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.

Nepal Plane Crash

Old 17th Jan 2023, 18:18
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: cyprus
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the phone itself kept recording until it was destroyed by fire. it was held in his hands, then at the end it lets go and drops. you can also hear faint breathing. the video was lived streamed on fb. his relatives confirmed this and his name. i don't get why all the discussion about it being fake. it is real
mobov98423 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 18:21
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: cyprus
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
simon is too high on his high horse lately. the video is confirmed legit by his relatives and his name is out. everyone doubting it please quit. you're making a fool of yourselves. just because SIMON SAYS something that doesn't mean anything. next
mobov98423 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 18:23
  #223 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,489
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Claybird
It did, beginning at a speed of 108 knots (vs the 134 projected) and the captain's move to move flaps setting from 30 to 25 gave clearance of a 58 extra, meters preventing the strike of the ILS column by the aircraft. It's in the AAIB report of 2010. Anyway...
BA038 was a unique accident. Totally unremarkable flight all the way from China until within a minute of landing, when a loss of power to both engines caused by ice, entered the equation. FO Coward as PF. Fortunately the captain retracted one stage of flap & effectively glided past the aerodrome boundary. The passenger injuries were mainly suffered during the slide evacuations.
The unfortunate ATR appears to have stalled during a base leg turn onto final, resulting in a rapid rate of roll & increasing ROD. Once past the incipient stage probably insufficient height to recover? Students will now appreciate why stalling with flap in a descending turn is in the syllabus.
Just why will become clearer once FDR/CVR data is known. I suspect rich in CRM aspects for pilots to learn from?
parkfell is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 18:55
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kent
Posts: 59
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
I hear your points.
I dont think post 103 is showing the actual track unless they have access to a much longer video or FR24 coverage.
The video I saw only shows effectively base leg and I commented at the time it was rather close in, measured on google maps its about 2K give or take a bit.
There is high ground to the north and to the west so limiting how large a circuit can be made.
The downwind leg could have been extended a little thus making the turn to final less than 90 degrees.
Looking on google earth 3D gives a really good perspective from the old airfield to the new and location of the gorge.
They were nowhere close to making the turn to final on 12.
Look on the video for a road running top to bottom with a distinct right kink in it, then get the same perspective on google earth and you can see how close in they were and late in turning.
I flattened the perspective a bit so you can see the new airport.
https://earth.google.com/web/@28.201...9.58734423t,0r
and this video(for easy reference) at 7secs

See how long it will be before they release info from CVR/FDR
michaelbinary is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 19:15
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,991
Received 316 Likes on 162 Posts
Originally Posted by Claybird
It did, beginning at a speed of 108 knots (vs the 134 projected) and the captain's move to move flaps setting from 30 to 25 gave clearance of a 58 extra, meters preventing the strike of the ILS column by the aircraft. It's in the AAIB report of 2010. Anyway...
On the contrary, the AAIB think not:



DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 19:23
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Salzburg
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by macboydus
Anyway, as per usual, I'm enjoying the machinations of the minds here attempting to fathom this incident. It's rather frustrating to see the other site I check—AVHerald—completely close the comments and so adamantly state that the cabin video for this crash is fake. As a scientist, I like to keep an open mind about things. Certainly it's surprising to see such a video, but having examined it, I thought right (!), off to Google maps and attempt to match....sure enough, those tennis courts next to the stadium were a bit of a give away....my only guess is that Simon is just overloaded and has to stop comments out of frustration and a lack of time to moderate.
Now that I find a bit of time, let me share my view and reasons on this video:

So far I found out that there was never a livestream out of the cabin, it was not possible to livestream for this user. Facebook permits livestreams only for users with more than 10,000 followers. The passenger had about 2 dozen followers (and since the crash no new have joined, how could they have been approved even if they requested, if the account owner is dead?) However, the video was uploaded to that account a long time after the crash. This makes clear that somebody else has access to the account and placed the video there a long time later. Only THEN the livestream became public (and this explains why the livestream became known only a day after the crash. Had the video been around as a livestream indeed, it would have been known within an hour after the crash just like the ground observer video).

In the time between the crash and the upload of the video was more than enough time to combine two videos. The first, showing the correct passenger, however, on a previous flight into the old airport (hence before Jan 1st 2023) and the second blurred video, that pretends to show the crash sequence. The transition from the first to the second video is dilletantic. The last fully clear and crystal sharp frame of the first video is followed by the totally blurred first frame of the second video without any transition. The last clear frame still shows the passenger happily and relaxed, the next frame is blurred without transition, there is no visible refocussing of the camera, no movement of the camera, no movement before the camera, no reason for the sudden blur is visible. However, only this first blurred frame "starts" the crash sequence, and the video remains blurred to the very end.

