CRJ crash in Yerevan

[maxho]

Russian media reports Belavia CRJ-100 crashed on takeoff from Yerevan. 18 pax, 3 crew.

[dmitrik]

According to Russian media at 4:15am local time CRJ-100M flight number B2-1834 departed runway on takeoff, wingtip contacted surface, the aircraft tumbled, broke into two parts and caught fire. Thanks to prompt response of emergency services there were no fatalities. 4 people hospitalized, others threated at the scene.

[DK_FCI]

What kind of weather did they have at the time in Yerevan?

[AltFlaps]

YEREVAN INTL - UDYZ - EVN

MET UDYZ 140800Z 00000MPS 3500 -SN BR BKN020 M02/M05 Q1018 09190060 NOSIG=
MET UDYZ 140730Z 19001MPS 3500 -SN BR BKN016 M03/M05 Q1018 09190060 NOSIG=
MET UDYZ 140700Z 00000MPS 3500 -SN BR BKN016 M03/M05 Q1018 09010070 NOSIG=

TAF UDYZ 140750Z 140918 VRB02MPS 3500 BR SCT015 SCT100 TEMPO 0918 1000 SN OVC008=
TAF UDYZ 140450Z 140606 VRB02MPS 2000 BR SCT010 BKN100 TEMPO 0618 23006MPS 0600 SN OVC004 BECMG 1415 1000 BR TEMPO 1806 0200
SN FZFG VV001=


Oh Oh
I really hope this is not the old "we didn't think we needed de-icing" CRJ trick again !
How many have there been already ?

[MATaxi]

That Met might let you to believe that Icing played a part again along with the description of how the plane impacted i.e wingtip first , but that would purely be speculation. At least its not a fatalities incident thankfully.

[maxho]

First photo's in: http://drugoi.livejournal.com/2520161.html

[gallo]

So many plane crashes have been happening recently in the former Soviet Union involving western types.
If I am correct this was the second CRJ (the other being N168CK at Vnukovo)
Armavia A.320
S7 Airlines A.310
German Challlenger
German C.90
Ivolga Avia C-208
Jet 2000 Falcon 20
Evolga BAe 125

So sad

[STN Ramp Rat]

http://armenianow.com:80/?action=viewArticle&AID=2822&lng=eng&IID=1172

[AltFlaps]

I'd hate (obviously) to jump to any conclusions as to what happened here ...

BUT, this is the third picture of a CRJ that I've seen on its back with its gear sticking up, and the previous 2 were both ice related on takeoff.

The CRJ has a SUPER critical wing, and is VERY prone to stalling issues with ice ...

Looking at the pics, I'm very glad (and very surprised) that they all got out !

[robbreid]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080214/Canadair_jet_080214/20080214?hub=World

[Huck]

BUT, this is the third picture of a CRJ that I've seen on its back with its gear sticking up, and the previous 2 were both ice related on takeoff.


Don't forget the Canadair business jets....

[looserfer]

Overrotation!!! :{

[Wellington Bomber]

That is an interesting way to get rid of ice:eek:

[international hog driver]

Belavia CRJ

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z96/redlum5x5/ai282201.jpg

Moscow CRJ

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z96/redlum5x5/1-388.jpg

Yep, both similar. Lets wait for the report but being a pessimist they may as well photocopy the moscow version........ names to be changed to protect the innocent

[lomapaseo]

Nice comparison pics. How about the flap settings?

[er340790]

Whatever the precise cause of this incident, it is most impressive that in a take-off crash / inverted fuselage / devastating fire that everyone was still able to get out without major injury.

There must be something in Canadair's CAD/CAM after all..... just a pity it was set at 7/8 scale for the CRJ.;)

[FEHERTO]

We are talking about 3 accidents within a year (Moscow-Vnukovo, Almaty and now Yerevan), all in de-icing/anti-icing weather conditions and all with aircraft type from the same series/type.

All turned over and burned out. The one in ALA would look the same if the aircraft would not hit a wall.

Let me state a few things from experience in this region, knowing all the airports and handling agents very well:
- training of the ground crews not accomplsihed or not complete (no aircraft procedures done)
- They have fluid and equipment manufactured in Europe and the USA, but not fully understand all features.
AND
- they are not understanding the difference between a TU-154 with a wing thick like a dozen of telephone books and a CRJ, with a maximum of two.

And one more item:
Not only the trainign of the ground crews, I have my problem to believe that all the flight crews had been properly trained.

[AltFlaps]

I hate to say it guys, but the fact the airframes have been CRJ/Challenger tends towards smaller airlines, private charter and corporate work.

Case in point was the Birmingham UK Challenger crash about 5 years ago.
Skipper asked about deicing (heavy overnight hoar frost) ... when he got the price and queue time he decided he'd just go without !

