Jet goes down on its way to Medellin, Colombia [Archive] - Page 3

Airbubba

2nd Dec 2016, 20:21

The aircraft didn't have GPS when it flew for CityJet, and I'd be surprised if it had been retrofitted, so the ADS-B position reports will be from an inertial source.

That's supported by the fact that the coordinates sent as it turned onto the runway at Viru Viru were offset by approximately 1 nm SSE, so it's likely that at least that much error will apply to the subsequent ADS-B track.

Are you sure? I thought ADS-B positions had to be satellite based.

From a Boeing article:

Navigation satellites send precise timing information that allows airplanes equipped with global navigation satellite system (GNSS) or GPS receivers to determine their own position and velocity. Airplanes equipped with ADS-B out broadcast precise position and velocity to ground ADS-B receivers and to other airplanes via a digital datalink (1090 megahertz) along with other data, such as the airplane’s flight number and emergency status.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_02_10/pdfs/AERO_Q2-10_article02.pdf

From an FAA page on ADS-B installations:

An ADS-B Out transmitter alone will not be sufficient to meet the requirements outlined in 14 CFR 91.227. To comply with the requirements for the ADS-B Rule, the aircraft must be equipped with a Version 2 ADS-B Out transmitter and a compatible GPS Position Source.

https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/installing/

I realize that this wasn't a Boeing flown under FAA rules but I've flown with legacy airliner installations where the ADS-B and TCAS had GPS but the FMS did not.

DaveReidUK

2nd Dec 2016, 20:32

Are you sure?

Yes.

I thought ADS-B positions had to be satellite based.Most aircraft are, some aren't. The latter include some older Boeings and Airbuses, too.

Tu.114

2nd Dec 2016, 20:36

The FPL that reached the Colombian authorities showed the flight departing from Cobijas. They only learnt it had departed from Santa Cruz when it was already in Colombian airspace.

So just to make it clear, the flight was planned to take 4:22 from Cobijas to Medellín, using up all its endurance? This smells a bit like they were lucky to even make it to the holding, seeing that they departed way further south than that.

Could somebody with access to an ARJ flight planning system run these two flights through it so we get fuel burn and EET for both? This might be interesting.

peekay4

2nd Dec 2016, 20:46

Strictly speaking ADS-B does not require GPS / GNSS. But practically speaking, a WAAS GPS system is the "easiest" way to comply with ADS-B's performance requirements.

Many ADS-B systems are sold / installed with integrated GPS receivers. So it is not necessary to retrofit the aircraft's legacy NAV system just to have ADS-B Out.

The two systems could remain independent of each other: one system for navigation, one system for position reporting. (And there could be significant deltas between them).

That's supported by the fact that the coordinates sent as it turned onto the runway at Viru Viru were offset by approximately 1 nm SSE, so it's likely that at least that much error will apply to the subsequent ADS-B track.

1nm error is well outside the limits specified for ADS-B. The position limit is 0.05nm with an integrity bubble of 0.2nm. These requirements can be tough to meet using legacy inertial or RNAV sources, which is why most ADS-B retrofits will include GPS instead.

Gauges and Dials

2nd Dec 2016, 20:52

You would never believe someone claiming to be an 8,000 hour captain would tell you they believed fuel falls down to the lower wing when holding, now would you??!!!

Actually, due to various quantum effects, nonlinear compressibility of air, and wormholes in space/time, every time you make an uncoordinated turn, a little fuel from the upper tank ends up in Bob Hoover's coffee. Always used to piss him off when he got a mouthful of Jet A.

Airbubba

2nd Dec 2016, 20:55

patowalker

2nd Dec 2016, 21:08

So just to make it clear, the flight was planned to take 4:22 from Cobijas to Medellín, using up all its endurance? This smells a bit like they were lucky to even make it to the holding, seeing that they departed way further south than that.

What makes you think both FPLs showed the same EET?

Alas para Volar

2nd Dec 2016, 21:11

The sad thing about this incident is that the one positive aspect of the crisis, namely the fact that the chances of a crash landing without loss of life due to the lack of fuel meaning that there wouldn't be an explosion, wasn't taken advantage of. I assume that a landing on relatively flat terrain would have given a pretty good chance of people surviving with there being no chance of a explosion due to the exhaustion of fuel compared to if there had been fuel.

In aircraft crashes it is not usually the "explosion of fuel" that kills people.
😫

DaveReidUK

2nd Dec 2016, 21:21

1nm error is well outside the limits specified for ADS-B. The position limit is 0.05nm with an integrity bubble of 0.2nm. These requirements can be tough to meet using legacy inertial or RNAV sources, which is why most ADS-B retrofits will include GPS instead.

