Jet goes down on its way to Medellin, Colombia
 

Colombian authorities responding to plane crash | CTV News

"BOGOTA - Authorities are responding to an emergency after an airplane with 72 people on board has crashed on its way to Medellin's international airport.
Medellin's international airport said on its Twitter account that the aircraft had departed from Bolivia.
It's not clear if there are any survivors. But local media reported that the charter aircraft was carrying members of the soccer team Chapecoense from Brazil, which is scheduled to play Copa Sudamerica finals against Atletico Nacional on Wednesday in Medellin."

Latest rumors say there might be survivors, rescueworkers are reported to try and get people out the wreck.

Survivors?
 

BBC report notes reports of survivors:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-38140981

The aircraft was operated by a Bolivian carrier, LAMIA. It was an RJ85, formerly operated by (among others) Dublin based Cityjet.

Photo: EI-RJK (CN: E2348) British Aerospace Avro RJ85 by John Fitzpatrick Photoid:6938415 - JetPhotos.Net

Flightradar24 shows the flight apparently ending whilst in a holding pattern near mountains just to the south of Medellin.

Some pictures:

https://twitter.com/360RadioCo/statu...84952558010368

Airfleets.net shows EI-RJK (now CP-2933) being stored as of September 2015.

Here's a Flightradar24 playback:

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/a...-2933/#bbef1b9

The UK Daily Mirror is publishing a flight tracker (doesn't look like FlightRadar24) that shows an aircraft leaving the hold and heading north(?). Another aircraft comes quite close then jinks away to the left. Almost immediately after that the trace vanishes.
There are no labels on the aircraft shown and no flight data either.

BBC World Service reporting that the aircraft had declared a fuel emergency.

Suggestions that most on board have survived, with the fuselage having broken in two on impact, but are hard to reach due to inhospitable terrain and poor weather.

The video on the UK Daily Mirror site is weird. At the beginning, there is a caption xyz-name/Flightradar24, then it almost looks like another aircraft collided with the RJ85 as it was leaving the hold. Here's the vid: Plane carrying Brazilian football team crashes in Colombia - Mirror Online

It's flight radar being stupid, as usual. It extrapolates the flight path if it gets no data, so you can't read anything into what's shown there.

Looks to me like a source reliable enough be posted: an announcement from the Medellin Airport Authorities mentioning that the crew had declared an electrical failure before the crash (hence the holding?): https://twitter.com/AeropuertoMDE/st...85107269017601

More survivors found (10 so far):

https://twitter.com/CaracolRadio/sta...86850702802944

The GC plotter gives a distance between Santa Cruz and Medellín of 1839 SM = 1598 NM (thank You for the correction, Portmanteau). Can somebody who knows the type say whether this is within the capabilities of a RJ85? For what it´s worth, I have talked to an RJ85 crew member years ago who said that flights between HAM and SKG (a bit above 1000SM) gave them planning problems.

Does MDE require a descent in the holding due to surrounding terrain? If not, holding while having declared a fuel emergency appears a peculiar combination.

It is a good thing that at least some survived the accident.

Wasn't this rather a long flight given the range of an RJ85?

Figures that I have for the RJ85 show a max payload range of 1,148nm and a maximum 'design' range of 1,782nm.

BBC reporting Columbian Police statement 76 dead 7 survivors

RJ85 range
 

Airliners.net




says "RJ70 - Max operating speed Mach 0.73, cruising speed 763km/h (412kt), long range cruising speed 720km/h (389kt).


RJ85 - Same, range with max fuel 2965km (1600nm), range with max payload 2130km (1150nm). "

JACDEC reporting that the flight distance exceeded the range of the RJ85. Are we looking at an out of fuel cause here?

2016-11-28 LAMIA Avro RJ-85 crashed near Medellin with 81 on board » JACDEC

....... no fire ......

tu 114, think you will find thats 1839 statute miles = 1600 nm.

