Tail strike correct in the 777?

[jgoggi 65]

Hi, I haven't purchased the 777 yet, but I have the 737 NGX and one thing that (is) was not correct is the tail strike simulation: when during takeoff rotation I pull the yoke too much, the tail penetrates the ground like a knife in butter. I modified some contact points in the aircraft.cfg and now I have a better behaviour, with the tail skid that hits the ground and doesn't sink into it.

Is the tail strike correctly modelled in the 777?

Thanks! 

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

Is the tail strike correctly modelled in the 777?

 

Define "correctly modeled."

 

There a vast difference between modeling correct consequences of treating an aircraft poorly, and getting overly nitpicky about the graphics handling of everything.  I'd argue that if you're outside looking at the tail to begin with, you have a prefect vantage point to avoid hitting said tail, so why intentionally smack it on the ground?

 

Just my thought.

[jgoggi 65]

It's not only a visual effect. Now that I have modified the contact points, the tail hits the ground or bounces and I realize that from the cockpit during rotation, I realize that I have done a tail strike. Before changing the contact points, I did not realize if I was overrotating or not, because the tail sank into the ground and I could overrotate without any effect. 

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

I could overrotate without any effect. 

 

That is not the case here.

 

There's an EICAS indication, and if you hit it hard enough, it will cause issues with the pressure bulkhead to the point that you will suffer a decompression if you attempt to continue the flight.

[kjjj11223344 48]

That is not the case here.

 

There's an EICAS indication, and if you hit it hard enough, it will cause issues with the pressure bulkhead to the point that you will suffer a decompression if you attempt to continue the flight.

That's cool I didn't know that.

[FLEX1978 373]

I think it is  random, one of my first test flights involved a tail strike, I carried on anyway  without any issues. 

[jalexb88 7]

I think it is  random, one of my first test flights involved a tail strike, I carried on anyway  without any issues. 

 

Could be some some sort of probability type event. You have a tail strike, then you have an x chance of getting a decompression, but not every time. Just a speculation. 

 

Alex

[FLEX1978 373]

Could be some some sort of probability type event. You have a tail strike, then you have an x chance of getting a decompression, but not every time. Just a speculation. 

 

Alex

 

Makes sense, although re-reading Kyle's post makes me think the severity of the tail strike affects the outcome.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Makes sense, although re-reading Kyle's post makes me think the severity of the tail strike affects the outcome.

 

I thought that's what it was, but if could be truly random.  I don't know specifically how they programmed it.

[kevinh 409]

I thought that's what it was, but if could be truly random. I don't know specifically how they programmed it.

You can of course do both. Higher tailstrike force meaning a higher probability of serious damage. If it was too predictable it wouldn't be as good.

[jgoggi 65]

What I wonder about (and you who already own the 777 could test it) is: if you try to hit the ground with the tail fuselage at rotation, will it in fact hit the ground and bounce or will it sink into the ground and from the cockpit you don't realize that you have hit the ground?

[FLEX1978 373]

What I wonder about (and you who already own the 777 could test it) is: if you try to hit the ground with the tail fuselage at rotation, will it in fact hit the ground and bounce or will it sink into the ground and from the cockpit you don't realize that you have hit the ground?

 

I did a quick test yesterday at Edwards air force base. The tail contacts the ground correctly, as mentioned previously you also receive an EICAS alert.

[jgoggi 65]

Thank you for the test, Rob.

[Tabs 2,790]

I think it is  random, one of my first test flights involved a tail strike, I carried on anyway  without any issues. 

 

The chance of the aft pressure bulkhead failing as the PSI inside increases after a tailstrike is a probabilistic function based on Boeing's actual data on the chance of failure after one of these events. You won't always see it and it's not just purely "random".

 

Worth noting too that a tailstrike incident ultimately caused the worst single aircraft disaster in the history of aviation:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_123

[FLEX1978 373]

I remember reading the CVR transcript on that accident many years ago, beyond a nightmare.  The aircraft was in the air without control for quite sometime.   Sadly one of the engineers involved in the botched fix also committed suicide.