If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
although the initial weather information and the proclamation of Bhoja management point to a Delta 191 type microburst/windshear type event, the physical evidence - specifically the unsurvivable total destruction of the aircraft - point more toward a Polish Tu154, or Afriqiyah 771 type CFIT event or even more a mechanical (rudder?) type out of control high energy impact.
this airline intentionally purchased a 30 year old 732 out of abandonment with the intention of what, using it in pax service until its 50? The steam gauges and antique engines would not support an overall "safety first" attitude in this company. having said all that I have no idea why this thing went down.
The aircraft type or age has little to do with the accident. Canadian North, First Air and Air Yukon here in Canada are testaments to that.All fly this type every day. My Father flew them for the better part of 25 years.Rather a crew who flew into conditions which were not safe to do so could be a factor.
The weather was reported as severe with eye witnesses seeing the aircraft struck by lightning prior to the crash.Wind shear,micro burst,hail or combination of these could bring an aircraft down. RIP to the lost and prayers for the families.
Why? Because of the CFIT? You can have the newest, best equipped aircraft and still fly it into a mountain. That has nothing to do with age or maintenance of an airframe. It is just a terrible problem that these accidents still occur in our modern world with GPWS and other systems. And I am pretty sure the First Air 732 was equipped with that, but I don't know about the recent 732.
newer aircraft are safer, even if its just a better ergonomically designed display reducing workload or more clearly displaying a radio altitude, whatever, in a critical situation it might just give a second or two advantage which would make a difference between a late but successful go-around or a deadly crash, first air or bhoja
They might where you fly - they don't where I fly!
The background weather is 5kts, but the actual is 30kt. Heavy rain, Thunderstorms.
Do you make approaches when TS are within 5nm of the aerodrome?
Yes, it is possible that there were some gaps in the weather. The weather may have been acceptable (I did not say it wasn't). However for the OP say the weather is ok (and imply it is not a factor) is just plain wrong. The weather may very well have played a critical role in this accident.
I would describe this weather as crappy - and in fact would be leaning very heavily towards prohibitive.
newer aircraft are safer, even if its just a better ergonomically designed display reducing workload or more clearly displaying a radio altitude, whatever, in a critical situation it might just give a second or two advantage which would make a difference between a late but successful go-around or a deadly crash, first air or bhoja
3WE...
Do you make approaches when TS are within 5nm of the aerodrome?
...
Indeed
(For the record, I am not an ATP, and therefore do not make such approaches)
After years of following aviation, living near DWF when 191 went down, watching flight aware, watching youtubes I have the following bullet points that I insist are accurate:
[There is a context here of busy airports]
Approaches often take place right up to the point where the first gust front hits the airport, and often resume from the backside of the storm within 5 to 10 minutes if it's not a severe storm. A lot of operations take place in big storms!
Video from internal FedEx Memphis Hub Operations during the severe storms and tornadoes on Feb. 5th 2008 that shows how flight paths were modified in real-t...
This NTSB animation shows the last minute of flight for American Airlines Flight 1420, which crashed while landing at Little Rock, Arkansas on June 1, 1999. ...
(The cause of the Little Rock crash was blamed on the pilot forgetting to arm the spoilers, with the storms only being contribuing)
You may question the youtubes- that the FedEx ones are not accurate enough to depict 5 miles from the airport, but, I've been at airports during thunderstorms and on many occasions, witnessed exactly what I'm saying. Landings right up to the gust front on heavy thunderstorms, and full, never-ceasing operations during moderate thunderstorms. Spent three hours at DFW one day watching guys land in ongong moderate thunderstorms!
Numerous articles have been written (and even some discussion forum posts) that the US air system continues to operate on some stormy days including flying through thunderstorms, and landing and taking off through them. If they did not, the scheudle would melt down (and you would strand folks on planes at terminals).
Numerous studies have been done on "herd behavior"
At ATL, DAL, ORD...you have a constant stream of guys landing. If no one reports a significant wind shear, the approaches continue. If one guy decides to break it off, suddenly a lot more guys break off. Everyone holds until one person tries, and then they all go. (same on take offs). This behavior is more evident in the months following a weather-related crash.
I understand that there are lots of holds (ground and in the air that take place)- and if the winds get up, sure, guys will not land. But I'm saying given the millions of flights taking place, and a year's worth of weather, there's lots of operations that take place literally in thunderstorms. It's does happen.
I agree that the weather here should have gotten the pilots attention, but also say it's not unusual at all for them to be continuing on their arrival/approach. And, if I'm not mistaken, they crashed 10 miles from the airport.
Weather is definately a suspect here. Indeed, thunderstorms can eat airplanes and spit them out in pieces. We continue to roll the dice and equip planes and airports with ever-improving wind shear detection systems- why? so we can operate in and around storms.
Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
The service allows you to load one or more METARs / TAFs from the Internet and to show its translation. There is a database containing all the airports for an easy search of the ID ICAO airport code. It is also possible to show the weather condition and the METARs / TAFs in Google Earth.
Location: OPRN
ISLAMABAD - CHAKLALA - PAKISTAN
Latitude: 33°37'02"N - Longitude: 073°05'60"E.
Magnetic declination: 2.26°E
Sunrise: 00:31 UTC
Sunset: 13:42 UTC
Report emitted the day: 20, time 15:00 UTC
Friday 20 April 2012 12:00 local time. Wind: True direction = 050 degrees, speed: 30 knots (56 km/h) (15 m/s).
Runway 12, length 10801 feet, altitude 1660 feet: Cross Wind 29 KT Left - Centerline Wind 9 KT front.
Runway 30, length 10801 feet, altitude 1657 feet: Cross Wind 28 KT Right - Centerline Wind 10 KT rear. Minimum horizontal visibility: 4000 m. Weather: Thunderstorms . Clouds: A few (1-2 oktas), at 2500 feet above aerodrome level (762 meters), cumulonimbus. Clouds: Scattered (3-4 oktas), at 3000 feet above aerodrome level (914 meters). Clouds: Broken sky (5-7 oktas), at 10000 feet above aerodrome level (3048 meters). Temperature: 20 degrees Celsius (68 Fahrenheit). Dewpoint: 16 degrees Celsius (61 Fahrenheit). Relative humidity 77.79 %. QNH (Sea-level pressure): 1014 hPa (29.94 inches).
(which is fact a combination of information contained in the METAR, in an airports database, and calculations -such as crosswind, relative humidity- based on both sources)
I could not post it here but at the bottom of the report there is also a very intuitive graphic summary.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Visibility and ceiling, if as reported, were quite good, so CFIT would be unlikely.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
And, if I'm not mistaken, they crashed 10 miles from the airport.
Hmmm, make that maybe 3 miles.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Correct me here, but at 10nm out, I believe they should have been level at around 4000ft. They were still short of the glideslope. From the metar I can see no reason why they would dive and drive or anything. Weather is a prime suspect. Some of the media reports have speculated wind-shear. But with that much altitude to recover, is windshear really a danger in itself? I realize this could be a botched recovery from windshear, another chain of events scenario, beginning with an upset...
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment