ATR72 Incident at FCO

[ILS27LEFT]

According to local media an ATR 72 ended up off the runway at Rome Fiumicino, operated by Romanian carrier codesharing with AZ, two injured ...very early stage so news unverified for now and likely to be inaccurate! Anybody knows more ?

[ILS27LEFT]

Yes, Romanian Carpatair, quite predictable then as they have been in thè news very frequently in thè last few months due to various glitches. Fingers crossed for those on board, 6 injured, 2 seriously .

[1stspotter]

La Stampa - Aereo fuori pista a Fiumicino, sei feriti (http://www.lastampa.it/2013/02/02/italia/cronache/aereo-fuori-pista-a-fiumicino-due-feriti-zq59s0ig6awP5CLoMQ3cmK/pagina.html)

Google translate

An ATR 72 aircraft of the Romanian company Carpatair, who works for Alitalia from Pisa and landing at Fiumicino, went off the track. On board fifty people, at least six of them were wounded (according to the first fragmentary information, five passengers and a flight attendant), two more serious relief from the 118 and transported to the hospital St. Camillus. They would not be life threatening. This would be a passenger and a flight attendant. Two others were taken to code yellow, Eugene and Aurelia Hospital. The others were bruised in a lighter way, will be medicated in a separate medical facility within the airport, which has set up a control room with 118 of Rome.



It could be the strong wind that was blowing at the time the area of the airport, to cause the accident, letting the aircraft from the corridor of asphalt assigned to the control tower. We are carrying out investigations on the dynamics of the episode took place this evening at Fiumicino airport, where a plane landed off the track. The agents of Polaria, led by Antonio Del Greek, try to establish exactly when the next few hours - is the most likely hypothesis - the strong wind and weather conditions may have affected the proper landing or if it was an error of pilot operation. In addition to emergency vehicles, on-site is already bringing an investigator of the National Agency for the safety of the flight commenced an investigation in the act.

[Glonass]

Premliminar report from ASN, with weather conditions at the time of the event.

ASN Aircraft accident ATR 72-212A registration unknown Roma-Fiumicino Airport (FCO) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20130202-0)

[DaveReidUK]

On board fifty people, at least six of them were wounded (according to the first fragmentary information, five passengers and a flight attendant), two more serious relief from the 118 and transported to the hospital St. Camillus. They would not be life threatening.Report here

Latest Online News | Agenzia Giornalistica Italia | AGI (http://www.agi.it/flash-news/articles/201302022211-cro-ren1062-alitalia_accident_at_rome_airport_5_injured)

describing the condition of two of the pax as "critical".

[ILS27LEFT]

Incidente aereo Fiumicino, l'aereo fuori pista: foto - YouReporter.it (http://www.youreporter.it/video_Incidente_aereo_Fiumicino_l_aereo_fuori_pista_foto)

[ILS27LEFT]

Foto L'Atr72 piegato dopo l'incidente - 1 di 6 - Roma - Repubblica.it (http://roma.repubblica.it/cronaca/2013/02/02/foto/l_atr72_piegato_dopo_l_incidente-51826424/1/?ref=HREA-1)

[Armchairflyer]

Accident: Carpatair AT72 at Rome on Feb 2nd 2013, runway excursion on landing, main and nose gear collapsed (http://www.avherald.com/h?article=45d25cc2&opt=0)

[Blind Squirrel]

Carpatair aircraft off the runway in Fiumicino

An ATR 72 aircraft (of the Romanian company Carpatair) departed the runway while landing at Leonardo da Vinci airport at 20:15 [local]. There were 50 people aboard the flight, including four crew members. Sixteen were injured, two seriously, but none of the injuries are life threatening. Alitalia's partner airline Carpatair, which has been at the centre of many incidents in the past, has aroused much controversy. Alitalia itself intimated that the strong wind blowing at the airport was the cause of the accident, but in the meantime has suspended flights to Pisa and Bologna operated by the Romanian carrier.

Among the injured, the most serious case is that of a female flight attendant, a foreign national, who was probably standing at the time of the accident and sustained injuries to her spinal column. The woman was taken by ambulance to Gemelli Hospital. Another passenger was taken under code red to San Camillo hospital. The other injured people were taken to San Camillo (three code-green patients), Sant'Eugenio (a code yellow and two code greens), Aurelia Hospital (a code yellow), San Filippo Nero (three code greens), Grassi (two code yellows), and the Tor Vergata Polyclinic (two code greens), with more or less severe bruises. Other passengers on the plane were treated on the spot. Fifteen other passengers received medical checks at the scene: these include several Italians and a Brazilian, though the majority are Romanian citizens.

The aircraft is currently lying on the grass, at the top of no. 3 runway [sic], leaning slightly to one side and with an undercarriage leg snapped off. The machine is surrounded by four fire engines, as well as airport security and police vehicles. A passenger offered a dramatic account: "So very afraid. Some of us thought they were going to die and everyone screamed. During the landing the aeroplane twice hit the ground hard: they tell me that the second time the undercarriage collapsed and the aircraft finished up off the runway."

"The Carpatair aircraft went off the runway due to the strong wind," Alitalia said in a statement reconstructing the event. The same interpretation was offered by the Director of the Fiumicino Airport ENAC [Italian civil aviation agency], who spoke of the wind as a possible cause: "Just this moment it's impossible to say what happened. There could be a thousand reasons, not least the weather. The wind might indeed have contributed to the event," said Vitaliano Turra, in an interview with SkyTg24 [Italian cable news channel]. The Civitavecchia prosecutor's office has opened an investigation. An investigator of the National Agency for Aviation Safety is also at the scene and has begun an inquiry. The agents of Polaria, led by Antonio Del Greco, are trying to piece together the precise characteristics of the incident, to see if pilot error was the cause. The runway at the international airport was temporarily closed to air traffic, with some delays to flights.

PRECEDENTS The Romanian Carpatair company that operates some routes for Alitalia under sub-contract is no stranger to incidents affecting their aircraft. In May 2012 at Florence Airport, there was a fire indication on board and four passengers suffered contusions. In December, a fuel leak on a flight from Pisa to Rome made a return to base necessary. On 4 January, cabin depressurisation on an Ancona-Rome service sparked panic on board. The most recent incident took place on Monday, January 7: flight AZ1666, departing at 0700 from Pisa to Rome-Fiumicino, had just taken off when as a result of a mechanical failure on board it had to return to its point of origin.