On rotate, one wing stalled, the other continued to fly - cartwheel - fireball - 5 fatalities. I saw the pictures on the news - and I immediately recognised the burnt out frame of a CRJ/Challenger on its back with the gear sticking up ...

This appears to be becoming an all too 'common' problem with this airframe. Its a supercritical wing - if its not clean - don't fly ! :eek:

[Minorite invisible]

- they are not understanding the difference between a TU-154 with a wing thick like a dozen of telephone books and a CRJ, with a maximum of two.

The Almaty accident was German registered and German crew. The Birmingham, UK crew mentioned in a previous post had no Tu-154 experience, nor did the Nov 28 2004 CL-601 crash in Colorado, USA, that occurred in circumstances that look very similar to this one at first sight.

A Feb 14 2008 CRJ-100 in Armenia
A Dec 26 2007 CL-604 accident in Kazakhstan
A Feb 13 2007 CRJ-100 accident in Moscow
A Nov 21 2004 CRJ-200 accident in China
A Nov 28 2004 CL-601 accident in Colorado
A Jan 4 2002 CL-604 accident in Birmingham, UK

All take-off accidents, all lost control at or right after rotation, all flipped on their backs, all in winter conditions.

I think that Bombardier should emphasize the importance of taking off with a whistle-clean wing when flying this aircraft.

[international hog driver]

There was a thread about this a while back, but it appears that there are some serious issues with “loss of corporate knowledge” that is being compounded by mismanagement by middle management.

Back in my FO days I flew with guys who had been around the block and one thing we learn was that in these type on conditions, with runway available, use an improved climb / V2+ / Overspeed technique.

Sure go the usual V1/VR… blah blah but brief the crew that you will leave it on the ground longer for more acceleration, hell if the tyres can take a heavy weight, no flap Vref +40 or more ….. STAY ON THE GROUND.

Once you are beyond V1, you are going anyway, but given runway available and inclement weather…… go faster, as SPEED IS LIFE.

Obviously you are not going to de-rate/flex, but how many corporate operators actually do? More relevant, why would you even bother in these conditions.

Far too many times now I see newbies coming in and at VR try and yank it off the ground….. guys its not that hard, pitch up and let it fly off the ground!!

[Bearcat]

kinda of agree with the above...after de icing i like to use icp speeds and a nice slow rotation esp in sh@tty wx.

btw is there a link where bombardier discuss icing conditions and its implications.

[merlinxx]

Had a customer looking at a 604 & GLX, now looking at a DA2000x & 7X, he's not happy with the incidents as is his C/P. Sad really, nice acft, bad SOPs being applied. The BHX situ proved this!

[Minorite invisible]

Had a customer looking at a 604 & GLX, now looking at a DA2000x & 7X, he's not happy with the incidents as is his C/P.

Well that is a bit extreme. Air Canada has a fleet of those that perform thousands of flights per week the harshest of weather and they never lost any due to icing: because the crews are trained and made aware of the CRJ's weakness about wing contamination and never take off with any unless fully de-iced.

[BeechNut]

Well that is a bit extreme. Air Canada has a fleet of those that perform thousands of flights per week the harshest of weather and they never lost any due to icing: because the crews are trained and made aware of the CRJ's weakness about wing contamination and never take off with any unless fully de-iced.

The Air Canada CRJ100 landing accident in in Fredericton in 1997 had ice mentioned as one possible contributing factor though it could never be proved.

See the TSB report at

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/1997/a97h0011/a97h0011_index.asp

Beech

[merlinxx]

I did say "bad SOPs being applied" enough is published re 'Cold WX/Winter Ops' in the industry media every year for this not to be a 'we didn't know 'bout that' scenario.

The mainly BIZAV/Regional Ops publications (B&CA, AIN, BART etc carry specific articles, let alone all the OEM/CAA/Associations (IBAC/NBAA/NATA/IATA/RAA/EBAA et al) publications/manuals.

[FIRESYSOK]

And my company just authorized takeoff in ice pellet conditions and heavy snow as well neither of which have holdover times- all with a little help from the FAA who approved it. I think I'll reference this thread when they ask my why I didn't go.

[Sensible Garage]

related: Cimber Air nearly lost CRJ100LR OY-RJC during take-off at Olso 31jan08. Crew experienced uncommanded roll after / during rotation causing excessive bank angle. The stick shaker and pushed were acitaved, crew recovered and landed safely. FDR readout has estabished the crew used 6 to 7 degrees rate of rotation... Yes, it was snowy and cold, they did de-ice but (forgot?) to switch wing anti ice on (on the runway). Bombardier has issued All Operator Message stressing do not use excessive rate of rotation.

