Tweet
Video of the crash at the link below. I've seen plenty of plane crash videos, but even I find this one overly disturbing.
-
Video of the crash at the link below. I've seen plenty of plane crash videos, but even I find this one overly disturbing.
-
A lot of comments, photos and videos out there with no official or reliable info, but from those surces...
The plane was landing, not taking off.
The plane made multiple approaches.
In one video the #2 engine (right) can be seen sputtering a puff of fire and smoke, apparently while on approach (or go around) with the gear apparently up.
Some rumor talking about a failed go-around hence the gear up. Could it be that they forgot to add power? (go around, gear up, flaps 15... Am I forgetting something, why are we not climbing?)
This rumor is a good speculation, it would explain several things:
- The gar-up condition
- The flaps/slats position (it's not clear in the crash video but it is very clearly either up or "some", not anywhere close to a landing position)
- Why is it sliding so fast so far down the runway. An intentional gear-up landing would be done with minimum fuel/weight and hence minimum speed, in the order of 120 kts, from which you don't need a lot of runway to slide to a stop, let alone depart the end of the runway, let alone depart the end of the runway at high speed and slide through additional 100m of concrete (stepway) and 150m of grass.
By the way, the plane did not crash against a wall, it crashed against an earth embankment on top of which the localizer antenna is mounted. Some pictures clearly show that. It can also be seen in the crash video if you stop it at the frame immediately before the impact.
--- 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 --- -
Unfortunately I couldn't find the a video showing the approach.
Forgetting to manually add power in case of a go-around, especially when using auto throtte is definitely a possibility.
An intentional gear up landing would be performed with full flaps.Comment
-
Longest video I've seen so far of the approach/crash.
Comment
-
Through all the videos I saw, the Boing 737 seemed to have drift sidewards of the runway and into the dirt. I don't think the flaps or spoilers
were activated so that may have a theory behind it. The plane may have lost power which caused to slide down the runway so quickly. All videos
provided a gears up landing with no approaching evidence. https://www.9news.com.au/world/plane...1-f40b0558757a
When your aircraft door is open and you see a truck,
You jump out of the plane and wish yourself a final good luck.Comment
-
Some new images have been posted been on 9News on the damage: https://www.9news.com.au/world/plane...1-f40b0558757aWhen your aircraft door is open and you see a truck,
You jump out of the plane and wish yourself a final good luck.Comment
-
Thank you for the link👍Originally posted by B757300 View Post
To me it looks like the initial sparks at touchdown are coming from the fuselage, not the #2 engine.
Touchdown seems to be intentional, very smooth with a perfect pitch attitude for the flap setting.
I have no explanation at all for the reduced flap setting.
Maybe a similar case like PIA 8303?Comment
-
Here it is:Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
--- 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 ---Comment
-
That's a good video.Originally posted by B757300 View Post
Crosschecking that video with Google Maps, the plane touched down gear up some 1900m down the 2800m runway (about 2/3), with 900m (1/3) to go until the departure threshold. After that there's some 250m until the loc antenna embankment (some 125 is a paved yellow-chevron stopway, and then 125 of grass).
2 hypothesis mentioned in this thread so far:
- gear forgotten up after a crazy unstable, way to fast and way to long approach, in the style of PIA8303
- go-around started from very low somewhere around the normal touchdown zone, gear was raised, flaps partially retracted (from 30 or 40 to 15), but either they forgot to add thrust or there was insufficient thrust and the plane settled back close to opposite the touchdown zone, in the style of EK251
Both hypothesis are very crazy but they fit the video and both are evidently possible, since they happened before.
But PIA is a different-dimension crazy, I can't believe that there is another set of such stupid, arrogant, ignorant and criminal crew in our universe.
EK, as outrageous as it is, it is a honest mistake. I'll stick with this one by now.
--- 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 ---Comment
-
While certainly possible, I find it unlikely that they would have retracted the gear at that point in the go-around. I think it’s more likely that, overwhelmed by the deteriorating situation, they forgot to lower the gear, especially if this happened after raising it during a previous go-around. I think the lack of flaps and the high speed may be the result of lost hydraulics after losing one engine. The scenario would be a unintentional gear-up landing at high-speed with no ground spoilers, perhaps compounded by a long touchdown.Originally posted by Gabriel View PostComment
-
Unlikely, the flaps have alternate electrical extension. And the gear has a mechanical alternate extension that, once actuated, the gear cannot be retracted again.Originally posted by Evan View Post
The gear retraction during go around is part of the normal procedure, they may have established positive climb (by trading airspeed for altitude) and retracted the gear as part of the normal go-around procedure. That would be perfectly ok and normal. That part that would not be ok or normal is forgetting to add thrust or otherwise lacking sufficient thrust. If for some reason they attempted a single-engine go-around, that's a very critical procedure on its own, and reducing drag as soon as possible (but not sooner than that) becomes critical.
--- 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 ---Comment
-
airport official said bird strike.Comment
-
Yes, it certainly fits. Especially considering the likely engine failure preceding this leading to a go-around without A/T. If a crew is conditioned to and expecting thrust after pushing the G/A buttons at that point, they aren't going to get it. And in very stressful, time-compressed situations, the situation is ripe for such error.Originally posted by Gabriel View PostComment
-
Regarding alternate flaps:
Originally posted by Airliners.netComment
-
Gabriel, I think you could be right. I can see this as a perfectly manageable bird-strike engine loss turning tragic due to a stealth factor and pilot error. The bird strike causes the loss of the #1 engine. It also takes away the auto throttle due to either procedural disconnect or split TL levers or thrust asymmetry. The crew opts for a go-around. They push the GA buttons and expect the normal AT thrust to come on. Of course, it doesn’t and that leaves them touching down too far down the runway at high speed with the gear retracted and the wings cleaned up.
This also assumes the error of raising the gear before positive climb. Another possibility is a prior go-around and, with the workload of a bird-trike/engine failure/relight attempt, the gear was never extended for the second attempt. Perhaps they even realized this prior to to touchdown and that was the reason for a second go-around attempt.Comment
Comment