"We have been so deeply struck by the number of mechanical failures and problems experienced by this company that I personally made a complaint to ENAC and the National Agency for Aviation Safety. Since then I haven't heard anything," said the national secretary of UIL Trasporti [the Italian transport workers' union], Marco Veneziani, in reference to the runway excursion. "There are serious question-marks over the company and we hope," Veneziani went on, "that the service will be suspended immediately. Before generating further alarm, though, we should await the outcome of the investigation."

And Antonio Divietri, the president of Avia (Italian Flight Attendants' Association), added: "The accident flight this evening at Fiumicino was an ATR 72 operated by the Romanian company Carpatair under Alitalia livery. Luckily, the first accounts indicate no serious injuries but we can't forget that along with Anpac and Anpav, we've been reporting for a long time now the growing number of operational anomalies on Carpatair-operated Alitalia flights. We hope that the investigations are thorough and bring into the full light of day any responsibility or omission that may have been involved on the part of all parties concerned."



Aereo Carpatair fuori pista a Fiumicino 16 feriti, due gravi. Sospesi voli della compagnia - Roma - Repubblica.it (http://roma.repubblica.it/cronaca/2013/02/02/news/incidente_all_aereoporto_di_fiumicino_velivolo_fuori_pista_d ue_feriti_gravi-51816317/?ref=HREA-1)

[Blind Squirrel]

I've just watched an interview in which Signor Turrà, the Italian CAA bloke at FCO, contradicted Alitalia by saying: "The wind wasn't strong enough to cause an aircraft to depart the runway."

A passenger on board complained bitterly that he was left lying on the ground for more than half an hour beside the wreck before the emergency services showed up.

They're now saying that of the two serious injuries, the broken femur was sustained by a passenger, not the FO as previously reported.

A journalist (yes, I know...) reported that runway 07/25 is closed for maintenance at present, hence its non-use by the accident aircraft.

[fendant]

Time to remove Moritz Suter from all airline responsibilities. Remember Crossair and the two accidents with casualties? This guy has three priorities:
a) polishing his ego
b) spend money ( always from 3rd party investors )
c) airline safety

Luckily his last airline adventure "Hello" went belly up ( prio 2 applies ) before having had a tragic accident

[Daermon ATC]

Considering that there appear to be two seriously injured passengers wouldn't it be more accurate to speak of an accident instead of incident?

ICAO Annex 13 Appendix (http://www.iprr.org/manuals/Annex13.html)

[LeCCa]

I am really sorry for Carpatair, but it seems operating ATR's in Italy wasn't a good decision for them... They had a lot a problems in a short period of time, and now this.. They will have to work very hard to restore their image.

[deci]

A journalist (yes, I know...) reported that runway 07/25 is closed for maintenance at present

true, rwy 25 closed for landings due to work in progress.

[eliberto]

...someone has removed the Alitalia brand from the plane...

[hetfield]

Very fast CIR

(Corporate Identity Removal):O

http://roma.corriere.it/media/foto/2013/02/03/AEREO_FU_122212--620x420.JPG

[Spitoon]

Considering that there appear to be two seriously injured passengers wouldn't it be more accurate to speak of an accident instead of incident?If you take a look at the aircraft, I think it's pretty obvious that by ICAO standards it's an accident.

[Chris Scott]

Only just briefly seen and read this thread. In case it helps, and before they become difficult to obtain, here are the half-hourly weather observations (METARS) for the period around the accident. The ASN report (link courtesy of Glonass, post #5, above) is unable to pinpoint the actual landing time, but it was some time between 2015 LT and 2115 LT (1915Z - 2015Z).

LIRF 022220Z 23024KT 9999 BKN035 11/03 Q0991 NOSIG
LIRF 022150Z 24025KT 9999 BKN040 11/03 Q0992 NOSIG
LIRF 022120Z 24024KT 9999 BKN040 11/03 Q0992 NOSIG
LIRF 022050Z 25025KT 9999 FEW022 BKN040 11/03 Q0992 NOSIG

LIRF 022020Z 25022G32KT 9999 SCT022 BKN040 11/03 Q0992 NOSIG
LIRF 021950Z 25023KT 9999 SCT023 SCT040 11/03 Q0992 NOSIG
LIRF 021920Z 25028G41KT 9999 SCT023 SCT040 11/04 Q0992 WS RWY 16L NOSIG

LIRF 021850Z 24024KT 9999 FEW023 SCT040 11/04 Q0992 WS RWY 16L NOSIG
LIRF 021820Z 24030KT 9999 FEW023 SCT040 11/04 Q0991 WS RWY 16L NOSIG
LIRF 021750Z 24027KT 9999 SCT023 SCT040 11/05 Q0991 NOSIG
LIRF 021720Z 24025KT 9999 SCT023 SCT040 11/06 Q0991 NOSIG
LIRF 021650Z 25023KT 9999 SCT023 SCT040 11/06 Q0991 BECMG 24018G30KT

For the uninitiated, here is a rough, plain-language translation of the 1920Z observation:
LIRF (FCO) February 2nd @ 19:20 UTC.
Wind from 250 deg (west-south-west) at 28 kts, gusting 41 kts;
Visibility 10 km or more;
(No precipitation);
Cloud ceilings (1) scattered at 2300 ft, (2) scattered at 4000 ft;
Temperature +11C, Dew-point +4C;
QNH (atmospheric pressure corrected to sea-level) 992 hPa/mb;
Wind-shear reported on approach Rwy 16L;
Trend Forecast for next 2 hours - no significant change.

I haven't flown ATRs, but can offer a few thoughts about the decision-making processes involved in flight operations when the destination weather is marginal. The main challenge was the fact that Rwy 25, the into-wind runway, was closed for maintenance. A strong-crosswind landing was unavoidable at FCO.

We do not have the TAF (aerodrome forecast) that was in force at the flight-planning stage, and which alternate airfield(s) were nominated. In flight, the captain would have decided whether or not to continue to FCO (or divert) on the basis of the above METARS, including the 1820Z and (probably) 1850Z observations, and (later) ATIS reports from ATC at FCO. On final approach, the Tower would have transmitted the wind speeds, gusts, and any wind-shear warnings.

