Tibet Airlines A319 on fire at Chongqing.
Images showing both engine and gear clearly off the aircraft.
Its reported that the aircraft was departing and there is no FR24 track so it looks like a botched aborted take off?
Its reported that the aircraft was departing and there is no FR24 track so it looks like a botched aborted take off?
From the CAAC
The pilots had interrupted the takeoff in line with procedures after experiencing an abnormality, CAAC said in a statement, leading to an engine scrape and fire after the plane veered off the runway.
Only half a speed-brake
Correct, only +/- 75° is. FCOM-DSC-32-20-10-A.
#16 sounds like a complaint about this feature: https://mentourpilot.com/incident-a3...se-gear-again/ (feature, not a bug), hence my call.
#16 sounds like a complaint about this feature: https://mentourpilot.com/incident-a3...se-gear-again/ (feature, not a bug), hence my call.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tibet Airlines A319 suffers massive damage following runway excursion
on one of the images the starboard aft door is open and the evac slide deployed almost horizontally,
You see pax coming from the nose of the aircraft but hard to see if they come from the forward port door … this door is seen open in another video but not clear if a slide was deployed there …
the plane is flat on its belly so the jump is not as high as could be, but,
one website was reporting 36 injured yesterday,
and a substantial fire on the fwd port side before it was put out with the help of about 7 ARFF vehicles..
better description here Tibet Airlines A319 suffers massive damage following runway excursion
Originally Posted by mickjoebill
no evacuation on starboard side?
Did flames start after port side evac commenced?
Did flames start after port side evac commenced?
You see pax coming from the nose of the aircraft but hard to see if they come from the forward port door … this door is seen open in another video but not clear if a slide was deployed there …
the plane is flat on its belly so the jump is not as high as could be, but,
one website was reporting 36 injured yesterday,
and a substantial fire on the fwd port side before it was put out with the help of about 7 ARFF vehicles..
better description here Tibet Airlines A319 suffers massive damage following runway excursion
Last edited by A0283; 13th May 2022 at 09:39.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BoeingDriver99
Fun fact; RTOs are not practised in the sim in China...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BoeingDriver99
Fun fact; RTOs are not practised in the sim in China...
Edit: I asked one colleague who used to be captain with Air China which is the national carrier and they also do rejected take off in the simulator.
Last edited by pineteam; 16th May 2022 at 04:16.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mickjoebill
no evacuation on starboard side? Did flames start after port side evac commenced?
Pretty clear from this video that a even a short delay can kill ... re delays caused by people trying to get their carry on bags ...
On the other thread, a report of two explosions heard and fire around the port wing. Perhaps the port engine let go, and/or massive loss of thrust, with the other on full chat and they couldn't control the yaw.
Only half a speed-brake
That implies them trying to fly her away. Okay, selecting toga would match that plan AND exacerbate the yaw, possibly taking the aeroplane off the runway before getting airborne.
However, I'd expect the destruction to be much more severe with a high energy excursion at around 140 kts if that had been the case.
For a stop decision, the asymmetrical thrust is quickly removed by the initiating THR IDLE/REV.
However, I'd expect the destruction to be much more severe with a high energy excursion at around 140 kts if that had been the case.
For a stop decision, the asymmetrical thrust is quickly removed by the initiating THR IDLE/REV.
It could be an engine failed approaching V1 and they selected TOGA initially and then Idle/Rev. Using TOGA for a V1 cut is all but mandatory in some airlines and as the V1 speed approaches the skipper should be go minded -> large audible stimulus -> reflex action to select TOGA -> massive and increased yaw -> RTO initiated -> max braking pointing 20-30 degrees of runway centerline -> crew along for the ride.