[safetypee]

The obvious concern is ice or snow contamination on the wing, but don’t forget that other types of contaminant might cause similar problems.
Some aircraft have operating limitations / special procedures after de/anti- icing, e.g. ATR and Saab 2000; these aircraft also have ‘aft loaded’ – reflex tail/wing sections similar to the CRJ.
In these aircraft, the problem appears to originate with anti-icing fluids that are slow to shear form the tail plane / wing surface and change the aerodynamic effects of the controls via the control surface / wing slots. The fluid is the contaminant.
IIRC the problem increases with over application of thickened fluids, i.e. more fluid is not better.

[FEHERTO]

Unfortunately this has again to do with training !

Most pilots do not understand than in frost conditions in most airports worldwide the use of a T1 fluid would give enough hold-over-time. They oder thickened fluids all over.
Had last week the case that several pilots ordered a T1 100%, which in normal cases (except in pre-diluted condition) should not be sprayed at all and may cause a safety risk due to bad aerodynamics.

A study (qustioning pilots) performed by several organisations 3 years ago in Europe showed that 80% had no winter ops training or it had bene more than 5 years back.

And reading a lot here about higher rotation speeds or more aggressive take off rates: It doe snot work in all cases and can be really dangerous.

[FEHERTO]

is valid for the Belavia crew.

I am doing a lot of training in the area of the former USSR and you can thrust me, this is a big problem to get them an understanding for a supercritical wing.

And for US or European crews: How many of them really received a complete, appropriate and annual refreshed winter ops training ?

[The Bartender]

Had last week the case that several pilots ordered a T1 100%, which in normal cases (except in pre-diluted condition) should not be sprayed at all and may cause a safety risk due to bad aerodynamics.

Same problem here further north actually, with pilots requesting all sorts of T1-mixes, regardless of OAT and precipitation, not understanding the fact the the stronger ratio of T1 over water just lowers the freezingpoint and does nothing for their holdovertime...:ugh:

...and if i'm bold enough to try to explain why, all hell breaks loose...
"What? A mere mortal challenging the wisdom of a pilot wearing four stripes??? Have this man beheaded at dawn!"

Still have my head attached after all these years though, so i guess they learn something, one at the time.... :hmm:

They're not all bad of course... I've even met some who were looking to learn more about de/anti-icing, for their own safety! :D

[Green Guard]

And for US or European crews: How many of them really received a complete, appropriate and annual refreshed winter ops training

And may I ask where was Captain last half an hour before engine-start time ?
In and around his/her aircraft or somewhere else?

[MarkD]

http://www.macleans.ca/world/wire/article.jsp?content=w021455A

Belavia acquired the nine-year-old aircraft last February. More than 1,000 of the aircraft have been delivered since they went into service in the early 1990s, said Bombardier spokesman Marc Duchesne.

"The Bombardier team is on its way to give a hand to the local investigation," Duchesne said in an interview. "But for now it's impossible for us to say anything on the probable cause because the investigation is ongoing."

"I don't recall any similar events with this aircraft," he added.

Is this an Alberto Gonzales use of "I don't recall" or does BBD have reason to think the incidents cited above are different... :rolleyes:

[Willie Everlearn]

Thousands of CRJs takeoff in the United States every week in icing conditions. They don't seem to be falling out of the sky.
Is there something missing here?
Apparently not. But, maybe it's easier to blame the manufacturer and somehow manage to connect this type of incident with shoddy maintenance on a Dash 8 fleet?

C'mon gents, how about some substance???

[Minorite invisible]

maybe it's easier to blame the manufacturer

Who in this thread blamed the manufacturer?

[galaxy flyer]

While the CRJ/Challenger series does seem to have a bad record with icing accidents. Need comparative data, not anecdotes, a couple of things:

A wing cleaned of all snow or ice contaminents is required for ANY airplane, there is no room for playing here. Yes, some planes may tolerate contamination better, but you're still being a test pilot and gambling with your lives, PERIOD.

I recently transited PANC, snow was falling and visibility was about RVR 4000, viz of 3/4 but very cold, -14C (the only way of judging snowfall rates for holdover times, forget SN, SN- and SN+. If viz is less than RVR 2000 or 3/8 of SM, think hard about cocktail hour) Anyway, deiced, holdover time with Type 4 predicted at 15 to 20 minutes, IIRC. Off within the time, at destination, the wing that was treated first had small amounts of telltale ice. Some streaks of ice on the upper surface and small icicles aft of the heated leading edge on the lower surface. Picture book stuff, we had just about maximized the holdover time under the actual conditions. Type II deice and Type IV anti-ice, btw

While some extra speed is not bad, it is NOT protection against an contaminated wing. If it won't fly, more speed will just increase the roll rate to the contaminated side. Yes, rotation rates of 6 degrees/second are excessive, uncalled for and not the way training is done. Or shouldn't be anyway. A normal rate of 2-3 degrees/second is correct. On two engines, the speed will take care of itself. On a 604, you will lift-off at V2+ at that rotation rate.

A clean wing is a happy wing---Piper Cub or A380 and everything in between!

GF