The 1850Z METAR shows a wind from 240 (SW) at a mean speed of 24 kts, with no gust reported, but a report of wind-shear. The preceding 1820Z report gave a mean speed of 30 kts, again with no gust report, but including wind-shear for the first time. However, gusts of less than 10 kts above the mean speed are never reported on METARS, and the captain would know that. Presumably, other a/c were in the process of landing as the ATR was descending, which adds to the pressure not to divert without trying an approach to assess the conditions. An approach and go-around would be a perfectly safe manoeuvre in those conditions.

The 1920Z METAR shows the wind from 250 degrees (WSW) at 28 kts, with a recent gust to 41 kts. That represented an increase from the previous reports. 250 degrees is roughly straight across Rwy 16L, and the gust to 41 kts might have been accompanied by a shift of direction: normally a veer towards the west. The latter would represent a tailwind shear, which causes a loss of airspeed. The conditions then were certainly challenging, even to a highly experienced pilot on any aeroplane type. The next two METARS suggest that the wind moderated slightly, although there is a gust to 32 kts on the 2020Z METAR.

We don't yet know the landing time, or if it was off the first approach.

Here are the relevant observations for the nearby Roma Ciampino, which - if open - is normally the preferred alternate for Fiumicino. It has a single runway, aligned 15/33. If the ATR had diverted there at an early stage, it might have arrived at about 1945Z. For whatever reason, the wind is much lighter there, apparently never exceeding a 20-knot crosswind component.

LIRA 022115Z 22010G24KT 9999 SCT017 SCT030 10/02 Q0992
LIRA 022045Z 23012KT 9999 SCT017 SCT030 10/04 Q0992
LIRA 022015Z 23011KT 200V260 9999 SCT017 SCT030 10/04 Q0992
LIRA 021945Z 25008G20KT 210V290 9999 SCT017 SCT030 10/03 Q0992
LIRA 021915Z 25009G22KT 210V300 9999 SCT017 SCT030 10/04 Q0991
LIRA 021845Z 24015G26KT 9999 SCT017 SCT030 10/04 Q0991

[DaveReidUK]

Strange decision to paint over all the windows as well.

[harriewillem]

Aircraft / looks like write off, so windows white is the fastest way to paint :)

Carpatair has been send home.... Understand that they are cheap coming from Romania, do they have P2F F/O's?

But why take the gamble with these "non CRM / skygod" airlines.

Same with Monarch and others, why hire these few hundred euro cheaper banana airlines...

If you want to know what is expensive... try an accident.... :ugh:

[1DC]

Why bring Monarch into this? What do you think is wrong with them??

[harriewillem]

Didn't want to specific bring them in, but in general why takes a good airline with descent name these joker airlines from Eastern Europe... P2F wannabe's and skygod captains... End of the day it's your name up to grabs and this all for what, few hundred an hour...

Monarch had 2 incidents this summer on leased in eastern european toys...

Incident: Aurela B733 at Birmingham on Sep 21st 2012, runway overrun (http://avherald.com/h?article=45635eca&opt=0)

Incident: AirExplore B734 near Limoges on Jul 24th 2012, loss of cabin pressure (http://avherald.com/h?article=4532b22b&opt=0)

It is off course hard to say but doubt Titan would have had this...

[Hotel Tango]

Carpatair have been operating scheduled services in their own name for some time, mainly with Saab 2000s and Fokker 70/100s. I have to say that I haven't heard any scare stories about them. Plenty about Air France though.

[harriewillem]

HotelTango check here...

The Aviation Herald (http://avherald.com/h?search_term=carpatair&opt=0&dosearch=1&search.x=0&search.y=0)

For such small fleet, this is a big list not to be proud off. Also in this lease to Alitalia they were suspended for few days just last week over safety issues, now this....

[hetfield]

@HT

Your post is the best joke on PPRuNe I have read.

Thanks:D

[Blind Squirrel]

Hetfield wrote:-

Very fast CIR

(Corporate Identity Removal)

But also, as it turns out, spectacularly ineffective CIR. There's hardly an Italian newspaper this morning that doesn't have before-and-after photographs of the aircraft prominently displayed, usually with appropriately acerbic commentary attached.

Additional information from the Italian media:-

Sig. Turrà now says that the windspeed was 25 kt at the time of the accident (last night, on TV interviews, he was saying "25-35 kt").

The local (Civitavecchia) prosecutor's office has taken custody of the aircraft and had it removed by crane and low-loader to a secure location. No indication of whether he or the accident investigators gave permission for the overnight paint job, which was done at Alitalia's request. (Although I'm not an expert in either field, it seems extraordinary to me that either should have agreed to this.)

Turrà said that no. 1 runway at FCO (16R/34L, apparently) was closed last night because spray from the sea was blowing over it, so the only runway available was 16L/34R. When asked whether this meant the airport should have been closed and traffic diverted elsewhere, he emphatically disagreed, saying that it was the pilot's decision whether to land or divert. Another ENAC guy, Quaranta, added that no other aircraft had gone off the runway last night. Listening to them both, there seemed to be a strong element of "nothing to do with me, guv'" in their responses to questions.

Anpav, one of the Italian flight attendants' unions, has demanded that Carpatair's sub-contracting arrangement with Alitalia be ditched permanently and is doing a great deal of "we told you so." It describes the arrangement as "a clumsy attempt to reduce costs with no obvious benefits." It reminds people (no idea whether this is true or not) that in the Pisa fuel-leak incident of December 11 last year, it was two members of the airside ground staff that saw fuel flowing out while the aircraft was taxiing to the runway; got on the 'phone to the control tower; and had the latter bring the flight back when it was already in the air. The implication seems to be that the flight crew was remiss in not realising how much they were losing. Bearing in mind that it took two hours to clean the spilled fuel from the Pisa runway, it does seem to have been a matter of more than a few drips here and there.

Under Law 231/2001, criminal and civil liability in this matter, it is claimed, rests in the Italian legal system with Alitalia, not Carpatair.

[Hotel Tango]

Laugh all you wish Hetfield, but Air France have quite an impressive list too. Perhaps enough for them to qualify as "cowboys" too?

[hetfield]

@HT

With your logic, any 3rd world bush hopper is comparable to AF.

Gimmie a break!

Look how many pax/takeoffs per day are done with AF!

