What is worse is pilots taking off without having noticed they forgot about the flaps. Watched two shows on this - different airlines, different years but same reason. Neither maintained a sterile cockpit right before takeoff, chatting with an attendant and not completing checks. Terrible outcome on both. Planes couldn't get lift. With these guys obviously a mechanical problem with flaps. Great job on landing. Great video too!
I watched this to learn what went on behind the scenes when things happen. I was on a flight to BWI about ten years ago that had to land without flaps. We went around, dumped fuel, and the pilot informed us what was going on and to not be worried. He said we landed at 220 instead of the normal 140. He put it down right at the threshold, and used one turn away from the end. No problem. Glad to have real professionals doing this day in and day out. 👍
also called Lindbergh Field) is considered by some to be one of the country's most dangerous due to its downtown location. What's more, mountains to its north and east, Mexican airspace to its south, 😁
@@G_Kaz Though not a whole lot easier, you're still dropping over a (smaller) hill and have another displaced threshold. SAN has displaced thresholds on both 9 and 27, which is crazy.
Wow! KSAN runway 27/09 is very short and 27 has a steep stepped approach due to buildings on final. It is also one of the busiest single runway airports in the country. (And the 09 approach has some exciting terrain).
that last METAR call with 1/2sm FG had me in chills with FDX906 coming in with no flaps. Would really love to see a cockpit view to really see the decision making and maintaining calm as a pilot part.
Well done the crew, go round, try to fix then try land when they couldn't fix it. Everything was clear communication and maybe a very fast landing. He even let them know emergency equipment is not needed and got off the runway. They must have been sure there was no fire on the brakes, but then they still had reverse thrust. Fast landings are not good!
Mixed luck I guess. Most of the time KSAN lands 27 with the steep approach over the Laurel St. Parking garage, so flipping around and coming in the other direction is good. The bad is, they managed to find one of the rare foggy nights out here.
Because I know someone is gonna say it. It is not a DC-10. The MD-10 is a DC-10 with an upgraded cockpit that also eliminated the need for a flight engineer.
@@aussiebloke609 For all practical purposes its a DC10 with an MD11 cockpit. Not exactly, but close enough for arguments sake. -19 year FedEx aircraft mechanic.
Been on two flights that have experienced this out of my years of business flying. That flat and hot approach they use when dealing with this is pretty crazy. But both times landed safely - one at JFK, one at ORD. Both required ARFF to hose down the brakes though.
VASAviation - having landed on it many times, can confirm it’s sporting but manageable. In a MD with no high lift devices to slow you down, I’m not sure gear would be enough to keep you on speed for that approach angle 🤔 good job to the crew
Just curious...did the ILS approach pose another challenge? I'd think they could have come in a little lower and slower on a visual, but a 9 knot crosswind, fog at 200 feet and 1/2 mile visibility made the visual impossible.
You're not going to want to drag in an MD10 "lower and slower" on a visual; stabilized approaches are crucial for a safe landing, and even more in that aircraft type. FedEx has a HUD on the captain's side for all aircraft but the A300, and the HUD has FLIR, so they can see the runway through the clouds. As far as crosswind is concerned, 9 knots is well below the limit for the MD10, although I'm not sure if it changes in a no-flap scenario.@@leghumper83
@@leghumper83 You follow a hill down to runway 09 at San Diego. You really don't want to be low on that approach. The neighbors don't want tire tracks on their roof. ;) Edit: Scratch that. The small hill is on 09. The real hill that I was thinking of is going in from the other end - to 27. But 09 has the benefit of a slightly longer effective runway, since the 27 end has a displaced threshold. From the 09 end, a plane landing fast can still use the area past the threshold to stop.
ive been a passenger on a plane that didn't have flaps for landing going into Denver it was definitely nerve racking coming in twice as fast as normal and seeing the fire trucks lining the runway BUT ended the same as this landed and went to the gate just fine
I dont know if you could do this, but i live near Providence, and i listened to the ATC trying to get planes to land Monday. There was bad windshear, and many planes had to divert. I would Love to see a video on that.
