Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Crash-Cork Airport

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Crash-Cork Airport

Old 10th Feb 2011, 18:24
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
surely the pilot had the option of diverting
Its a good point - however i think someone may have mentioned that the crew may have entered the hold for 20 minutes after making their 2nd go-around (wait until conditions improve as conditions at alternate advised as not much better)? Which could of then resulted in a possible low fuel scenario...

...as Andrasz (szia Andrasz, hogy vagy?) suggests this may have resulted in a CFIT (due to pressures of running out of fuel?) or it could have been fuel starvation & engine failure which might have been mishandled resulting in inversion and impact.
Pilot Positive is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 18:43
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There are different weight mods (MTOW/MZFW) for Metro 3, without knowing for sure operating weights and payload it is hard to estimate whether a fuel shortage could have been a factor. Metro fuel burn is quite low for its speed (ca 250 kgs/hour) so depending of the weights it could have anything between low fuel or enough fuel to divert as far as Gatwick.
10 pax range is something like 1200 nm + standard reserves with an average weight specs.
CargoOne is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 18:45
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Very sad to hear about this tragic event.

I'm pretty new to the world of ATC and am curious about RVR minima, especially for an aircraft of this type.
Where I work (Cat 3b ILS) we regularly have modern biz-jets coming in during LVPs with minima around 550-600. Obviously when the RVR remains below this they divert.
Now looking at the reported RVRs at Cork this morning it seems like they were floating around the 300-400 mark. At our Cat3 airport we would be seeing a lot of the biz-jets and possibly even airliners flying off to alternate aerodromes. Would the Manx2 crews' minima actually be down that low for a Cat2 ILS approach?

Regarding the snippit from the AIP pasted below, I can only guess this kind of thing would increase a crews' AOM?

Looking forward to some expert insight into my curiosity.

From the AIP:

Caution: Operational evaluation has indicated that the performance of automatic landing systems may be affected by the profile of the terrain under the approach to RWY 17. Operators' procedures should take account of this during CAT II approaches.
twentypoint4 is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 18:47
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
irish investigators saying the initial report is anticipated in weeks rather than months
lfc84 is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 18:57
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DOGuerrero

The Cat II approach there is known for its idiosyncrasies given the undulating terrain. TBH I was wondering myself how long it would be before there'd be an accident.
Now we know.
Opened in 1961. First such accident afaik.
juice is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 19:02
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
andrasz said:
andrasz Lot of talk about minimums and weather, but to me the key to this sad event is how did the a/c end up inverted. Low visibility CFIT accidents are typically wings level, slight nose down impacts. Hard landing induced inversion happens if one wing separates (the MD 11 patern), does not appear to be case here. One possible scenario a mis-handled engine failure on applying go-around power, the resulting torque imbalance inverting the a/c very rapidly...
Pretty much what I said a few posts up from this... that Viscount at Manchester looked uncannily like the pictures of the inverted Metroliner.
Shaggy Sheep Driver is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 19:07
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Different point - I trained 4 chaps who went to Manx 2 to fly the Metroliner. 3 of them left at the first opportunity citing it as "the sort of company that you leave as soon as possible"
How can that be with Manx2 only being a ticket agent? They have used Metroliners from different sources over the years, various Spanish ones (Euro Continental, TopFly) and also German ones (FLM).
virginblue is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 19:13
  #128 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Most of the people who have actually been involved in aircraft accident investigation have not appeared on this thread.

Exception; aterpster, who posted the charts.

For those of you who don't know (apparently most posters), let me give a brief lesson in the very beginnings of accident analysis.

Lesson 1: Determine any facts you can.

The facts as I understand them reading this thread.

1 There is an aircraft upside down near or on some asphalt at Cork Airport
2 The aircraft appears to be EC-ITP
3. This aircraft belongs to XYZ airline.
4. The Metar for Cork for the time at which the accident is reported to have happened suggests general foggy conditions
5 Some passengers are reported in hospital; some passengers are reported dead.