BTW

I'm not with AF!

[testpanel]

Harry,

you want to know how many west-europeans (even DUTCH) worked for carpat? i was there.....

[Hotel Tango]

hetfield, I think you have an agenda! I used AFR as an example only because, regardless of fleet size, they have had some frightning incidents and accidents for a safety conscious 1st world carrier. There are others too.

[hetfield]

@HT

I'm afraid, you still didn't get it!

With increasingly number of flights, chances raise for an accident/incident.

All major carriers like AF/LH/BA, you name it, are facing it!

It's a question, yes not solely, of statistics.

To compare carpate xy with AF is just inappropriate.

Next time try to compare Tahiti xyz island hoppers with BA!

[Blind Squirrel]

The Corriere della Sera claims that the same aircraft (unclear whether it was the same flight crew) was involved in an incident a couple of hours earlier on the outbound leg (Rome-Pisa), getting too close to another aircraft as a result of misunderstanding a clearance from Pisa ATC. No more detail than that as yet.

The captain is said to be "superlatively experienced" 15,000 hours total; 9,000 on type; an ATR 72 check pilot. He spent most of last night being interrogated by the Italian fuzz.

[Welle]

hi -

seems quite uncommon to me, that any authority would accept an accident involved aircraft to be manipulated before thourough/final investigation?

rgds
welle

[Hotel Tango]

My feeling is that you're confusing two issues and not getting my point hetfield.

[hetfield]

@Welle

That's Italy.

Do you know Francesco Schettino, Captain of stranded Concordia, is challenging his companie's decision to fire him?

Do you know Berlusconi, a multi sentenced criminal, has been voted for president 4 times by italian voters?

[goodpic]

It's still unclear what happened. This was an accident for sure. Any comment on East or West European airlines makes no sense at all in this case.
What is more important that cost cutting has a negative effect on safety.
Like the whole P2F system is an accident going to happen. An accident like this which is probably related to do the lack of handling/flying skills.
Can you imagine the situation when a P2F copi is left alone?

P2F is not an East European idea.

And we still do not know whtat happened .

I was just thinking.

[harriewillem]

Goodpic,

You have an airline, that is flying a new type for them for less as 3 months.

Has an fleet of 4 types in total 11 units. With 2 runway excursions in 12 months.

And a **** load of other incidents...

Take them and an above normal windy evening.... and this is what happens... Luckily all can tell.. it has all ingredients for a good stew.

But you are right, let's wait 3,5 years until the Romanians and Italians have their final report. Pilota errore, or how do you write that in Italian...

24JAN2013: Alitalia replaces Carpatair on Ancona route after incident
Alitalia (AZ, Rome Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International (FCO)) has temporarily replaced wet-lease operator Carpatair (V3, Timisoara Traian Vuia International (TSR)) on its route from Rome Fiumicino to Ancona Falconara (AOI). This follows an incident involving an ATR 72-500 of Carpatair on January 17 where the aircraft had to return back to Ancona for an emergency landing due to a problem with its airconditioning system. A similar problem had already developed on a flight on January 7 leading to another flight having to return back to Pisa. Alitalia is now temporarily using EMB-175s of subsidiary Alitalia CityLiner (CT, Rome Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International (FCO)) on the route until the cause of the incidents has been identified. Carpatair continues to operate its second ATR 72-500 on behalf of Alitalia between Rome Fiumicino and Pisa Galileo Galilei International (PSA) and has asked Avions de Transport Régional (Toulouse Blagnac (TLS)) for assistance in the investigation of two incidents.

01FEB2013: Carpatair resumes full Alitalia wet-lease operations
Carpatair (V3, Timisoara Traian Vuia International (TSR)) has again resumed operations with its second ATR 72-500 operating on a wet-lease contract for Alitalia (AZ, Rome Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International (FCO)) now operating three daily services from Rome Fiumicino to both Bologna Guglielmo Marconi (BLQ) and Pisa Galileo Galilei International (PSA) on behalf of its Italian partner. Alitalia subsidiary Alitalia CityLiner (CT, Rome Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International (FCO)) will continue to operate between Rome and Ancona Falconara (AOI) going forward where it had replaced Carpatair from mid-January following an incident with one of the ATR 72-500's air conditioning system. Carpatair has meanwhile retired its last of a total of three Fokker 70s with YR-KMC (c/n 11569) also expected to join Australian charter carrier Alliance Airlines (QQ, Brisbane International (BNE)) shortly like the other two aircraft. Carpatair continues to operate two ATR 72-500s, a B737-300, three Fokker 100s and five Saab 2000s.


03FEB2013: Alitalia suspends Carpatair agreement following accident
Alitalia (AZ, Rome Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International (FCO)) has announced that it has temporarily suspended its wet-lease agreement with partner carrier Carpatair (V3, Timisoara Traian Vuia International (TSR)) following a runway excursion incident of ATR 72-500 YR-ATS (c/n 533) on arrival to Rome Fiumicino Leonardo da Vinci International (FCO) on February 2. Alitalia has wet-leased two ATR 72-500s from Carpatair for its domestic routes from Rome Fiumicino to Bologna Guglielmo Marconi (BLQ) and Pisa Galileo Galilei International (PSA).

[goodpic]

There are other airlines with issues. Even though what happened here might not be a surprise for some it still doesn't mean that every pilot/airline from East Europe is dangerous while everything which is from the "West" is totally safe/nice/well organized. We have seen very f... sorry:) mishandled Xwind landings in the past. For example from very reputable airlines too.

Nowadays you have no idea who is sitting in front where is he/she from etc. There are good and bad everywhere.

What I see is that Alitalia is one of the last airlines in Europe/world? where you can still enjoy your work and its benefits and still can stay at home and now the unions find this case as a superb opportunity to justife their fight. I don't blame them. It's good to fly and work for a flag carrier and sleep in your bed every night without worrying the schooling of your children in your next "home".

[TBSC]

@harriewillem

Carpatair never ever lost one passenger. Does the number 234 ring a bell when it comes to a certain dutch company?

Human errors happen everywhere, it has nothing to do with nationalities. You might end up in the mud on a bad day even if you fly a mighty blue aircraft and you can only hope there won't be someone judging you on the next day without knowing the facts.

Photo of Boeing 737-406 PH-BTC - Aviation Safety Network (http://aviation-safety.net/photos/displayphoto.php?id=20041128-1&vnr=2&kind=C)

[Tomescu]

Romanian pilots are as good as the Dutch ones are. No difference.

[Vc10Tail]

Good analysis Chris. The ATR72 does not handle well in such severe crosswind conditions.CErtainly it was an accident and quite certainly it would point toward "Pilot Error" as there was ample info to lead to a diversion to Campino..unless there was a dire emergency situation going on that could not await a diversion?? Too early to decide but quite apparent when airoort not inviting, and aircraft is ok...then GO Around...or GO Meet GOD..

ATR72 has a crosswind limit of 45 kts if I recall correct...but that is a steady wind.With windshear, especially tail shear as was this case I would be more conservative rather than be a maverick pilot. If as rumoured the Capt was a check Capt (15000hrs total/9k ATR) perhaps this was a check flight? If the PF was CM2 then OMs would dictate what the crosswind limit for CM2 is and am sure it would be much ,lower than 45kts. To maintain track for a 45kt crosswind the view from the cockpit t the runway would have looked interesting indeed:eek:

[Daermon ATC]

If you take a look at the aircraft, I think it's pretty obvious that by ICAO standards it's an accident.

You are absolutely right, of course. :ok:
When I posted my consideration I hadn't seen any of the pictures and just from the reading noticed talk about serious injuries.:(

[deci]

it was an accident and quite certainly it would point toward "Pilot Error" as there was ample info to lead to a diversion to Campino

according to a guy in the italian forum, who landed just before the carpatair, LIRA was closed at the time due to strong wind.

( http://www.pprune.org/7671811-post15.html )

[Vc10Tail]

Fair enough deci...but a more suitable alternate or return to origin station should have been planned for considering the severity of reported weather.In any case they could have gone around and and tried another approach, by which time the wind gusts might have softened? ...Unless fuel carriage was below that required to allow such contingencies?? The winds were encroaching aircraft limitations!!

[avionimc]

In the case of the almost new Kingfisher ATR, airspeed was way above Vref:

http://www.skybrary.aero/images/thumb/AT72_VTKAC.jpg/600px-AT72_VTKAC.jpg

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSIMtfXdzA7qzUsT6BdfYq1i3_Mmw2DjiQqsVvYQiS HmX7J9B0GJQ

Talking to some local pilots there, many add the full gust factor to Vapp; others even add the full gust factor plus the wind speed to Vapp and Vref.

Results of misunderstanding or ignoring Vref are shown in the pictures.

I just happened to land a few minutes earlier and was on the ramp when this happened in 2009 (RWY 27A LDA = 5587 ft.)

NB: they did NOT re-paint it, they just removed the engines and the airframe remained in the runway object-free area (ROFA) for months.

[Dg800]

seems quite uncommon to me, that any authority would accept an accident involved aircraft to be manipulated before thourough/final investigation?

It's actually done on a regular basis, although painting over the whole fuselage is rather over the top. Plastic foil and speed tape are usually employed as a temporary measure and then removed once the remains have been moved to somewhere not accessible to the general public.

[Chris Scott]

Thanks Vc10Tail,

Don't know or have details for the ATR-72, but on most types the gust limit is as high or higher than the steady crosswind limit. Yes, the port (left) drift on the ILS approach to Rwy 16L would have been interesting, because the wind would be stronger up there than on the ground. The pilot in the L/H seat would be seeing the runway through his DV window (the one to the left of the windshield). Also, at that stage the wind would have probably been in the starb'd quarter - perhaps about 270/50 - giving a significant tailwind effect until the latter stages, when the wind drops and backs off. At night that typically does not happen until you are very close to the ground, and then suddenly. However, these are generalisations on my part, as I don't have local knowledge, and terrain effects can override normal theory.

(COMMENT: In conditions like this, it's all too easy to find yourself crossing the threshold carrying too much airspeed as the positive shear effect kicks in, and the simultaneous, sudden reduction in drift can result in the a/c drifting upwind of the runway centre line. Many high-wing a/c allow the handling pilot to use the wing-down, sideslip technique for the last part of the approach, which enables him to de-crab early, and then keep the a/c pointing along the runway. But it would involve a lot of bank in that wind, and I don't know the maximum possible on the ATR to ensure propeller and wing-tip clearance.)

Quote from deci:
"according to a guy in the italian forum, who landed just before the carpatair, LIRA was closed at the time due to strong wind."

Airfields do not "close" because of unfavourable weather, unless it seriously degrades the aerodrome facilities (e.g., runway flooded). The METARS I posted here (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/506931-atr72-incident-fco.html#post7672964) suggest the wind was consistently lighter at LIRA (Ciampino) than at LIRF (Fiumicino), so that report surprises me.

[Kulverstukas]

Alitalia painted crashed palne white overnight to hide it's logo :}

http://ais.badische-zeitung.de/piece/04/1a/2a/87/68823687-p-590_450.jpg

Panorama: Italien: Bruchlandung in Rom - havariertes Flugzeug wird über Nacht umlackiert - badische-zeitung.de (http://www.badische-zeitung.de/nachrichten/panorama/bruchlandung-in-rom-havariertes-flugzeug-wird-ueber-nacht-umlackiert--68823631.html)

[deci]

@Chris Scott

I've only translated (and linked) a post from the italian forum.
That guy says that, at the same time carpatair was landing in LIRF, a RYR was holding over CMP because LIRA was closed due to strong wind.

[Chris Scott]

That you were simply passing the information on was understood, deci. Thanks.

As I said, airfields do not close simply for strong winds. The decision to make an approach to land always rests with the commanders of aircraft, despite what you read or hear in the media. Each captain's decision is made from a multitude of varying criteria, and the situation is often fluid. It is possible that there were temporary increases of wind at Ciampino that were not reflected in the half-hourly METARS that I posted, but it seems unlikely. We shall find out sooner or later...

[BO0M]

ATR72 has a crosswind limit of 45 kts if I recall correct.

Limit is 35kt on a DRY RWY, 28kt on a WET RWY up to 3mm of water and beyond that it drops rapidily down to 16kt with 3-6mm water or slush.

The ATR is an aircraft that needs to be respected (not feared) in these conditions. Even if the approach was stable (not even close) it would be a tricky landing and possibly Captain only depending on what company you work for.