First and foremost. Nobody got injured! Amen to that. Now that said... Fedex"hey tower we is flapless! Atc"try harder" FedEx"we tired, we've been flapping all the way here!" 😆
My dad was a truck driver and when he would get in he would tell his dispatcher, "I just arrived and boy is my arm tired." "Why" "From whipping those 600 horses all night!"
There was a plane in a snowbank exiting the runway at Toronto Pearson. Initially thought to be off the taxiway but later confirmed to actually be on the taxiway...
@@randomgooglename I know right, people act like Ryanair' is such a subpar airline because apparently, they make 'hard landings' when literally every single landing I've had with them is the same as any other airline
108 108 the joke was funny the first thousand times i read it is all im saying. just annoying af. reminds me of the kid in school that ruins the joke and everybody just stops laughing because of it
Wow. Kind of surprised he would even attempt landing a MD10 at SAN with no flaps, compounded with low ceilings and multiple missed approaches. Not much margin for error given the runway length. Gutsy call with obvious confidence.
im always surprised how scratchy and muffled the people are. id have thought the clarity of the transmissions would be crystal clear by 2019! I know there must be technical limitations to the radio transmissions, so that's probably why.
It's because what we hear has been picked up mostly by amateur radio listening, usually someone nearby the airport with an aerial and a computer. This means there are often objects in the way of the line of sight as well as various sources of interference, so the signal isn't as clear as in the sky, where the planes and airport have good antennas and almost always have line of sight.
It's also VHF radio, which is the same as they used over 50 years ago, maybe even 80 years ago. The microphones and speakers have gotten better, and the transceivers as well, but we're still limited by radio transmissions themselves. It is just a bit scratchy sounding, not the clearest.
San Diego uses runway 27 95% of the time unless there's trash weather; sounds like bad weather and heavy fog/marine layer on top of it. Lucky that they made it in
@@VASAviation very true. I lived in San Diego for some time and got to know the traffic pattern pretty well just from watching aircraft fly in. Others have brought this up but this approach was probably only possible on runway 09 due to the steep approach on 27 required by downtown.
gaddemyt Most likely because there is a hill before runway 27 and it seems like they would have to decend really fast on short final but with runway 09 there is no hill that I know of and they would have a normal approach, just a guess
Runway 27 doesn't have an ILS approach because of terrain. Runway 9 does. The visibility was about 1/2 miles, so all aircraft needed the ILS 9, instead of the less precise RNAV approach for 27.
Landing heavyweight with no flaps at KSAN of all places is very sporty! Edit: landing on 27 is less of an issue opposed to the localizer for 9 which goes over the skyline
I guess the pilot can still use Airbrakes and extend the landing gear to slow down the aircraft. Choosing to land on a runway facing the wind can help too.
Not easy. The MD-11 has a very high stall speed and I imagine that the DC-10/MD-10, its predecessor, also has a high stall speed. By contrast, the Boeing 757 has a really slow stall speed of just 87 knots.
In a Cessna 172, flaps slow you down while maintaining a pitch down attitude for better visibility and reduces stall speeds. Without flaps, the only way to slow down would be to maintain pitch up attitude which results in approaching the runway flat and it’s hard to see the runaway. I remember practicing a flaps 0 landing once and the whole time I thought I was too high on approach but in reality the approach was fine, the sight of the runway looked completely different as I wasn’t able to aim for the numbers. Good reminder to practice once again. I think landing without flaps is challenging and definitely I would definitely declare an emergency.
@@_chipchip the DC-10 had a bad reputation in it's earlier stages but afterwards the stats showed is actually fairly safe as time went on, even with the cargo door issues, and it being the cause for the Air France Concorde to crash.
