Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

4th Aug 2018 Junkers JU52 crashed in Switzerland

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

4th Aug 2018 Junkers JU52 crashed in Switzerland

Old 3rd Dec 2018, 07:38
  #301 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 70
Posts: 2,861
Originally Posted by A Squared View Post


I suppose. I’m obviously speaking from a US perspective. It’s hard for me to imagine a legal system under which one person can unilaterally sign away another person’s right to legal remedy for damages.
It is not only that, this paper waver is only good for acts of God or technical/mechanical failures, if it is pilot / maintenance error or negligence , it will not help you much either , and this in any Country I would say. But I am not a lawyer .
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2018, 08:19
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 54
Posts: 2,370
Originally Posted by jimjim1 View Post
These golden oldies should not be permitted to operate as passenger flights without it being entirely clear that they are not part of the same industry that delivered worldwide ZERO jet airliner fatalities in 2017.

The Touristy or Traveling public should not be misled.

There are times to extend the envelope and there are times to say NO!
Who misled them and when ? If you are a person allowed to vote (eg. above 18 years old), you should be able to work out that an airplane 80 years old can´t be as save as new one and a piston powered airplane is less save to travel in than a turbine powered one. Have not seen a single statement by any provider of these trips that would claim anything remotely close to what you imply.

Who made the pax on this flight say YES ? Were they forced to fly on this aircraft ? Of course not and you know that. So, whats your agenda ? More regulation, less freedom ? Forebid anything fun ?

Go ahead, you´re in line with the EU and almost all administrations in the world. Not sure I like this mindset. (actually I hate it, but...)

I have piloted trips in a D.H. Dove under German air law and we had to stop that after JAR OPS came in force. IMO there should be a statement possible to exclude the same amount of safety from such trips, as it is crystal clear that it could not be achieved. Even if the JU would have been build from scratch in 2017 - that most likely would have not changed anything in this case. IF we would be talking about a structural disintegration of some sort it`d maybe be different, but for the time being we aren´t. Or would you ban - e.g. - 737s when a crew mishandled them and killed passengers ? Of course you wouldn´t.

Last edited by His dudeness; 3rd Dec 2018 at 08:20. Reason: Spelling
His dudeness is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2018, 10:26
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Switzerland
Age: 74
Posts: 98
Totally agree, your Dudeness! The Swiss Regulator (FOCA/BAZL) is already threating with more control on oldtimers - instead of better controls of course. I am affected by this actionism because I own and fly a swiss registered oldtimer. I have been twice on a flight of Ju-Air and nobody boarding was misled into believing to fly with a modern aircraft. No oldtimer is dangerous because of its age if well maintained and piloted with its limits in mind and taking care of its idiosyncrasys. This aircraft did not crash because of age. And, as we are sadly aware, even brand new aircraft can be involved in accidents.
clearedtocross is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2018, 11:27
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 1,913
Dudeness - they also have t think of people on the ground who may not have signed up to having an 80 year old 'plane flying over them and depositing large amounts of metal over the vicinity

Personally I'm with Terry Pratchett on this in general - you have freedom of choice but that includes the requirement to take the consequences of your actions. If I go to an Airshow I accept the risk I may be killed by an aircraft crashing - but that's a long way from, for example, the people driving on the main road and killed by the Hunter crash in the UK a couple of years back...............
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2018, 11:42
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 54
Posts: 2,370
Originally Posted by Asturias56 View Post
Dudeness - they also have t think of people on the ground who may not have signed up to having an 80 year old 'plane flying over them and depositing large amounts of metal over the vicinity