[Roger Greendeck]

Crosswind limits for ATR 72 are 35 knots dry runway and 28 wet. The ATR taught technique, rightly or wrongly, is add 1/3 of the headwind component to the Vapp.

[Vc10Tail]

THanks Chris for confirmig my views and adding further insights. I too ws no
convinced about the airport closure due to gusting winds and know that the PIc is entitled
To attempt the approach down to minimums,go around and hold or divert . Atr42-5 fcom says 45kt as max x wind dry runway and assumed it wud be close to that figure or minus 10kts for the 72 which I only did sim trng in 2008? So what s the uper limit for gust compared
to steady wind? X wind limit for CM2 in my airline is 15kt...ridiculous! I wonder if slight differential power is used (more on upwind side) to counter weather cocking can helop in stabilizing the flight tragectory as the ATR rock n rolls a lot on crosswinds..admitedly non standard but it is a matter of grabbing the bull by the horns when th going gets to ifugh. I like to keep the yaw damper on till 100ft RA and then have te freedom of rudder authorit to de crab while side slipping for a upwind wing down touch down..carrying power till touch down if momentum not constraining and flaring around 10ft max pitch 2.
5 degrees (avoid floating and getting bullied by the crosswind)..taking partiocular care with tail strike which the ATR72 is prone.I wonder if Flap 15 approach. Would handle better in such winds(though tail strike probability would be higher but it would allow for a higher approach speed which could counter the x wind additional to being armed for a
higher go around speed should it be required? Definitely a CM1 excercise!

[ATRISGREAT]

This CM1 only policy is an absolute crap.

- Some CM2s are more experienced on type than the CM1.

- Decision making is more efficient when the CM1 observing the situation.

- The CM1 only policy is a kind of macho attitude in the cockpit making believe that CM1 is god.


Very dangerous.......

[hetfield]

This CM1 only policy is an absolute crap.Interesting, in my outfit (major EU carrier) we don't have it.

BTW, who was PF?

[Tiennetti]

Apparently LIRA had similar winds, but the runway was WET because of some RA and TS experienced earlier that day
In that case, with that wind, then it would be out of limits for many aircrafts

LIRF, instead, was dry

[Vc10Tail]

Quite right Atrisgreat.ATR defines CM1 as the commander no matter the PF.PF can revert to CM1 anytime safety is compromised.CErtainly I had plenty of instances where I was CM2 but had far more experience than CM1 and it can be awkward when that experie
nce leans toward CM2 with blue line CM1..good crm and adherence to SOP will defuse that. Wet and windy runway certainly a hazard.

[flyacanard]

I see that the aircraft has been given a new paint job, removing any reference to Al-Italia. Surely the AAIB would have something to say about this. This paint job could cover up a multitude to sins. surely tampering with the aircraft , in any way , runs contrary to aircraft safety ( even after the event ) and integrity !?

[AviationFan1]

Are the sustained injuries to PAX and crew known?

[Dg800]

Bit late in the game, aren't you? ;)
The AAIB actually has no say in the matter, in Italy it's the ANSV that will lead the investigation. Unfortunately, unless a magistrate actually seizes the asset (which is usually done only if there are casualties) the owner can do whatever he wants with the wreck, even something as stupid as painting it over. There is no clear legal obligation to behave differently. :}

[Vc10Tail]

That is normal for airlines to preserve their corporate image especially in this case here Alitalia and not carpatair that is exposed.Am sure there are security procedures that
ensure no tampering with evidence..

[Lurking_SLF]

The quick paint job is pretty normal..
Check out Crash 1 (http://telstarlogistics.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/22/before737after.jpg) or Crash 2 (http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/ci605/5.jpg) or Crash 3 (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled-(WDL-Aviation)/Fokker-F-27-200-Friendship/1153792/&sid=5fefd696f57a2014741cf98ea7ab00fa)

Which came out on top of a quick Google search.

I think the thoroughness of the job is impressive though!!

[Blind Squirrel]

Are the sustained injuries to PAX and crew known?

The only ones giving grounds for concern were the passenger with the broken femur (not the FO as initially reported), and the FA with the spinal trauma. Both were said by the Italian papers to be doing well in hospital. Always hard to say with back injuries, though: effects can linger for years afterwards -- or, worse, not begin to manifest themselves until years afterwards.

[hetfield]

@Lurking SLF

Do you mind to publish the dates of mentioned accidents?

[Tiennetti]

Only just briefly seen and read this thread. In case it helps, and before they become difficult to obtain, here are the half-hourly weather observations (METARS) for the period around the accident. The ASN report (link courtesy of Glonass, post #5, above) is unable to pinpoint the actual landing time, but it was some time between 2015 LT and 2115 LT (1915Z - 2015Z).

...

We don't yet know the landing time, or if it was off the first approach.
...


FlightRadar doesn't shows the ATR, but if you look at it, there is almost a continuous flow up to 19:32 and then at 19:33 the frst go-around by an AZA E170 followed with the interruption of all approaches

So I would say that 19:32 is a good estimated landing time

[Aerostar6]

Maybe they've already sold it to a cargo mob?

[Spacepope]

Not too terribly difficult.

Pic 1 is from Aug 20, 2007 in Okinawa (a fire not a crash) China Airlines Flight 120 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Airlines_Flight_120)

Pic 2 is from the crash on November 4, 1993, though I don't know when the paint was applied. China Airlines Flight 605 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Airlines_Flight_605)

Pic 3 is another not-crash, from November 6, 1984. From the caption of the photo, the gear collapsed overnight and the livery was obscured by morning. Very quick.