People of Pokhara tell me, that the video in its clear part clearly show the straight final approach to old Pokhara Airport's runway 22, all landmarks etc. are correct. The approach is visible to relatively low height.

Witnesses of the crash however say, that the aircraft was already on a final approach in straight flight (not turning anymore) west of the old airport, crossed the old airport in a nearly perpendicular and straight wings level trajectory across the old runway, and shortly afterwards rolled left and impacted the ground (this is also what the ground observer video shows, the aircraft was wings level until the final roll left!). This approach however is definitely not visible in the cabin video (even if the aircraft was turning base still before the aircraft rolled left, that turn would have been visible in the cabin video too but wasn't).

In the cabin video the development of trouble is also not visible. According to the groundvideo the aircraft increased its pitch progressively, accelerating the pitch rate towards the end. Passengers would not be alerted by this pitch increase and would also not recognize the unusual attitude, however, the trained eye would instantly see the high pitch in the video while showing the outside through the cabin video (this pitch movement was not just a few seconds long, on the ground video the aircraft becomes visible already at a high pitch attitude). Not in the cabin video.

The initial left roll, according to the ground video, was relatively slow at first, hence no big forces onto the passengers, however, clearly noticeable that the aircraft would turn. This is not visible in the cabin video, also no reaction by the passengers. The passengers would have recognized they were on short final having seen the old airport pass by the windows flying over the old runway in a near right angle and would have known, that now a turn would be entirely wrong. Hence the passengers would have been alerted. Nothing visible/audible on the video.

Then the aircraft rolls in with quite some violence, the forces onto the passengers must have been huge and the people would have screamed with certainty in panic. Nothing on the video however.

One of my readers gave me an additional hint, a very good observation: comparing the ground observer video and the cabin video the time in the cabin video between the first blurred frame (before only happy cabin) and the impact is much less than the ground observer video shows.

How did the video get to the public? The BBC writes:

Quote:
Abhishek Pratap Shah, a former lawmaker in Nepal, told Indian news channel NDTV that rescuers had recovered the phone on which the video was found from the plane's wreckage.

"It [the video clip] was sent by one of my friends, who received it from a police officer. It is a real record," Mr Shah told NDTV. Officials in Nepal have not confirmed his claim or commented on the footage.
Endquote

So, on this way the video got the public according to the BBC, possibly also onto the Facebook Account of the passenger. The BBC also raises the question, how even an Internet contact or a live stream could have been accomplished, but nonetheless states the video is authentic because the family confirmed they had seen the video live. However, a live stream was not possible (and the video was uploaded many hours after the crash only), this statement is disproven. I do not think the family is behind the fake (but can't rule this out either), but under this assumption that the family is not part of the fake I believe they are strained with the grief over their lost family member and the sudden interest by media and all those inquiries and said "Yes" and "Amen" to everything, hence the reporter only needed to ask the right question to get his story confirmed (I would even think, had the reporter asked whether his interview partner was already dead, the interview partner would also have said "yes").

However, the BBC story raises one more question: how could one access the mobile phone and get to the video without PIN/password in this time? This all doesn't fit together.

Servus, Simon

Austrian Simon is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 19:26
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Kathmandu
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Yo_You_Not_You_you

Flight path for runway 12 . but with a turn from different side over the old airport .
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/a...n-amz#2ed30fdb
Compared with Approximate observed path from video .
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?m...TE&usp=sharing
At the time where the outside video starts , I think the pilot are aware of the stall and have aborted the turn and moving straight to deal with it. The base doesn't go that far along the river as per the witness who has seen rare runway 12 landings.

Thus a Vmc roll in my limited knowledge.

Last edited by Yo_You_Not_You_you; 17th Jan 2023 at 19:49.
Yo_You_Not_You_you is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 19:38
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: cyprus
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
simon the blur is from quick motion blur
also from heavy smartphone video codec compression (becomes even heavier when u fast move the phone)

pin and unlock : many people have their phones unlocked with no pin

you make some good points, but let's see what is the truth at the end. the video could very WELL be true

and there was a post crash fire. photos and videos from ground on impact point show this
mobov98423 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 19:40
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: cyprus
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
also u say the passengers didn't react in the violent pull up of the nose
it doesn't seem so violent in the external video

they did react later on
there IS screaming heard when the wing dropped
mobov98423 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 19:47
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LIVT
Posts: 197
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Austrian Simon
However, the BBC story raises one more question: how could one access the mobile phone and get to the video without PIN/password in this time? This all doesn't fit together.