Personally I'm with Terry Pratchett on this in general - you have freedom of choice but that includes the requirement to take the consequences of your actions. If I go to an Airshow I accept the risk I may be killed by an aircraft crashing - but that's a long way from, for example, the people driving on the main road and killed by the Hunter crash in the UK a couple of years back...............
Well, what if BA 038 would have crashed half a mile earlier ? Is it really 100% safe to fly A380s over London ? Or Paris ? Now, we most likely agree that the probability is way smaller, however, we also allow oldtimer cars in todays traffic. With drum - brakes and no ABS. Bicycles have brakes that are way less effective than, say, car brakes. Yet they are in todays traffic, in growing numbers. Where exactly do you draw the line ? Lastly I think you deliberately compare apples and oranges. The JUs accident has NO parallel whatsoever with the 'accident' of the Hunter, when we set aside advanced age of the aircraft. Unless we find out the JU was involved in acrobatics, which I seriously doubt. Airshows ? Who accepts risks in Airshows ? Nobody does nowadays, thats why there are less and less of em. They get killed by H&S (or the nanny state, if you prefer)
His dudeness is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 08:10
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 54
Posts: 1,619
Updates on HB-HOT JU-52 crash

First it seems that the draft on the final report is being circulated and that the SUST (Schweizerische Sicherheitsuntersuchungsstelle) is confident that they had sufficient data to perform their analysis.

Second there is some new development in which the Swiss government has requested that the Dutch NLR investigates the BAZL (Das Bundesamt für Zivilluftfahrt) in the context of this investigation (not exactly clear, does anyone have more info ?).

Last edited by atakacs; 10th Aug 2020 at 08:13. Reason: typo in title
atakacs is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 08:25
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 962
They called in the Dutch before. It's about possible issues with BAZL oversight over Ju Air. They want a neutral body to look at things.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 10:03
  #308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 187
There are some loose connections here with the crash of G-APFE over Mt.Fuji in March 1966. A passenger's cine camera was found in the wreckage that was running just before the side gust caught the aircraft. There were 2 frames of the film missing immediately before the camera hit the cabin floor which were later assesed to gauge the subsequent lateral G forces that removed the vertical stabiliser. From this, the subsequent aircraft breakup was fairly well established - complimented of course with the very sad images of the aircraft falling to the ground. Quite possibly the video images, if available, will be potentially of far better quality that the old cine super 8 film.
Terry McCassey is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 10:46
  #309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 962
The actual crash might be more about hot weather high mountain flying and maneuvering.
But the post-crash in-depth wreckage analysis is said to have revealed unexpected fatigue and non-standard repairs to word it polite. This will be the part the Dutch will have a look at.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 13:05
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Switzerland
Age: 74
Posts: 98
The actual crash might be more about hot weather high mountain flying and maneuvering.
But the post-crash in-depth wreckage analysis is said to have revealed unexpected fatigue and non-standard repairs to word it polite. This will be the part the Dutch will have a look at.
Spot on, LessHair. The delay in publishing the final report is not because of any doubt to the primary cause. Its because the whole outfit was operated in a rather amateurish way which did not really match the stringent commercial rules that apply when you sell flight-tickets to the public. The BAZL (FOCA or Federal Office Of Civil Aviation) had a blind eye on this outfit because it was mostly run by well-known and well-liked military aviation oldtimers. It will be difficult and critical to word the final report, as it will most likely trigger legal battlements (insurance) and possibly criminal investigations. And if indeed the oversight of the FOCA was producing holes in the Swiss Cheese, state liabilities might matter too. Sad for all those involved.
clearedtocross is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 14:44
  #311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 54
Posts: 1,619
But the post-crash in-depth wreckage analysis is said to have revealed unexpected fatigue and non-standard repairs to word it polite. This will be the part the Dutch will have a look at.
Well that was made clear in the preliminary report published in 2018. If the BAZL were derelict in their supervision I would expect an investigation to be initiated earlier...
atakacs is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2020, 18:52
  #312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Switzerland
Age: 74
Posts: 98
Well that was made clear in the preliminary report published in 2018. If the BAZL were derelict in their supervision I would expect an investigation to be initiated earlier...
You are too optimistic about the awareness and speed of the Swiss government. They are not any better (or worse) than other governments. This department is run by a very nice lady who probably does not know the difference between a knot in aviation and in stitching. They probably only reckoned something was amiss and got shocked when they read the pre-release of the final report.
clearedtocross is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2020, 11:14
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 445
Originally Posted by His dudeness View Post
Or would you ban - e.g. - 737s when a crew mishandled them and killed passengers ? Of course you wouldn´t.
Er, they got pretty damn close to it though, it was (still is) a ban in all but name.
meleagertoo is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.