[119.4]

Kulverstukas (http://www.pprune.org/members/119846-kulverstukas) I was pretty certain the paint job was covered (!) way back in post #17 onwards..:hmm:

[JammedStab]

THanks Chris for confirmig my views and adding further insights. I too ws no
convinced about the airport closure due to gusting winds and know that the PIc is entitled
To attempt the approach down to minimums,go around and hold or divert . Atr42-5 fcom says 45kt as max x wind dry runway and assumed it wud be close to that figure or minus 10kts for the 72 which I only did sim trng in 2008? So what s the uper limit for gust compared
to steady wind? X wind limit for CM2 in my airline is 15kt...ridiculous! I wonder if slight differential power is used (more on upwind side) to counter weather cocking can helop in stabilizing the flight tragectory as the ATR rock n rolls a lot on crosswinds..admitedly non standard but it is a matter of grabbing the bull by the horns when th going gets to ifugh. I like to keep the yaw damper on till 100ft RA and then have te freedom of rudder authorit to de crab while side slipping for a upwind wing down touch down..carrying power till touch down if momentum not constraining and flaring around 10ft max pitch 2.
5 degrees (avoid floating and getting bullied by the crosswind)..taking partiocular care with tail strike which the ATR72 is prone.I wonder if Flap 15 approach. Would handle better in such winds(though tail strike probability would be higher but it would allow for a higher approach speed which could counter the x wind additional to being armed for a
higher go around speed should it be required? Definitely a CM1 excercise!

It seemed to me that because there was no direct connection between rudder pedals and nosewheel steering on the ATR.....my first few strong crosswind landings had a tendency to find me behind the aircraft when it came to rudder inputs resulting in a not so straight landing. I was worried but after talking to a more experienced guy, he said that this was not abnormal for a newbie. Soon after, I found I no longer had this problem. But I wonder if it could crop up as a problem in an extreme case such as this Rome accident may have been.

Did anyone else experience this? Maybe it depends on your previous type flown.

[Domi]

French BEA talks about destabilized short final, 3 bounces and touchdown on nose gear which collapsed, then veering off the runway. Sounds like EI-SLM in Shannon...:bored:

[keitaidenwa]

The were in such a hurry to cover up the alitalia connection that the windows got painted white as well, but somehow they had time to leave the non-Italian registration mark and Romanian flag intact.

This way of operating - finding a low quality operator to do your flights in your livery - and then shedding the connection as soon as something goes wrong - should be considered frauding your customers.

People bough tickets to "Continental 3407" flight but died abroad "Colgan Air 3407". Clever PR yes...

[Stuck_in_an_ATR]

French BEA talks about destabilized short final, 3 bounces and touchdown on nose gear which collapsed, then veering off the runway. Sounds like EI-SLM in Shannon...

Sounds like bounced landing is the favourite way to write off an ATR. See the list below, which is not exhaustive... :sad:

ASN Aircraft accident Arospatiale/Aeritalia ATR-72-212 N438AT San Juan-Luis Munoz Marin International Airport (SJU) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20040509-0)
ASN Aircraft accident ATR-72-212A VT-JCE Indore Airport (IDR) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20070701-0)
ASN Aircraft accident ATR-72-201 HL5229 Jeju (Cheju) International Airport (CJU) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20061128-0)
ASN Aircraft accident ATR-72-212A VT-DKC Bangalore-Hindustan Airport (BLR) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20060311-0)
BREAKING NEWS: Jet Airways ATR72 nose wheel collapses at Ahmedabad, airport shut down - Bangalore Aviation (http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2010/07/breaking-news-jet-airways-atr72-nose.html)

[Dg800]

The were in such a hurry to cover up the alitalia connection that the windows got painted white as well, but somehow they had time to leave the non-Italian registration mark and Romanian flag intact.There we go again! :ugh: Registration markings (this includes the national flag, when mandated) are a legal requirement and cannot be removed or tampered with for any reason. To do so would mean risking criminal prosecution. Other markings such as an airline's logo are merely cosmetic and can be disposed of at will.
Unlike some uninformed posters to this board, the people who performed the paint job knew very well (or had been previously properly instructed by someone knowledgeable) which parts they could paint over and which areas were off-limits. :D


This way of operating - finding a low quality operator to do your flights in your livery - and then shedding the connection as soon as something goes wrong - should be considered frauding your customers.

Who's shedding what? If anything, Alitalia's management is strenuously defending their outsourcing decision in the national press, to the point of incidentally repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot.

[Vc10Tail]

On the steering issue there are sops that suggest fornarrow runways go straight for the nosewheel steering after nosewheel touchdown.perhaps such technique might be helpful to practice on a severe gusting crosswind in a sim.haven't flown ATR a number of years now.the atr nise wheel has a tendency to straighten fairly easily provided not excessive rudder cycling that would induce uncomfortable oscilations below 70kts.Aileron input to counter upwind lifting on touchdown is liable to raise spoiler and the differential drag added o the wether cocking effect could lead to a nice tango in the cockpit!

[Never Fretter]

The accident report is now out and here is a short summary
ANSV Highlight Procedures & HF After ATR72 Landing Accident (http://aerossurance.com/emergency-response/ansv-atr72-landing-accident/)

[hoss183]

But what were a PAX and FA doing out of their seats (or possibly just unbuckled) during a landing?

[pattern_is_full]

But what were a PAX and FA doing out of their seats (or possibly just unbuckled) during a landing? What makes you believe this was the case? I don't see any reference to anyone being out of their seats or unbuckled, in the report.
______

A chain of errors and misjudgements, but ultimately the captain botched the flare, (possibly due to poor depth/height perception in the dark) - and you just can't do that in an AT. (Well, you can't do it in most aircraft - see SWA-La Guardia - but the AT seems especially prone and vulnerable)

[hoss183]

Among the injured, the most serious case is that of a female flight attendant, a foreign national, who was probably standing at the time of the accident and sustained injuries to her spinal column.

Because i read it. Ok its from the press, but the injuries do seem to suggest that that was the case.

[JammedStab]

Could someone please download the report and then copy and paste the very last two pages of the report which are in english. These are the comments from the Romanians stating that the maximum crosswind limits published by ATR are too high and should be lowered. Several other recent related accidents are listed.

Thanks

[Never Fretter]

Could someone please download the report and then copy and paste the very last two pages of the report which are in English. These are the comments from the Romanians stating that the maximum crosswind limits published by ATR are too high and should be lowered. Several other recent related accidents are listed.


The key text from the Romanian letter is here, with links to more details on those other accidents:

The accident report is now out and here is a short summary
ANSV Highlight Procedures & HF After ATR72 Landing Accident (http://aerossurance.com/emergency-response/ansv-atr72-landing-accident/)

[JammedStab]

I remember that 45 knot crosswind limit on the ATR42(for takeoff) which seemed awfully high. The turbulence in many airports will be significant to say the least. On the other hand, I have been to airports in the middle of nowhere with no terrain or trees around where a 30 knot crosswind in a smooth approach.