Servus, Simon
Not sure about the specific mobile phone here, but it might be that the camera was set to save media on a removable SD memory card rather than on the device memory. If they removed the card and read it on another device, they may have been able to retrieve the video.

Edited to add:
Even more so, in case the phone had been damaged by fire and not functioning anymore.

Last edited by aerolearner; 17th Jan 2023 at 19:59.
aerolearner is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 20:02
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by aerolearner
Not sure about the specific mobile phone here, but it might be that the camera was set to save media on a removable SD memory card rather than on the device memory. If they removed the card and read it on another device, they may have been able to retrieve the video.
Where does this Simon guy get the idea you need 10,000 followers to live stream on Facebook. That is simply not true, anyone with an account can live stream on Facebook. If the video is genuine then it was a live stream as recovering the video from an SD card recovered from a phone which was likely incinerated is just too far fetched.
passenger51 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 20:23
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: cyprus
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
indeed. many android models take sd cards and record media on them
mobov98423 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 20:33
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why all this conspiracy theorizing about faked video footage?
So far as I am aware, there has been no suggestion that the crash was caused by someone using a mobile phone and interfering with the on-board electronics.
MEA_mann is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 20:36
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: U.K.
Age: 33
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Austrian Simon
So far I found out that there was never a livestream out of the cabin, it was not possible to livestream for this user. Facebook permits livestreams only for users with more than 10,000 followers.
This is incorrect. I just checked my app, and I am able to start a Facebook livestream with just a few hundred friends/followers.
I was also sceptical of the cabin video when it first surfaced. There are people who would fake that kind of thing for social media engagement. And while the video doesn't show enough to prove that it is genuine, everything in the video matches the known facts. If it was a fake for somebody's social media fame, I'd be surprised if they got even the right aircraft model.

As it is, the video shows
  • The correct aircraft/airline
  • The correct flight path
  • Passengers reacting to the sudden roll
  • Plausible crash & post-crash
It's possible that somebody found a video of a matching approach and appended the crash sequence. But that doesn't explain the passenger reaction to the roll. And they couldn't have started with any publicly available video, or somebody would have found the source by now.

The simplest and most plausible explanation is that it's a genuine video.
alexmclean is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 21:10
  #235 (permalink)  
aox
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 228
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BBC item about the video, which names the person involved https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-64287331

Local journalist Shashikant Tiwari told the BBC that Kashyap showed him the video on Jaiswal's Facebook profile, which is set to private.

aox is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 21:22
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kent
Posts: 59
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Using the video 1 - 7s on post 228 and google maps you can see the rough track of the plane and its not perpendicular to the old runway at all.
@7secs you can see a road wth a kink in it at right angles to the plane, so just draw line from that and perpendicular to that line is the approximate track of the aircraft, which is starting a left turn for runway 12. This puts the plane around 300 - 400 feet above the old airfield, its not on final approach, its not trying to land at the old airfield at all. The old airfield is below the aircraft as it heads on base leg to turn final for 12.
So stop spouting nonsense.
Go check the landmarks s1 - 7 in the video with what you can see on google maps or even google earth https://earth.google.com/web/@28.201...9.58734423t,0r and you will see it all ties in with an approach to 12.
As the plane crosses the intersection of the kinky road the left wing tip drop starting a turn to the left, it never completed that 90 degree turn, and you can see if you dont complete the turn the gorge where the crash happened will be straight ahead of you.


Last edited by michaelbinary; 17th Jan 2023 at 21:39.
michaelbinary is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 21:41
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 677
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Really appreciate the interesting and enlightening comments. The conspiracy theory minded will cling to this "it's a fake!" ideology till the day they die regardless of the counter evidence. Human psychology.

Kerosine is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 22:05
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Toronto
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whether the cabin video is fake, I cannot say for sure, but some of the "analysis" "proving" it's fake is quite sad.

I'll pick one post to respond to, but it's one among many.

Originally Posted by Austrian Simon
So far I found out that there was never a livestream out of the cabin, it was not possible to livestream for this user.
It need not have been a Facebook livestream. It may have been another platform. It may have been a private stream that that immediately uploads to some cloud storage.

