Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: GoAir Near Total Disaster

  1. #1
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,520

    Default GoAir Near Total Disaster

    Skipped over the before take-off checklist.

    Hit birds on the roll. #1 engine damaged.

    Despite obvious engine vibration issue, opted to continue the takeoff while under V1 but over 100kt.

    After becoming airborne, crew discussed the wrong engine.

    After level-off at approx 3300ft, crew shut down the wrong engine.

    Restart of unaffected engine took over two minutes. Fortunately affected engine was still producing thrust.

    A/P disengaged. Crew sort of forgot about airspeed. Alpha Floor saves the day.

    Botched the return approach. Landed on the second attempt.

    Got lost on the ground.

    Go GoAir!

    http://avherald.com/h?article=4aaadd7a&opt=0

  2. #2
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    6,825

    Default

    There is one part of this that is not necessarily bad:
    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Despite obvious engine vibration issue, opted to continue the takeoff while under V1 but over 100kt.
    Typical go-nogo decision tree:

    Below 80 knots, abort for any alarm or doubt.
    Between 80 knots, abort only for engine failure, fire or unsafe/unable to fly.
    Above V1, abort only for unsafe/unable to fly.

    Engine vibrations that, according to the report, where above the warning limit but below the "oh shit" limit, with the engine producing thrust and the rest of the parameters normal, can very well be considered NOT an engine failure.

    --- 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 ---

  3. #3
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel
    There is one part of this that is not necessarily bad:
    Also, did abandon the first, unstable approach.

    Still, no fly list.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    6,825

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Also, did abandon the first, unstable approach.

    Still, no fly list.
    True. Still bad that they did an unstable approach forcing them to go around on 1+1/2 engines. But given that the approach was unstable, going around was the right thing to do.

    --- 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 ---

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    249

    Default

    You have to wonder if there should be some indicator (lights... shaker) on the thrust lever that the engine is working fine (or not fine) so we don't end up with another TransAsia crash which these folks were at risk for.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •