PDA

View Full Version : Merpati MA-60 damaged in hard landing


ETOPS
10th Jun 2013, 08:42
More Indonesian problems..........

News item with pictures (http://news.detik.com/read/2013/06/10/100850/2268599/10/ini-penampakan-merpati-yang-alami-insiden-di-bandara-el-tari-kupang)

Takeoff53
10th Jun 2013, 08:44
The new Osprey with negative tilt?

Hopefully nobody was hurt.

Sir Niall Dementia
10th Jun 2013, 08:53
"A little late on the round-out again Hoskins."

flaphandlemover
10th Jun 2013, 09:08
all peaces are lying in flight direction.... thus... perfect landing..:}:}:}

hope all are well...

ATC Watcher
10th Jun 2013, 10:12
They must have won the prize for the hardest landing of the year ..but at this rate how many MA-60 are there left flying ? the attrition rate of this aircraft must be worse than the MU-2 by now .

fox niner
10th Jun 2013, 10:24
That looks more like a soft crash than a hard landing.

Dash8driver1312
10th Jun 2013, 10:26
What disturbs me is how the wings on these come off much more easily than the landing gear.

lomapaseo
10th Jun 2013, 13:43
What disturbs me is how the wings on these come off much more easily than the landing gear.

When you crash (exceeding the maximum designed g-load) something is going to break. Which something depends on the vector. As a passenger I quite prefer the outcome shown.

I recall a video of an airshow crash (similar plane type) some years ago with similar outcome.

The overhung engines probably create quite a lever with high vertical g

gcal
10th Jun 2013, 14:15
Damaged! Damaged?
That aircraft is not damaged it is ********* - begins with K for UK readers!

ORAC
10th Jun 2013, 14:23
When you crash (exceeding the maximum designed g-load) something is going to break. Which something depends on the vector. As a passenger I quite prefer the outcome shown. I recall a video of an airshow crash (similar plane type) some years ago with similar outcome. You design for the structure to take the force of the impact and crush/fracture to relieve the landing impact. Same thing for the substructure of a car or helicopter.

9SzMvKXP8Pc

captjns
10th Jun 2013, 14:58
Indonesia must be competing with Russia for the greatest number of pile ups:{.

Thaihawk
10th Jun 2013, 15:26
This unfortunate MA-60 was PK-MZO.

Out of 14 of this type this is at the least the second to be written-off.Luckily with no loss of life.

Dash8driver1312
10th Jun 2013, 23:06
Would you like this outcome if you had been sat at the point where the fuselage got ripped in half because of the wing tearing it?

Metro man
11th Jun 2013, 00:22
DC10/MD11 has very poor crash performance resulting from a hard landing. IIRC main gear is attached to the wing spar and simply drives through it if the arrival is firm enough. FEDEX managed to lose a couple of aircraft at Tokyo and Newark due to botched arrivals.

Servo
11th Jun 2013, 00:52
Great short field performance in the video. Pity it is only a 1 off approach though :E

SloppyJoe
11th Jun 2013, 16:07
A Mayanma Airways MA60 crashed on landing the very same day as this one. In the 13 years since this type was introduced almost 10% have crashed!

jetjockey696
11th Jun 2013, 16:31
Lawmakers Want Merpati’s Wings Clipped as Investigators Take Black Box

The crash-landing yesterday of a Merpati Nusantara MA60 aircraft has prompted a lawmaker to call for all similar planes to be grounded, as the airline told this newspaper that investigators had taken the plane’s flight data recorder.

“Merpati is too bad to be saved,” National Mandate Party (PAN) lawmaker Teguh Juwarno said on Tuesday. “The Transportation Ministry should ground all similar planes.”

Teguh, a member of the House of Representatives’ Commission V on transportation, said all routes operated by the state-owned carrier should be assumed by other airlines.

A Merpati Xian MA60 carrying 50 passengers was forced to make a crash-landing at El Tari airport, Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara on Monday.

Five people were seriously injured in the accident, while some 20 other passengers suffered light injuries.

A spokesman of Merpati Nusantara, Akhmad Zulfikri, told the Jakarta Globe that Merpati was unable to comment before the findings of an investigation by the National Committee on Transportation Safety (KNKT).

Asked for any preliminary information on the cause of the crash, Akhmad said “I have no idea, we still need to wait for the investigation by the KNKT. The KNKT usually at least takes a month for its investigations.”

Akhmad said that the company was still focusing on the victims.

“But for sure we also want our customers to be loyal flying with us,” he said.

Merpati has something of a checkered safety record.

On August 2, 2009, Flight 9760 crashed in Papua, killing all 15 people on board.

In July 2010, passengers aboard an MA60 in Mataram, West Nusa Tenggara were forced to evacuate after a short circuit filled the cabin with smoke.

In February 2011, a Merpati MA60 slid off the runway after attempting to take off from El Tari Airport. No casualties were reported.

On May 7, 2011, Merpati Flight 8968 crashed off the coast of Kaimana district, West Papua, killing all 25 people on board.

The incident again raises questions over the deal involving Merpati’s purchase of 15 Xian MA60s for $14.1 million. It was later discovered that airlines in the Philippines, Ghana and Nepal bought the same type of aircraft for $11 million, while it is understood that the airline considered canceling the deal after finding cracks in one of the plane’s vertical stabilizers.

This prompted China to halt a loan for an electricity development project in Indonesia. In response, former Trade Minister Mari Elka Pangestu was sent to China to renegotiate the purchase agreement.

Afterward, the government agreed to take a small loan from the China Export-Import Bank — amortized over 15 years with an annual interest rate of 2.5 percent — clearing the way for the deal to go through.

The purchase is currently being investigated by the Attorney General’s Office (AGO).

Lawmakers and aviation officials have questioned the use of planes that are not certified by the United States Federal Aviation Administration.The Indonesian government has argued that such a certification is unnecessary since Chinese transportation authorities have approved the planes.

Martin Hutabarat, a lawmaker with the Great Indonesian Movement Party (Gerindra) called on the Transportation Ministry to assess the usage of MA60s as passenger airplanes.

“The ministry should evaluate them to prevent dreadful accidents like this,” Martin said on Tuesday.

Elsewhere in the region, a Myanma Airways plane carrying about 60 passengers skidded off the runway at a regional airport on Monday.

Both propellers on the Burmese flag carrier’s MA60 were damaged in the landing at Kawthaung, in the southern region of Taninthari.

In mid-May a Myanma Airways MA60 overshot the end of a runway at an airport in eastern Shan State due to suspected brake failure, injuring two people.


AFP.. 11/06/2013

Heathrow Harry
12th Jun 2013, 09:55
I don't think it's the plane that's a problem - it's the bloody awful places Merpati etc etc fly

just look at the map of where those accidents occurred

BOAC
12th Jun 2013, 10:50
A Merpati Xian MA60 carrying 50 passengers was forced to make a crash-landing at El Tari airport, Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara on Monday. - that's new one - possibly a translation issue? Does that make it a 'forced landing'....?

BOAC
12th Jun 2013, 15:05
Certainly looked like a 'crash' to me - maybe you have wider tolerance there?http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif Don't think they can re-use it.I concur with 'alarming'..................

Heathrow Harry
12th Jun 2013, 15:19
If you live in Indonesia any "incident" you walk away from (taxi, bus, boat, helicopter, cycle, scooter....) is just alarming

I think it has to be bodies all over the place to qualify as a"crash" - rather like the Nigerian "Dreadful Accident!"

alisoncc
12th Jun 2013, 15:43
Interesting article here reflecting on airworthiness of Chinese aircraft.

Chinese-made planes under scrutiny after incidents (http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/chinesemade-planes-under-scrutiny-after-incidents-20130612-2o3fv.html)

lomapaseo
12th Jun 2013, 16:20
Most industry folks follow agreed definitions and "crash" is not one of them :)

start with incident "minor" than "serious" and then "accident" and finally "catastrophe".

Most of the stuff clogging PPrune on something everyday is "minor" and not worthy of more than a post or two (easily available info in the trade although untrustworthy in the news)

Of more interest are the "serious" incidents where a significant loss of function has occurred affecting safe flight and landing. Where safe flight is not assured (let's not talk about heroes :)

Certainly worthy of a couple of pages on PPrune.

Then the catch all "accident" which captures serious injuries requiring hospitalization for time and/or extensive aircraft damage costing mucho $$

PPrune spends days discussing this stuff

and last

"Catastrophe" which includes loss of aircraft with multiple fatalities (pretty rare stuff) but worthy of months of discussion while awaiting a report.

OK I admit that the above is not official (although close to it) but kind of sums up our everyday banter on PPrune

DaveReidUK
12th Jun 2013, 17:22
No need to look any further than ICAO Annex 13 for definitions:

Accident: An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which (a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of being in the aircraft, or direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft, or direct exposure to jet blast, except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew: or (b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component, except for engine failure or damage. when the damage is limited to the engine, its cowlings or accessories: or for damage limited to propellers, wing tips, antennas, tires, brakes, fairings, small dents or puncture holes in the aircraft skin: or (c) the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible.

Serious Incident - An incident involving circumstances indicating that there was a high probability of an accident and associated with the operation of an aircraft which, in the case of a manned aircraft, takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, or in the case of an unmanned aircraft, takes place between the time the aircraft is ready to move with the purpose of flight until such time as it comes to rest at the end of the flight and the primary propulsion system is shut down.

Note 1.— The difference between an accident and a serious incident lies only in the result.

Incident - An occurrence, other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft which affects or could affect the safety of operation.

Dan Winterland
13th Jun 2013, 00:00
''Note 1.— The difference between an accident and a serious incident lies only in the result.''

Well, that clears that up then.


A Merpati spokesman was quoted as saying "I don't think we will ne able to use the aircraft again". Really?