![[REAL ATC] Turkish B77W is HIT BY SEVERE TURBULENCE | Multiple Injuries](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cxniygV1o_0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Run Away - Tzuyu(TWICE) ツウィ 쯔위 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 240906](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KnHNNyAYiu0/mqdefault.jpg)
![[REAL ATC] Fedex MD11 diverts to Newark due to FUEL LEAKING](/img/1.gif)
*You don't realize how useful flaps are until you can't use them... :D*
Untrimmed video will be available soon.
VASAviation - PLEASE MAKE A VIDEO ON THE NEWYORK JET BLAST INCIDENT!!!!!
Not to mention this is one of the issues that the United airlines crash in Sioux City ended up with
What is worse is pilots taking off without having noticed they forgot about the flaps. Watched two shows on this - different airlines, different years but same reason. Neither maintained a sterile cockpit right before takeoff, chatting with an attendant and not completing checks. Terrible outcome on both. Planes couldn't get lift.
With these guys obviously a mechanical problem with flaps. Great job on landing. Great video too!
Especially when they aren't deployed before takeoff and you run out of runway.
@@Cissy2cute ,
I thought it was slats on the leading edge that the crew was having problems with.
I think I detected a glimmer of pride when he stated that he didn't need any assistance in the end. Great job
I don't think so... more so a glimmer of relief, he probably wasn't flying if he was on the radios.
Considering he landed without flaps while everyone else was having to go-around I think he deserves some bragging rights lol
Wow, this brings an entirely new perspective as a consumer awaiting a FedEx package today. Glad they landed safely.
Now you can consider why your packages reach you ;)
I watched this to learn what went on behind the scenes when things happen. I was on a flight to BWI about ten years ago that had to land without flaps.
We went around, dumped fuel, and the pilot informed us what was going on and to not be worried. He said we landed at 220 instead of the normal 140.
He put it down right at the threshold, and used one turn away from the end. No problem.
Glad to have real professionals doing this day in and day out. 👍
Ah, the infamous “Space Shuttle Approach” into Lindbergh.
It must be so terrifying landing on 9 with no flaps since just feet after the threshold you see downtown. Props to the pilots and controllers!
With visibility half a mile with fog, not sure how much of anything they were seeing after the threshold :p
No flaps at Lindbergh Field? That's a ride if there ever was one!
No flaps IN A HEAVY at Lindbergh. That'll get the blood flowing.
also called Lindbergh Field) is considered by some to be one of the country's most dangerous due to its downtown location. What's more, mountains to its north and east, Mexican airspace to its south, 😁
@@MarcDufresneosorusrex yeah, feels like you clear the downtown skyscrapers then drop like a slug.
"any idea the approach speed you will need?"
Pause
"...fast..."
This is a really tricky airport to land in the best conditions.
Indeed!
Only airport I've ever had multiple aborted landings at.
At least they were landing from a western approach, easier than through the skyline coming from the East.
@@G_Kaz Though not a whole lot easier, you're still dropping over a (smaller) hill and have another displaced threshold. SAN has displaced thresholds on both 9 and 27, which is crazy.
Wow! KSAN runway 27/09 is very short and 27 has a steep stepped approach due to buildings on final. It is also one of the busiest single runway airports in the country. (And the 09 approach has some exciting terrain).
Exactly!
I was thinking the same thing. KSAN is exciting to land under any circumstances, much less flying a heavy w/o slats.
that last METAR call with 1/2sm FG had me in chills with FDX906 coming in with no flaps. Would really love to see a cockpit view to really see the decision making and maintaining calm as a pilot part.
Well done the crew, go round, try to fix then try land when they couldn't fix it. Everything was clear communication and maybe a very fast landing. He even let them know emergency equipment is not needed and got off the runway. They must have been sure there was no fire on the brakes, but then they still had reverse thrust. Fast landings are not good!
Mixed luck I guess. Most of the time KSAN lands 27 with the steep approach over the Laurel St. Parking garage, so flipping around and coming in the other direction is good. The bad is, they managed to find one of the rare foggy nights out here.
