are correct it is a mechanical problem caused by an external factor in this case the big bird.

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 02 Dec 2004, 19:46

Thanks for all the information you gave us Daurit.

Chris

Daurid · Post by **Daurid** » 02 Dec 2004, 21:05

No problem pleasure

AN124 · Post by **AN124** » 06 Dec 2004, 19:48

And here she is towed on the platform again:

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=282905

Looking to the damage I think KLM will repair the damage and we will see the bird in the air again in the near future.

When looking to the left engine it looks like something went in their. Maybe a big bunch of birds that flew into the engine and caused the plane to bank lift whilst on the runway.

But let's wait with conclusion intil the official report is published. The above mentioned just came up in my mind.

Best Regards,
Yvo

Post by **sn26567** » 07 Dec 2004, 09:18

It looks indeed like it can be repaired. Thanks for pic, Yvo.

AN124 · Post by **AN124** » 15 Dec 2004, 13:14

Sad enough the 737 will be a written off.

At his picture you can see that titles are already removed:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/732880/L/

And the plane is also no longer in the KLM fleet system.

Best Regards,
Yvo

waldova · Post by **waldova** » 15 Dec 2004, 14:58

I guess they don't want peole to see the KLM logo on a broken aircraft. They don't want people to get a bad opinion about KLM's safety!

Flying_Dutchman · Post by **Flying_Dutchman** » 15 Dec 2004, 16:23

I don't believe KLM will dump this aircraft, this damage is to repair. Look to the Transavia aircraft that ran off the runway on Christmas night 1997 in AMS:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/307769/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/182973/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/055790/M/

This aircraft flew again after a big repair

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/320515/M/

But there is one difference: How to get the PH-BTC back to AMS for a repair? The Transavia plane was "crashed" in AMS, so they have only moved the plane to the hangar.

Post by **luchtzak** » 15 Dec 2004, 22:04

waldova wrote:I guess they don't want peole to see the KLM logo on a broken aircraft. They don't want people to get a bad opinion about KLM's safety!

It's normal that they remove the titles from a crashed aircraft. I think it's IATA regulations to do so.

earthman · Post by **earthman** » 15 Dec 2004, 22:41

KLM has such characteristic livery, a plane with such colors but without the KLM logo will only draw more attention. "Huh, a KLM plane with the logo missing? Let's take a closer look!"

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 16 Dec 2004, 07:43

luchtzak wrote:
waldova wrote:I guess they don't want peole to see the KLM logo on a broken aircraft. They don't want people to get a bad opinion about KLM's safety!
It's normal that they remove the titles from a crashed aircraft. I think it's IATA regulations to do so.

Never heard of nor read about this IATA rule.
I presume it is a marketing rule....
Remember all the IATA members that did not (timely) remove or cover their name or logos on the wrecked aircraft, never read that they were in breach of a IATA-rule.
If such rule would existed I would rather expect to find it in ICAO rules.

May I remind of the different aims and roles of these organisations?
IATA brings together approximately 270 airlines, including the world's largest.

And The International Civil Aviation Organization, or ICAO, the specialized agency of the United Nations whose mandate is to ensure the safe, efficient and orderly evolution of international civil aviation.
ICAO standards and other provisions are developed in the following forms:
Standards and Recommended Practices - collectively referred to as SARPs;
Procedures for Air Navigation Services - called PANS;
Regional Supplementary Procedures - referred to as SUPPs; and
Guidance Material in several formats.

May I also remind that some multi-natonal and welknown companies other than airlines, have the same rule, that instructs their staff to cover and hide logos of their vehicles in case of accident or disaster. They are not IATA nor ICAO members, and so this makes me conclude its a 'marketing rule'.

After all, isn't it human to be ashamed. Didn't you try to hide when as a kid you were falling with your bicycle? And how would you have liked to cry, but could not in public?

sab319 · Post by **sab319** » 16 Dec 2004, 11:16

Maybe the B734 was going to be replaced by a B738 soon and that's why they scrapped it?

Sabena_690 · Post by **Sabena_690** » 16 Dec 2004, 14:08

@Sab319: not correct, as KL have no outstanding B737 orders. And still than, you just don't write off an aircraft because it would be replaced. It's only 12-13 years old...

Frederic

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 16 Dec 2004, 14:28

Sabena_690 wrote:@Sab319: not correct, as KL have no outstanding B737 orders. And still than, you just don't write off an aircraft because it would be replaced. It's only 12-13 years old... Frederic

Maybe it is a matter of cost. Leasing a 737 and cannibalising that other one is maybe more cost-efficient?

tojolmt · Post by **tojolmt** » 16 Apr 2005, 22:17

C_J wrote:that would never happen to SN Brussels Airlines...

Why not? I am a KLM mechanic working in spain and will tell you all what happened: the a/c had a bird strike in take off roll in schiphol airport. What the crew didn´t knew was that the bird hit damaged the wheel steering AND the down lock nose gear system. When it landed, the nose wheel colapsed and the a/c skid out from the runway. When it left the runway, the main gear colapsed also, leaving the a/c in his belly.
Birds don´t choose airlines to hit. They were there first and humans are the intruders. It could happen to anyone. (You would be amazed to see the amount of bird strike inspections we have to do to the a/c of several airlines, including SN Brussels and Virgin Express a/c).

tojolmt · Post by **tojolmt** » 16 Apr 2005, 22:20

Flying_Dutchman wrote:I don't believe KLM will dump this aircraft, this damage is to repair. Look to the Transavia aircraft that ran off the runway on Christmas night 1997 in AMS:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/307769/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/182973/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/055790/M/

This aircraft flew again after a big repair

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/320515/M/

But there is one difference: How to get the PH-BTC back to AMS for a repair? The Transavia plane was "crashed" in AMS, so they have only moved the plane to the hangar.

They will dispose of the a/c. They are removing already all the serviceable components from the a/c.

Aviation24.be

KLM 737 ran of the runway

klm 737-400 crash

And how would you have liked to cry, but could not in public