Don't confuse ADS-B with specific implementations of it (e.g. NextGen, Hudson Bay, etc).

ADS-B doesn't have specific limits - the spec accommodates a wide range of accuracy and integrity levels, which is why every position transmission includes a parameter (NUCp) that identifies the level that applies to the data.

Specific ADS-B implementations can require a minimum NUCp - the Hudson Bay ADS-B-mandatory airspace, for example, requires a minumum NUCp of 5, for example, so inertial-based ADS-B won't normally meet that criterion (but it still satisfies the ADS-B spec).

Thr LAMIA RJ85 had ADS-B, but would not have been allowed to fly in US airspace under NextGen rules.

grizzled

2nd Dec 2016, 21:30

DRUK

"The LAMIA RJ85 had ADS-B, but would not have been allowed to fly in US airspace under NextGen rules."

Agreed re ADS-B -- but it also would not likely be allowed to fly in the USA (or many other countries) for a whole host of other reasons too...

xcitation

2nd Dec 2016, 21:36

In addition to the bogus flight plan would there be many other SOPs skipped or ignored? Wondering if this a/c had a CVR capacity long enough to record the pre-flight briefing, cross checks, fuel warnings, QRH call outs. There is far more here than fail to plan, plan to fail.
Every pilot has experienced delays due to wx or traffic or whatever - to go without necessary fuel is Russian roulette.

mickjoebill

2nd Dec 2016, 21:39

A Also, most of those killed were members of the press.

Reports suggest 21 Journalists or photographers were on board.
Only one survived.

There are 40 people in the team photograph taken outside the aircraft, presumably they were. players trainers and support staff.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.ibtimes.co.uk/remembering-20-journalists-who-were-killed-chapecoense-plane-crash-1594261?client=safari

Mickjoebill

Alas para Volar

2nd Dec 2016, 21:41

In addition to the bogus flight plan would there be many other SOPs skipped or ignored?

It would certainly seem likely.

peekay4

2nd Dec 2016, 21:45

Thr LAMIA RJ85 had ADS-B, but would not have been allowed to fly in US airspace under NextGen rules.

Yet 1nm error implies a NUCp of 3, which is not acceptable to any ATS since NUCp values of 4 or lower are automatically discarded by infrastructure. With that kind of performance that RJ85 would not have been allowed to fly anywhere in the world.

patowalker

2nd Dec 2016, 21:50

The link doesnt work for me. Is there any evidence this is true?

If it is then the CYA plot thickens....

Try this one Investigación tras accidente de vuelo de LaMía en Antioquia - Justicia - ELTIEMPO.COM (http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/investigacion-tras-accidente-de-vuelo-de-lamia-en-antioquia/16764039)

The source quoted is the Colombian CAA.

DaveReidUK

2nd Dec 2016, 21:56

With that kind of performance that RJ85 would not have been allowed to fly anywhere in the world.

So you're saying that the ill-fated flight was a figment of our collective imagination ... :ugh:

peekay4

2nd Dec 2016, 22:05

So you're saying that the ill-fated flight was a figment of our collective imagination
Or that your interpretation of the aircraft's ADS-B installation is incorrect.

Hmm, I wonder which one is more likely?? :}

DaveReidUK

2nd Dec 2016, 22:11

Yet 1nm error implies a NUCp of 3, which is not acceptable to any ATS since NUCp values of 4 or lower are automatically discarded by infrastructure. With that kind of performance that RJ85 would not have been allowed to fly anywhere in the world.

The remaining RJ85s that CityJet didn't sell to LAMIA regularly fly around the UK sending an ADS-B NUCp of 0.

Does that mean that over here we have departed from the planet without anyone noticing, or that we've torn up the rule book ?

Doh.

costalpilot

2nd Dec 2016, 23:34

Fate is the hunter. So, if the story is true of course, this catastrophe began with a player misplacing his video game, from which point the holes in the cheese slowly began to align.

If it's true they elected to give up a fuel stop looking for a passenger,s game----it was not fate but stupidity that was hunting them. Imo.

Otoh, that's a big IF.

Airbubba

2nd Dec 2016, 23:46

The remaining RJ85s that CityJet didn't sell to LAMIA regularly fly around the UK sending an ADS-B NUCp of 0.

Were the RJ85's one of the early planes to get ADS-B installed perhaps?

Here's a 2012 post from an FR24 admin that mentions an 'old transponder' with a 'calculated position' instead of GPS in the RJ100:

There can be several issues behind incorrect positions.