Because I know someone is gonna say it. It is not a DC-10. The MD-10 is a DC-10 with an upgraded cockpit that also eliminated the need for a flight engineer.
Many people said it already :(
@@VASAviation not surprising, but you can't blame people for not knowing. I thought I would've answered the question for most before they asked.
So it's effectively a DC-10, only with a modified designation to indicate the avionics upgrade?
@@aussiebloke609 For all practical purposes its a DC10 with an MD11 cockpit. Not exactly, but close enough for arguments sake. -19 year FedEx aircraft mechanic.
Thanks, mate - I never knew. :-)
There was another recent one in San Diego, maybe a week ago? A private jet landed at KSAN without brakes. Busy month in SD.
Been on two flights that have experienced this out of my years of business flying. That flat and hot approach they use when dealing with this is pretty crazy. But both times landed safely - one at JFK, one at ORD. Both required ARFF to hose down the brakes though.
Not sure if they'd be able to do this to 27 with the displaced threshold and 3.5 degree approach path...good job to the crew for pulling it off.
That 27 is really challenging indeed.
VASAviation - having landed on it many times, can confirm it’s sporting but manageable. In a MD with no high lift devices to slow you down, I’m not sure gear would be enough to keep you on speed for that approach angle 🤔 good job to the crew
Just curious...did the ILS approach pose another challenge? I'd think they could have come in a little lower and slower on a visual, but a 9 knot crosswind, fog at 200 feet and 1/2 mile visibility made the visual impossible.
You're not going to want to drag in an MD10 "lower and slower" on a visual; stabilized approaches are crucial for a safe landing, and even more in that aircraft type. FedEx has a HUD on the captain's side for all aircraft but the A300, and the HUD has FLIR, so they can see the runway through the clouds. As far as crosswind is concerned, 9 knots is well below the limit for the MD10, although I'm not sure if it changes in a no-flap scenario.@@leghumper83
@@leghumper83 You follow a hill down to runway 09 at San Diego. You really don't want to be low on that approach. The neighbors don't want tire tracks on their roof. ;) Edit: Scratch that. The small hill is on 09. The real hill that I was thinking of is going in from the other end - to 27. But 09 has the benefit of a slightly longer effective runway, since the 27 end has a displaced threshold. From the 09 end, a plane landing fast can still use the area past the threshold to stop.
ive been a passenger on a plane that didn't have flaps for landing going into Denver it was definitely nerve racking coming in twice as fast as normal and seeing the fire trucks lining the runway BUT ended the same as this landed and went to the gate just fine
For all you do, this Bud's for you!
I dont know if you could do this, but i live near Providence, and i listened to the ATC trying to get planes to land Monday. There was bad windshear, and many planes had to divert. I would Love to see a video on that.
Thanks for the info! ;)
VASAviation - no prob!
ELEVrjATOR hey I live in RI too ⚓️
Arthur Morgan cool
Great one mate. Loved it
Thanks for watching!
IMC and a short runway...I would've diverted to LAX or ONT where there is a lot more runway to use and better approaches. Glad it worked out though.
First and foremost. Nobody got injured! Amen to that. Now that said... Fedex"hey tower we is flapless! Atc"try harder" FedEx"we tired, we've been flapping all the way here!" 😆
My dad was a truck driver and when he would get in he would tell his dispatcher, "I just arrived and boy is my arm tired." "Why" "From whipping those 600 horses all night!"
@@mikem9246 😆
Ayy my hometown. Glad that the old MD10 landed safely and everyone is okay.
The part of this that surprised me the most was the bad weather at San Diego!
Fog (or "Marine Layer, as they call it in SoCal) is very common at SAN.
I saw that last flight in front of him did a missed approach as well. Doesn't sound like the tower informed 906 of that.
Professionalism was a word created by the ATC and all pilots!!
