Originally Posted by
Kirks gusset
the trust levers advanced, which is possible if the aircraft lands in TOGA mode
It did. CM2 as PF innitiated go-around, CM1 took over and landed but never disengaged the autothrust. Not a whole lot of imagination is needed to realize what happens when reversers are stowed not quite at the same time.
If you have just joined the discussion, Kirk's gusset and I are referring to Jan 2018. TZX messup.
Originally Posted by
parkfell
Airport design also a critical factor.
How so?
Originally Posted by
fox niner
Whatever has happened, we will never know exactly. Turkey does not publish ANY accident reports.
That actually depends on the definition of "to publish". It's true the accidents investigations results are not made public. A few hardcopies are made and disseminated to parties including the airline, the manufacturer and the authority of the registry. I really, deeply don't like it but seemingly it satisfies the letter of ICAO rules.
Originally Posted by
tdracer
On a more serious note, maybe it's time for some airports to look into installing EMAS
Sabiha Gökcen has 3000x45 m runway built on a hill so steep decline at about 100m past THR24 is there because the last part of runway 06 is actually built on embankment. It's all very nice having an EMAS but personally I would prefer not getting runway shortened because of it.
Originally Posted by
Double Back
Interesting. In my B744 days I showed many a F/O, during X-wind landings, how the wind vector on the ND or PFD changed dramatically as soon as the PF decrabbed the beast, or when the A/P decrabbed it. I told them to stop reading the wind out loud as it only brought false info.
Wow. I am utterly impressed with your VSOP* technique of having both of you looking at ND wind display during landing flare. Being far lesser airman than you, I am reduced to arriving to 50 ft over the runway at proper place, with proper speed and proper thrust and relying on visual cues, e.g. touchdown zone fleeing away laterally and/or longitudinally from my aeroplane at an unacceptable rate, to judge whether to plonk it or to escape vertically, in the direction contrary to local gravity. Also I am so unaware that ND wind is false that I still try to use it as an assistance in possible windshear detection. I can only hope that, through experience, I'll become more like you.
*VSOP = Very Superior Old Pilot, an aeronautical being whose depth & breadth of knowledge of the matters pertaining to flight, acquired through experience, are of almost mythical proportions and who is only too happy to impart the aforementioned knowledge on any suitable target, main suitability criterium being position in the hearing range. He usually knows the cure for all our contemporary aeronautical ills, primarily consisting of returning to standards and procedures of the times when we lost the plot and working our way from there but in the right direction. Alas, for all their strength, his opinions are rarely taken into account and I'd daresay that's one of the major reasons we have the safety statistics the way we have them today.
Originally Posted by
EDLB
Will be an interesting CVR to see how the decision making process went on.
Chances of CVR ever making it to public are poor to nil.
Originally Posted by
73qanda
Is it just me or has the NG had more than it’s fair share of over-run events in the last decade?
Probably just a statistical glitch. I found 738 faster down the glide and more slippery than 320 but still well within "easily manageable" area.
Originally Posted by
Joe le Taxi
A question I expect Boeing are starting to ask themselves is, is it good business sense to sell our products to airlines who are given to smashing them to pieces, putting them on front pages and giving regulators palpitations?
That was already pre-empted by stopping the deliveries of MAX to any airline whose inferior pilots' performance might tarnish the reputation of Boeing's superior aeroplane.
Originally Posted by
Ollie Onion
I assume there was not a lot of fuel onboard as there was fire at the breakup but is seems to have extinguished itself which would suggest not too much fuel in the tanks which may have forced the issue of pushing on with such an tailwind.
SAW was the destination, they absolutely needed to have at least alternate fuel plus half an hour in their tanks at landing. Dunno what was their alternate but LTFM accepted post-crash diversions pretty swiftly and efficiently. At that time Bursa was affected by the TS and quite unusable but Çorlu or Eskişehir are not far away either.
Originally Posted by
Kirks gusset
Although SAW is often closed at night for "repairs" it appears nothing actually gets fixed, the airport stopped the heavy cargo aircraft for a while, but that didn't help much. In truth the runway needs digging up and completely re-laying.. just like Gaziantep, although hopefully quicker.
The problem with Sabiha is that, unlike GZT, ADB or ERZ, taxiway D is really a taxiway and can't be used as a runway while main one is being repaired. SAW has become a victim of its own success (mainly brought on by Pegasus) as the original plan called for far less movements than there were in a last decade so the runway is really beaten up. The new parallel runway is being built but I don't hold much hope for it to get operational this year. Anyway, all the unevenness of the runway and too much tire deposit in the TDZs, did not significantly affect the result of landing about 2 km into 3 km long, wet runway, with tailwind above limit.