People of Pokhara tell me, that the video in its clear part clearly show the straight final approach to old Pokhara Airport's runway 22, all landmarks etc. are correct. The approach is visible to relatively low height.
Which other comments have said is the correct approach to runway 12 at the new airport. The approach overflies the old airport so it looks very similar, just a bit higher.

. The last clear frame still shows the passenger happily and relaxed, the next frame is blurred without transition, there is no visible refocussing of the camera, no movement of the camera, no movement before the camera, no reason for the sudden blur is visible.

Autofocus isn't instant, and it can struggle greatly when there are sudden movements, sudden changes in focus distance, and extremely up-close shots. All of that happened in the video, with the passenger aiming the camera out the window, then toward himself, then toward other passengers, then toward the seat backs only inches away, then repeating the process, and when the actual extreme left bank takes place, it's likely he tries to grab onto the seat on front of him or his own, and that's when the phone's camera is aimed as something so close as to be unable to focus on it, which is then followed only a second or two later by the camera being flung to who-knows-where, again unable to gain focus until it's mostly stationary. Add typical digital video artifacting and I don't see how you can conclude a whole lot just because some frames are "blurry".

The passengers would have recognized they were on short final having seen the old airport pass by the windows flying over the old runway in a near right angle and would have known, that now a turn would be entirely wrong. Hence the passengers would have been alerted. Nothing visible/audible on the video.
How do you expect passengers to react? For them to even notice something is "different" you'd need a significant number of the passengers to have experienced this approach at this airport. In fact, probably none of them had. They have no idea what's "normal". And even something out of the ordinary would not automatically be cause for panic. They have no idea when something is a serious problem.

Passengers will scream and panic at normal turbulence, but kill all the engines and they'll get quiet and whisper "Oh, it's really quiet all of a sudden. Does that normally happen?"

Then the aircraft rolls in with quite some violence, the forces onto the passengers must have been huge and the people would have screamed with certainty in panic. Nothing on the video however.
What video are you watching? I hear the passengers shouting just before the crash.

Tobin is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 22:06
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Around
Posts: 101
Received 24 Likes on 11 Posts
A bit of techinical info for the non ATR (and Jet) folk.

ATR has power levers, those power levers go into the notch (similar to the bus) at take-off (in normal ops) and they stay there until descent. Once you reach about 240 KIAS in descent the power levers come out of the notch and are the pilots to use. There is no auto throttle!

All ATR pilots will atest to the fact they practice circling approaches in the sim constantly and some operations around the world do them as their bread and butter daily. Outside of the EU/UK ATRs rarely operate from ILS to ILS. Due to this reason circling approaches get significant training as does stalling on approach, especially now in the UPRT environment.

Some observations:
- Flap 15 appears to be selected (it should have been 30 at that stage)
- Below 500 ft the stick pusher is inhibited but the shaker remains active
- Left turn onto finals requires the LHS pilot (if PF) to look outside but it can be a little awkward and often leads to elevator input (hence why we practice)
- Selecting flap 30 produces a significant balloon, so much so that you are taught to immediately trim (roughly 3 seconds nose down) to avoid this and maintain speed. Failure to do so can lead to losing 10-15 knots very quickly.
- The body angle appears far too high for an ATR in this stage of flight (indicating a low power setting and slow airspeed)
- When you comibine a number of the factors above with a loss of situational awareness you get what we see in the video. A stall on base turning finals.

I doubt there's an ATR pilot here who hasn't practiced this in the sim or an ATR TRI/TRE that hasn't witnessed a crew get close to this situation in the sim or real life.

I've noticed a few times the mention of the ATR becoming a handful at low speeds. This is not accurate! Yes the machine requires good speed control and a solid case of telling it whos boss, which can make it a handful for low time pilots or pilots who havent got the greatest handling skills. A handfull of power will generally get you away from these low speed situations very quickly if you manage to get yourself there.

My comments are in no way saying this is what happened in Nepal they are for those unfamilar with the ATR. There may well be other factors that the FDR and CVR will show during the investigation.

BO0M is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2023, 22:25
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: edinburgh
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some very interesting analysis of the in-cabin video, Simon.

As I noted a few posts back, the confusing factor is that the approach to the old airport looks quite similar to a circling approach to the new one if coming into 12. However, would you not agree that the onboard video shows them too high to be about to land into the old airport? It certainly seems that way to me.

Someone else posted the FlightRadar24 tracking of a recent flight for this same flight number that had indeed landed into 12 (but coming in from the south rather than north), so it does appear that the terrain further west demands this rather tight turn over the old airport into 12.
macboydus 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.