And to obtain this extremely meagre information, slightly longer than a T-W-I-T-T-E-R message, I have waded through about 140 messages. (Interesting that I have to spell the WWW site name that way, to prevent the SW substituting "PPRuNe" for it!)

Lesson 2: Determine the causal relations, if any, between the facts.

Result: The passengers dead and in the hospital are probably in this condition because of the state of the aircraft.

Let me suggest what it would be good to know next.

A. If the aircraft was performing an approach at the time it crashed, which approach was it?
B. Where is the crash location on the airport plan?
C. What was the reported weather/actual weather/any weather details at the actual time at which the crash occurred?

When this is known, one might be able to write a very brief factual report. (Edit: and of course the usual sources have this info by now - PICTURE & GRAPHIC: Crashed Metroliner in Cork identified as EC-ITP)

For people choosing to slam the airline/pontificate about LoCos, and so on, give us a break from your personal politics. For all we know at the moment, the aircraft could have collided with an albatross on very short final, which went through the windshield and did for the PF.

Last edited by PBL; 10th Feb 2011 at 20:28. Reason: Link to info
PBL is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 19:26
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: ISLE OF MAN
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is a really sad day, and a sad one for Manx2. Despite the fact they are a virtual airline, they have been quietly expanding and providing a service for an Island where transport links are always at a premium. We have a lot less choice to stab at these days, and for the puddle jump, they were always pretty good. That said, listening to a mate who returned into Blackpool in a J31 on Monday at 30 degrees of yaw, you do wonder. that said, they got them down, but how differently that could have turned out one begins to wonder on the back of this.

Flying is a difficult job these days, and no pilot commits to the approach with the intention of killing themselves or their passengers. Lessons will be learned, and hopefully remembered.
STANDTO is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 19:45
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That said, listening to a mate who returned into Blackpool in a J31 on Monday at 30 degrees of yaw, you do wonder. that said, they got them down, but how differently that could have turned out one begins to wonder on the back of this.
What rubbish. Have you any idea what the crosswind limit is on a J31? I fly a turboprop not that much bigger than a J31 and the crossind limit is 35 knots. Have you ever seen a crabbed approach in that kind of wind? What utter and utter bull*it some people come out with on these forums. Stick to your bloody armchairs for gods sake.
MIKECR is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:18
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PBL, with respect, I don't think anyone is trying to "investigate" this incident. This is a forum for aviation people and those interested in the same, as such, people have a right to voice their opinions, however far off the mark they may be. One common thread is the regret and sorrow felt, nobody questions that accord.

The " reliable" information, i.e from the tower controllers, the police, pax in the terminal is that the weather was so foggy they could not see the crash site, only hear the noise and then see the flames.

The pictures on the various newspaper sites show the position of the aircraft relative to the runway, and holding point, some marks on the grass of excursion. They also show the nose almost broken off and the bent upwards with the Nose Gear, the fracture of the hull, aft of the nose, and the Main landing gear in tact.

Returning to your process, the weather was confimed as foggy, vis unconfirmed, but from the tower report to the press very low vis.

The aircraft was making an approach to RW 17 and crashed, the exact phase of flight, i.e landing flare or go-around or glide path is not known.

Of course human nature is that people want to ventilate their theories, that is why this is a forum..you know well the preliminary report, just like Hellios, TY will be ambiguous

In Photos: The Cork plane crash tragedy TheJournal

Your sober approach to this is to be commended, however, it is still a forum for debate, having said that, it is frustrating to see debate on JAR Ops material that is freely available outside of this thread and can be researched without the painful implications that the crew were slack.
Avenger is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:22
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: London
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Blimay!

I came here for informed opinion and am getting more accurate info from SKY!

Please please please PPRUNE close this forum to non aviation professionals. It is embarassing reading the amount of BS written today by FlightSim enthusiasts and other ill-informed wannabe's. I visit this site less and less now because of the quality of information posted here.