Indeed !
And that’s why they call ‘em professional. Well, just one of a whole bunch of reasons.😊
It's particularly impressive considering the MD-10 already had an extremely high landing speed
There was a plane in a snowbank exiting the runway at Toronto Pearson. Initially thought to be off the taxiway but later confirmed to actually be on the taxiway...
Thanks for the info!
No slat/ 22 flap/ 190 kts landing. Slat disagree issue. Ended up being a slat sensor bad.
Are you a pilot?
@@produKtNZ no.
26 year mechanic.
And the irony is here : I'm a pratt and Whitney digital support engineer working in a centre that only repairs v2500 a thru d5
@@produKtNZ I looked up the plane on the day of the event and saw the discrepancy.
The airport layout in the thumbnail looks like a high end automatic gun.
P-90
Thanks for your great videos. Keep them coming for sure! If you can do newark final either 22L or 4R one day, that would be awesome.
EWR will be coming soon.
*_Ryanair does this on a daily basis_*
no they dont
such a played out lame joke not funny
Why, thank you, Swiss001.
@@randomgooglename I know right, people act like Ryanair' is such a subpar airline because apparently, they make 'hard landings' when literally every single landing I've had with them is the same as any other airline
108 108 the joke was funny the first thousand times i read it is all im saying. just annoying af. reminds me of the kid in school that ruins the joke and everybody just stops laughing because of it
Wow. Kind of surprised he would even attempt landing a MD10 at SAN with no flaps, compounded with low ceilings and multiple missed approaches. Not much margin for error given the runway length. Gutsy call with obvious confidence.
@VASAviation how do you make these pretty animations ?
All those missed approaches--KSAN really be like that
I think I would have diverted to LAX or ONT. Longer runways and lower landing minimums.
im always surprised how scratchy and muffled the people are. id have thought the clarity of the transmissions would be crystal clear by 2019! I know there must be technical limitations to the radio transmissions, so that's probably why.
It's because what we hear has been picked up mostly by amateur radio listening, usually someone nearby the airport with an aerial and a computer. This means there are often objects in the way of the line of sight as well as various sources of interference, so the signal isn't as clear as in the sky, where the planes and airport have good antennas and almost always have line of sight.
It's also VHF radio, which is the same as they used over 50 years ago, maybe even 80 years ago. The microphones and speakers have gotten better, and the transceivers as well, but we're still limited by radio transmissions themselves. It is just a bit scratchy sounding, not the clearest.
I see I see. thanks!
They still use AM (amplitude modulation). It was developed during the first quarter of the 20th century ... So very old system.
@@MarcMadoc I was thinking that but couldn't remember. Just like am car radio but different frequency.
just the idea of flying a no slats approach to the minima in fog is frightening
Is it just me or does the map of that airport in the thumbnail look like a weapon xD
I was so confused by MD10 :'D
And reverse operations, as well.
San Diego uses runway 27 95% of the time unless there's trash weather; sounds like bad weather and heavy fog/marine layer on top of it. Lucky that they made it in
San Diego and all along the west coast. When operating easterly runways... bad weather is present.
@@VASAviation very true. I lived in San Diego for some time and got to know the traffic pattern pretty well just from watching aircraft fly in. Others have brought this up but this approach was probably only possible on runway 09 due to the steep approach on 27 required by downtown.
Why did aircraft not land with headwind? Metar was showing that wind was from 340, so why did they land on 09?
gaddemyt Most likely because there is a hill before runway 27 and it seems like they would have to decend really fast on short final but with runway 09 there is no hill that I know of and they would have a normal approach, just a guess
@@evanthepilot yeah, it sounds reasonable, but why did ALL aircraft before fedex land on 09?
Runway 27 doesn't have an ILS approach because of terrain. Runway 9 does. The visibility was about 1/2 miles, so all aircraft needed the ILS 9, instead of the less precise RNAV approach for 27.