An enroute fuel stop might have been planned, though has to be said chartering this type of aircraft for a flight distance of around 1600Nm seems odd.

Fuel range may not be a problem, the RJ has a range of up to 2500nm if fitted with the optional aux tanks in which case the range will be MTOW limited.

Portmanteau, You are right, thank You for the correction.

Indeed, if this leg stretches the performance of the Avro, it begs the question why it was planned that way. Certainly, there are airports between Santa Cruz and Medellin where they sell fuel?

RJ85 Range
 

It is certainly at the top end for an 85 although it is possible to equip them with up to three auxiliary tanks (although don't know if this one had them) Could also have been weight restricted but with a full load of largely male pax would limit scope for that However even if planned with correct minimum diversion fuel it is a tricky airport to fly into from a terrain point of view and if you had a technical challenge at night with minimum reserves it would make life very difficult

I realise that aircraft have run out of fuel in the past but surely a crew can not run the tanks dry without saying a word about their situation.

I don't recall this aircraft having pannier tanks when it was delivered new to Mesaba and unlikely that Cityjet would have added them for their operations. Possible of course that they were subsequently retrofitted for the South American customer.

Yea right - the usual idiot speculation.
All will become clearer when we have some real facts. There are always a chain of contributing causes and the full story will not be known until the official report is published.

BBC News reporting it was a chartered flight


from same BBC page story:-

"What we know about the crash so far
◾Plane operated by Bolivian charter airline Lamia
◾Carrying 72 passengers and nine crew, among them members of the Chapecoense football team
◾Flying from Brazil, bound for Medellin after a stopover in Santa Cruz, Bolivia
◾Plane crashed at 10:15 local time (03:15 GMT) after pilot reported an electrical fault
◾Five people survived the crash, including three footballers"

care to share the source of this information? I just looked up EASA type certificate for RJ85, it says you can fit pannier tanks (that are visible from outside and cause drag) for each wing giving you only about 1000lbs each.. I can't see how 2000lbs of fuel would increase the range by nearly 1000NM? Perhaps it's the military types that can carry that much more?

You cannot see the AUX tanks when fitted. They do not add any drag.
Without them you can load about 9400kg. That will give you around 1600nm without reserves.

A few pictures of the crash and rescue ops, with others as well.
They're ugly. My condolences to all involved.

Fotos: El accidente de avión del Chapecoense en Colombia, en imágenes | Internacional | EL PAÍS

Apologies if this is the dumbest question so far - but is nine crew (as per BBC story) a plausible configuration for RJ85 ops?

Pictures of the accident site suggest that what appears to be the rear fuselage was reasonably upright and intact, but of interest the centre section and both wings appear inverted, and remain joined together.

Someone mentioned holding. This is the ILS approach for SKRG:

PPRuNe Standards Adhered To ...
 

METARs, per PPRuNe Standards ... (Flightaware's popularity seems to have overtaken METAR's standard appearance on page one of such threads. Times change).

(For SKRG/Rio Negro Airport):
SKRG 290600Z 02003KT 9999 BKN015 BKN080 15/15 A3022 REDZ
SKRG 290500Z 04003KT 8000 -DZ BKN015 BKN080 16/15 A3024
SKRG 290400Z 00000KT 8000 DZ BKN015TCU SCT080 16/15 A3024 RMK RERA
SKRG 290300Z VRB02KT 9999 -DZ BKN015 SCT080 17/16 A3025
SKRG 290200Z 00000KT 9999 BKN015 SCT200 17/16 A3023
SKRG 290100Z 01003KT 9999 SCT017 SCT200 17/16 A3020
SKRG 290000Z 06003KT 9999 SCT017 SCT200 17/16 A3019
SKRG 282300Z 08005KT 9999 VCSH SCT017TCU SCT200 18/16 A3017 RMK TCU VCSH/SW/W

As a frequent SLF on a chartered luxury RJ85, nine seems steep but not impossible. I usually see 5 or 6 for a passenger count of maybe 20 people.

Could it be a CFIT?