If you don't work in the industry or don't have a valid licence READ but do not POST.

Everyone who works in aviation will be trying to learn from this tragic incident.
Sifting through loads of rubbish achieves nothing and makes Pprune look like a*rliners.net.
TrafficPilot is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:38
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Wythenshawe
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rubbish

TrafficPilot, you are quite right. I came in this evening and looked to this website to provide some useful information. It is there, (wx, times, flight details), but there is a vast amount of irrelevant and hysterical rubbish obscuring facts and educated discussion. Most participants here are enthusiasts, interested observers, and others. Some idiots included. These folk are not qualified, but no qualifications are required for the Professional Pilots Rumour Network.

As a pro pilot, I'm off for an hour or two to input my expertise in nuclear physics, neurosurgery, or international derivatives finance site, if I can find one! Makes about as much sense!
Mr.Bloggs is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:40
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: citizen of the world
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the three approach rule applies to the instrument runway i.e 2 approaches to 17 and 1 approach to 35 is counted as 2 and 1 not 3. it's like counting each end as two different runways. also the 3rd approach may only be carried out if their is double improvement in weather i.e a sudden change from cat III to cat I conditions.
technically you could make 4 approaches to one runway, two onto 17 and two onto 35 and STILL be within the 3 approach limit. Not that i would advise it.

until the hard facts are out it is wrong and wholly inaccurate to speculate. the mitigating circumstances must be discovered.

My condolences and sympathy to those who lost their lives and their friends and relatives
leadinghedges is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:41
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Esher, Surrey
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BBC News - President's relative among six killed in Cork crash

Some more details and some of those who were onboard.
beamender99 is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:42
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 60
Posts: 909
Received 13 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by PilotPositive
...as Andrasz suggests this may have resulted in a CFIT..
Szia PP,

I was actually suggesting the opposite. The wreckage attitude does not imply simple CFIT. SSD pointed out one posible scenario - a simultaneous one engine out - other accelerating to full power event will flip a twin prop on it's back in no time if not caught at once.

While the weather may have contributed in the lack of visual clues for a developing unusual attitude, so far I see nothing that would support a below minimums blotched NP approach accident scenario that seems to be discussed ad nauseam on this thread.
andrasz is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:42
  #137 (permalink)  
BarbiesBoyfriend
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
The report will state the facts of this sad event when it comes out.

I looked at the thread to see if the RVR went above CAT 1 minimums while they were there.

It's a long way from 375m up to 550 or whatever the CAT 1 min RVR is at Cork.

Did it get good enough to attempy a CAT 1 (3 times!) or didn't it?

If it didn't, then clearly the approach ban was in force and they should have been holding or diverting.
 
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:43
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just watched the news. The reporter made reference to Pprune, showing a laptop with the home page recognisable. I can't remember exactly what the reporter said but he mentioned a number of people on here from the profession were expressing concern that 3 attempts at an approach were made. Maybe it would be best to show some consideration with the speculation out of respect, as clearly the news teams are picking up on hearsay on this forum and I guess some of the people close to or touched by this tragedy would've seen that report.

Last edited by Wireless; 10th Feb 2011 at 20:55.
Wireless is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:48
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'd like to see a reference for this 3 approach 'rule'. In my airline we're strongly advised not to attempt more than 2 approaches to GIB before diverting but that is only company procedure...

I don't mind a bit of informed speculation but as another poster says at this stage with the info we have, it could have been anything. It's hard in these times of 24hr news, but we're just going to have to wait...and in the meantime consider this another example of the potential hazards of LVPs.
Dunbar is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 20:51
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Down South
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
3 approaches

It seems reasonable to ask for info about the regs. Maybe under Spanish/Irish rules 3 approaches are legal. From memory only 2 are permitted under Uk rules unless there's a significant weather improvement. Maybe changing runways makes that 2 on one & only 1 on the other?
Southernboy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.