@@COA764 seems legit! thank you!
No ILS to runway 9 and minimums wouldn't allow for the approaches available to 27.
Landing heavyweight with no flaps at KSAN of all places is very sporty! Edit: landing on 27 is less of an issue opposed to the localizer for 9 which goes over the skyline
Landing on 27 would have made it more difficult.
Landing with no flaps certainly reduces the margin for error aka margin for contingencies.
They have no slats "leading edge" not flaps
Fly high captain, RIP ro the families
They are all alive
@@nikki.t33 sadly there was fatal let them rest please
@@fatlittleparasite that was a completely different incident. different plane, different airline, different location, differend problems
We ALL have flap problems. Get over it.
N904DR needs to keep his trap shut for a minute.
Do you have anything about the British go around at Gilbratar?
Can you do a break down video on the Amazon flight that crashed in Texas when the information and details are finally available?
You have the video on the channel.
No SLATS doesn't mean no FLAPS.
But at 7:50 the pilot confirms it’s just a flap problem.
180 knots VREF, can you tell if they extended flaps and no slats?
I think ATC thought the pilot said “flaps.”
Doesn’t it? I know a few aircraft that prohibit flap extension without slat extension.
When setting the Flap-Lever to the first notch, only the Slats extend... on the second notch the Flaps move out as well
Hey, can you make a video how CSA A330-200 From Prague to Soule have to take way back to Prague from Poland because of fuel leake.? :D
Why so many go arounds?
Do you get the audio from live ATC?
Thankfully it was RW9 not 27
Members onboard? 7:27
why do they need the fuel on board on an emergency landing?
In case of a fire.
They speak super fast. How do they get used to understand every word, including numbers? How do they practice.
It's all practice.
I’ve dabbled in “flap problems” once.. Not in Nam of course.. #thankvets
Great job to this flight crew!👍
How fast is a high speed landing vs a normal landing?
In this case, like 40 knots faster.
That had to be fun😂
Untrimmed video link says "Unavailable".
Available now.
Another cargo plane having problems great!!
How hard is it for the big jets to actually get slow without flaps?
I guess the pilot can still use Airbrakes and extend the landing gear to slow down the aircraft. Choosing to land on a runway facing the wind can help too.
Not easy. The MD-11 has a very high stall speed and I imagine that the DC-10/MD-10, its predecessor, also has a high stall speed. By contrast, the Boeing 757 has a really slow stall speed of just 87 knots.
It’s not about the slats slowing them down, it’s what allows them to lower their stall speeds while maintaining lift, as Adam said
In a Cessna 172, flaps slow you down while maintaining a pitch down attitude for better visibility and reduces stall speeds. Without flaps, the only way to slow down would be to maintain pitch up attitude which results in approaching the runway flat and it’s hard to see the runaway. I remember practicing a flaps 0 landing once and the whole time I thought I was too high on approach but in reality the approach was fine, the sight of the runway looked completely different as I wasn’t able to aim for the numbers. Good reminder to practice once again. I think landing without flaps is challenging and definitely I would definitely declare an emergency.
There's still a flying MD10?
Several.
FedEx at Memphis probably has most of them lol
It seems to me that women are better at ATC than men. Many of the men sound like auctioneers. I'm not an aviator.
pretty sure the Lindberg tower controller is a woman, not a sir
FEDEX NEEDS TO RETIRE THEIR MD FLEET
Ofcourse not 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Can you argument why?
They are slowly replacing them with the 767
I don't like that plane. It has a terrible reputation.
David Esquivel it does? Pretty sure they have a pretty solid flight history.
@@_chipchip the DC-10 had a bad reputation in it's earlier stages but afterwards the stats showed is actually fairly safe as time went on, even with the cargo door issues, and it being the cause for the Air France Concorde to crash.
lannding without FLAPS?! please! i can land with half a wing missing in War Thunder so chill out...
Happy flights on your home simulator!