|
Boohoo Moose, the thing is that you, among others, still don't quite get it do you! If US airlines want to declare "an emergency" when flying in the USA so be it. DAL was not flying in the USA but was in a foreign country whose national language is not English. Hence the need to adhere to international standards. Here we have a Russian airline flying a domestic sector inside Russia. They can say whatever their training dictates and no doubt it will be in Russian.
|
Some photos on BBC:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66785897 Looks like the field was clear of crops. |
ATC here.
|
The case of diversion with increased fuel consumption is rarely catered to in flight planning, getting to half flaps with the gear down and having a failure which prevents further flap extension or retraction is quite possible. Out come the books and you find the runway isn’t long enough and with your new fuel flows you won’t make an airport with sufficient runway length.
Landing at the original airport and having an overrun with the emergency services in attendance would have been a better option compared to running out of fuel though. |
Maybe Airbus should offer a gravel kit and a High Float Gear kit. Could then trade in the Kingair for the farm strip.
|
They've got the gear, you just need the gravel bit.
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....41d4e72576.jpg |
2 Attachment(s)
New (for now) R/T [rus lng]
|
Wonder if they try to fly the A320 out of this field. The used airplane market in Russia today may be a lot different. Is there grass field take off performance data in the POH? FUD will be a big concern.
|
Already chopped up?
Originally Posted by visibility3miles
(Post 11501811)
Some photos on BBC:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66785897 Looks like the field was clear of crops. A video on social media showed a heavy digger then dismembering the plane, lopping off the cockpit, tail and wings to more easily remove the plane from the field. Either the BBC fell for the prior video or the investigation won't have much to go on in finding the cause of the hydraulics failure. Even if the plane was an obvious write-off, wouldn't taking it apart a bit more carefully improve the quality and quantity of the spare parts that will be harvested? |
I guess they could build a temporary runway, which would be an interesting military exercise. It would only need to be around 4000ft for a near empty aircraft.
In any case the pilots should have used superior judgement to not need their superior landing skills... |
Why divert?
Quick FlySmart calculation with an A320 CEO ldg (without knowing the actual weather/conditions at OMSK), assuming 10 kts tailwind, temp 15, QNH 1000, and RCC 5/5/5 (wet) at MLW 64.5 tons, with Green system reservoir lo lvl, gives an actual landing distance of 2148 meters.
There must be more to this story, or why on earth would they even contemplating diversion? A single hyd. failure on the 320 is not a great concern at all. Regards. |
Originally Posted by shared reality
(Post 11501999)
There must be more to this story, or why on earth would they even contemplating diversion? A single hyd. failure on the 320 is not a great concern at all.
|
Originally Posted by EDLB
(Post 11501919)
Wonder if they try to fly the A320 out of this field.
FUD will be a big concern. |
I am not an airbus pilot so can't verify latest report on that incident. Rumor is that they misunderstood fcom. FCOM states that you need 180% of extra fuel ,but they just multiplied it by 1.8
Silly mistake but incredible luck. |
Originally Posted by Luray
(Post 11502177)
I am not an airbus pilot so can't verify latest report on that incident. Rumor is that they misunderstood fcom. FCOM states that you need 180% of extra fuel ,but they just multiplied it by 1.8
Silly mistake but incredible luck. |
180% of extra fuel on top of what the original fuel to divert is a lot. If divert fuel was 2000 kgs, it’s now 5600 kgs (correct me if I’m wrong). If you don’t have it, you don’t have it.
|
Originally Posted by Magplug
(Post 11501609)
Any crew that runs a jet out of gas dealing with an emergency should be thrown in jail as incompetent. Landing with no gear at the original destination would have been better than making a forced landing in a field. Had the transit been over water the outcome would have been totally different. Even a brand new FO could tell you that the FMC fuel predictions are nonsense with the gear down.
Was it really a good idea to gravity drop the gear before deciding that going elsewhere to a longer runway was a better course of action? Leaving 2500m of runway behind you in favour of 3600m at Novosibirsk and then running out of gas only half way there is supremely incompetent. Edit: Can't spell! |
Temporary Runway...?
I seem to remember at a similar off-piste landing, it was possible to make a temporary runway to remove a stranded airplane. Can anyone come up with the details...?
There are reports that this aircraft has suffered a broken Nose-Wheel Strut, which might require a repair. |
Originally Posted by scifi
(Post 11502747)
I seem to remember at a similar off-piste landing, it was possible to make a temporary runway to remove a stranded airplane. Can anyone come up with the details...?
There are reports that this aircraft has suffered a broken Nose-Wheel Strut, which might require a repair. |
This one, I think... |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 00:17. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.