* Map calibration error
* Transponder error (sending wrong or random data)
* Receiver error (some kind of error in receiving so numbers get incorrect)
* Database error (some kind of mix up in database)
* Old transponder (some aircraft like RJ100 don't have GPS position but calculated position. It works OK on take off from Gothenburg, but once they reach Stockholm they land up to 30 km off from Bromma airport).

Why is the position of the plane sometimes wrong? (http://forum.flightradar24.com/threads/4481-Why-is-the-position-of-the-plane-sometimes-wrong?p=23125&viewfull=1#post23125)

That's supported by the fact that the coordinates sent as it turned onto the runway at Viru Viru were offset by approximately 1 nm SSE, so it's likely that at least that much error will apply to the subsequent ADS-B track.

The error looks like much less than a mile to me. At any rate, the holding pattern does not seem to be plotted at the VOR but several miles south. But it appears to be very close to the extended centerline of the runway.

Perhaps coincidental but as many have observed, the plane sure hit close to the VOR.

AtomKraft

2nd Dec 2016, 23:52

peekay4

2nd Dec 2016, 23:54

The remaining RJ85s that CityJet didn't sell to LAMIA regularly fly around the UK sending an ADS-B NUCp of 0.

Does that mean that over here we have departed from the planet without anyone noticing, or that we've torn up the rule book ?
If NUCp of 0 is actually accepted then yes, you have departed from the planet.

NUCp zero means the ADS-B data is invalid, and any position information should be discarded.

AndyJS

3rd Dec 2016, 00:04

"Personally wondering if the "leaked" FPL is genuine or just a hoax

Seems a but unlikely to me that Fuel Endurance and Estimated En route time would exactly equal the same figure, and i am finding it hard to understand how an experienced pilot would be ok departing like that.

Im sure there is more to this than just flying direct, surely there was some kind of fuel stop planned that didn't happen for whatever reason"

Yes, there was indeed meant to be a stop for refuelling, but because the plane was late taking off, the refuelling stop wasn't possible because it was scheduled to take place at an airport that doesn't operate at night-time.

WingNut60

3rd Dec 2016, 01:10

I am having a hard time reconciling 4:22 with any NORMAL sector times for 146/RJ's.
And yes, I know they are not identical.
My recollection is that 146's operating BME - PER (about 2:40) needed to run reduced baggage and make the occasional re-fuelling stop at Port Hedland, depending on seasonal winds / weather.
How that translates or progresses to an acceptable FP of 4:22 seems to be a giant leap of faith, even for the later aircraft.

sharksandwich

3rd Dec 2016, 01:29

If the pilot knew that they had very fine limits on fuel, why the agreement on a holding pattern?

JumpJumpJump

3rd Dec 2016, 01:48

I haven't sen any mention of is yet, but for those of you that do not remember your Greek mythology lessons.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamia Seems like a dark precursor to what happened.

I guess that now we are awaiting to see the transcripts from the CVR to get a better picture of what the climate was like on the Flight Deck and also to better understand who was sitting where and performing what role. I imagine that there was quite a large power gradient, I wonder how assertive the two first officers were, of if they were happy to go along with the plan, having been raised by the company and its culture. Right now in South America the pilot job market is incredibly tough and I get the impression from many of my students that there is a prevailing feeling of job preservation and a mentality of "If I say NO somebody else will say YES". I saw that the UK AAIB and Representatives of the Manufacturer are now in Medelin, I am curious as to how quickly a preliminary report will be issued.

Contact Approach

3rd Dec 2016, 01:56

LiveLeak.com - Chapecoense team aboard doomed plane before taking off for Colombia

jugofpropwash

3rd Dec 2016, 02:04

It is now clear that the aircraft simply run out of fuel, as others have from time to time. So the issue now must be how could this been allowed to happen.
The answer is to be found in Pseudo Pro`s post No.329 above, not bad for his first posting on Pprune. It represents damning evidence, the fact that EET and Endurance was questioned, but nothing was done about it. It is inevitable that some very serious further questions will follow. Such as given the glaring shortcomings of such a FP, why was it not rejected. In accepting the FP what sort of responsibility is shared by the air traffic service provider. Should they have been more insistent, should they have rejected it unless it demonstrated compliance with safety requirements. How can it be denied that the purpose of greater endurance than time en route is for no more than safety.
It would seem somebody was leaning on the dispatcher and he in turn was leaning on the hapless Ms. Monasterio.
It would appear the die was cast on the night of 21st November, seven days before the crash when the clock started ticking at 20:40
Assuming the reports are true that this was not the first time they'd flown this route (in one direction or the other) without refueling, it would suggest that this isn't the first time they filed a flight plan with no reserve fuel. Once might be an oversight, but if it was done repeatedly, someone knew it and apparently did nothing about it.