I would be curious to know where the manufacturers do their crosswind tests and what the turbulence is like during those tests. It could be misleading some pilots into trying high crosswind ops in places with much more turbulence.



ATR: Operators have freedom to set crosswind limits

| 
09 December, 2015
| BY: David Kaminski-Morrow
| London


Crosswind limits for ATR turboprops are not fixed thresholds and carriers should adapt them to suit their own operation, the airframer insists.

ATR’s response follows concerns expressed by Romania’s civil aviation safety authority that crosswind limits published in the flight crew operating manual are too high.

The authority had formally commented on the limits during the inquiry into a Carpatair ATR 72 landing accident at Rome which substantially damaged the aircraft.

Investigators found the turboprop’s crew had conducted the approach at high speed in strong gusting crosswinds.

ATR’s operating manual lists maximum demonstrated crosswinds, for a dry runway approach, of 35kt for the ATR 72 and 45kt for the ATR 42.

But the Romanian authority believes the published limits should be reduced because the aircraft becomes difficult to handle close to these thresholds.

ATR points out, however, that the airframer does not define the crosswind limit because it is not part of the certification.

Although the operating manual features demonstrated values, ATR states: “Typically operators define their own crosswind limits and incorporate those within their standard operating procedures.”

ATR also emphasises the Carpatair inquiry’s conclusion regarding the excessive approach speed of the aircraft. The airframer says it recommends “adherence to the quoted approach speeds”.

It intends to give “feedback” to the investigation into the 2 February 2013 accident, which was carried out by Italian authority ANSV.

[Danny42C]

1stspotter (your #3),
...letting the aircraft from the corridor of asphalt assigned to the control tower...
Don't you just love Google translations #! Of course, it means "going off the runway" or (more pedantically) "off the Aircraft Movement Area" (as we used to call it - do we still ?)

# No mockery intended: Google knows more Italian than I do ("ciao" and "arrivederci", and I'm done).

Danny42C.

[yrvld]

"Tower reported the current winds at 22 knots gusting up to 37 knots from 250 degrees and issued clearance to land on runway 16L. The captain advised he wanted to maintain an approach speed of 130 KIAS, the first officer agreed, the captain invited the first officer to put his hands onto the control column to follow/feel his control inputs for the landing. The landing gear was extended and the flaps were selected to 30 degrees, the approach was stable as the aircraft descended through 1000 feet AGL with the speed being around 130 KIAS fluctuating +/- 10 knots. After the autopilot was disconnected an airspeed of about 125 KIAS was maintained.

The aircraft touched down 2.6 degrees nose down, nose gear first, near the runway center line about 560 meters past the runway threshold in controlled flight but bounced, the captain called out "hop! hop! hop!" upon recognizing the bounce, neither pilot called for a go-around, the captain provided nose down inputs causing the aircraft to sharply touch down a second time nose gear first causing the nose gear to collapse and bounce again, both pilots provided conflicting control inputs thereafter, the captain providing nose down inputs while the first officer provided nose up inputs possibly triggering the interlock to separate left and right control column. Due to the now disconnected flight controls and conflicting control inputs the aircraft rolled slight left and touched down again heavy on the left main gear causing the left main gear to be damaged and bouncing again now with a right bank angle of about 10 degrees, the aircraft touched down a last time causing the collapse of the right main gear. After the last touchdown the aircraft slid for 400 more meters turning around by about 170 degrees until coming to a stop. After the aircraft stopped the two flight attendants initiated an emergency evacuation of the aircraft and collected the passengers outside the aircraft at the lawn.

First emergency vehicles reached the accident site 10 minutes after the aircraft came to a stop. A triage was setup at the site and doctors took care of the injured. 2 crew and 5 passengers received minor injuries. The aircraft was substantially damaged beyond economic repair.

The ANSV analysed that the crew was composed not homogenous due to the extreme difference in experience with the captain's far superior experience. On the other hand, the ANSV argued, the first officer had just completed his type rating and had fresh knowledge.

The ANSV analysed that although the wind data transmitted to the crew exceeded the demonstrated aircraft crosswind capabilities the captain remained confident that he could manage a safe landing nonetheless, reinforced by the fact that other aircraft had managed a safe landing, too. However, in the light of the weather information available the landing should have been aborted in view of the weather conditions being near or above the maximum permissable.

The omission of the landing brief proved fatal - the maximum weather data would have been part of the briefing reminding both crew of the maximum cross wind component they would be able to conduct a safe landing in.

In addition, the omission of the landing brief led to the acceptance of an incorrect approach speed of 130 KIAS by both crew and prevented a discussion between the pilots whether landing in Rome or a diversion to the alternate was advisable. The ANSV stated: "it is reasonable to assume that the first officer had refrained from pointing out the incorrect approach speed given the considerable difference in experience levels."

The ANSV analysed that no technical factors contributed to the accident.

The ANSV analysed that the weather, while not precluding the flight activity, presented significant challenges not to be underestimated in flight preparation and during conduct of the flight. Evidence from the flight data and cockpit voice recorder however made the investigation conclude, that windshear was not involved.

The ANSV analysed that during the descent towards Rome the "Descent" Checklist was read and executed properly by the first officer, however, upon the point "landing briefing" the captain stated that had already been done, a briefing thus did not occur. The briefing however would have been crucial in identifying limits of the approach, e.g. 35 knots maximum demonstrated cross wind, and landing as well as establishing the criteria and procedure for a missed approach. Handling techniques would also have been discussed during that briefing as well as the performance values including Vapp being reviewed.

The ANSV analysis of the landing has already been incorporated in the sequence of events during landing (description of bounces).

The ANSV continued analysis: "From the time tower alerted emergency services it took 10 minutes until the first vehicle of the fire brigades reached the wreckage, although the wreckage was straight in front of the fire station #1 about 400 meters from the station." The accident occurred in night time conditions, the general visibility however was unrestricted. It appeared that the fire fighters were unable to locate taxiway "DE" as identified by tower. Tower on the other hand never mentioned the coordinates according to the grid map laid down in the emergency response plans. As result fire services started a search for the wreckage driving down to the end of the runway, scanning the left hand edge of runway 16L on the way back, turned around and scanning the right hand edge of the runway now spotting the wreckage 10 minutes after the initial alert."