TylerMonkey

3rd Dec 2016, 02:22

jugofpropwash

3rd Dec 2016, 03:58

Only aware they flew this route twice in August but refueled each time enroute ( reported earlier in pprune , this thread ). Please link to reports they did it before without refueling , somehow I have missed that.
I'm not entirely sure one way or another. Some statements here have indicated that they've done it before with no added fuel, but I don't know where that's coming from.

cappt

3rd Dec 2016, 05:17

I'm not entirely sure one way or another. Some statements here have indicated that they've done it before with no added fuel, but I don't know where that's coming from

It came from this interview.
http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/accidente-de-chapecoense-entrevista-al-director-de-la-aerolinea-lamia/16761870

Translated

http://www.pprune.org/9594414-post157.html

DaveReidUK

3rd Dec 2016, 06:50

That's supported by the fact that the coordinates sent as it turned onto the runway at Viru Viru were offset by approximately 1 nm SSE, so it's likely that at least that much error will apply to the subsequent ADS-B track.The error looks like much less than a mile to me. At any rate, the holding pattern does not seem to be plotted at the VOR but several miles south. But it appears to be very close to the extended centerline of the runway.

GE plot of the taxy out and take-off.

http://www.avgen.com/LMI2933%20taxy%20&%20takeoff.jpg

The ADS-B offset looks pretty close to a mile to me :O. It's highly likely that a similar offset applies to the published track of LM2933 in the hold, but I agree it's still not enough to put it over the VOR.

NUCp zero means the ADS-B data is invalid, and any position information should be discarded.

Then feel free to ignore it, we'll continue the discussion without you ...

broadreach

3rd Dec 2016, 07:08

Regarding previous flights to and from Medellin without refuelling. Yesterday's O Estado de Sao Paulo carried this article with a drawing showing four previous flights this year.
http://esportes.estadao.com.br/noticias/futebol,vivacolombia-nega-que-piloto-tenha-declarado-emergencia,10000092090

butterfly68

3rd Dec 2016, 07:30

The police released this video about the rescue of Mr Tumiri, unbelivable how he is almost fine... a miracle, may he recover well especially from the psychological trauma...can't imagine how terrible it must be.:sad:
http://video.repubblica.it/mondo/aereo-caduto-in-colombia-il-sopravvissuto-tra-i-rottami-dove-sono-i-miei-amici/261365/261692?ref=HRESS-6

PEI_3721

3rd Dec 2016, 07:52

Any 146/RJ operators prepared to admit one of those 'Doh' moments when using the GNS fuel planning page as an inflight guide - 'how goes it', forgetting that the system requires manual updating.
Memory fades, but only part of the system, fuel contents or fuel flow, was automated.
Well, yes; I managed at least one Ooops during in-flight planning. More seriously, witnessed at least two Doh moments, one involving a tech stop to refuel.

Recall the A300 at Vienna landing without fuel; as an industry we tend to forget safety lessons.

patowalker

3rd Dec 2016, 08:02

It came from this interview.
Director de la aerolínea LaMia habla sobre accidente de Chapecoense - Justicia - ELTIEMPO.COM (http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/accidente-de-chapecoense-entrevista-al-director-de-la-aerolinea-lamia/16761870)

Translated

http://www.pprune.org/9594414-post157.html

Sí, pero lo hicimos dos veces de Medellín a Bolivia. Era un vuelo que siempre estaba perfecto.They had done the flight twice from Medellin to Bolivia. He was careful to avoid saying from Medellin to Santa Cruz. I suspect they flew Medellin to Cobija.

IcePack

3rd Dec 2016, 08:05

Why such a big deal of what was written on the filed FlightPlan? You can write what you like on it possibly illegally but I suspect it would not be noticed. Surprised the filed plan was so blatantly written.

AerocatS2A

3rd Dec 2016, 08:14

Any 146/RJ operators prepared to admit one of those 'Doh' moments when using the GNS fuel planning page as an inflight guide - 'how goes it', forgetting that the system requires manual updating.
Memory fades, but only part of the system, fuel contents or fuel flow, was automated.

Contents and fuel flow are both automated to an extent. Fuel flow is an automatic input and contents is manual input but fuel used is taken off to give fuel remaining automatically. Errors can be made inputing the contents either at the start of the flight or in flight if you feel the need to update them. Personally I only update the FMS fuel contents down. If the FMS contents is lower than the gauges then I leave it (within reason of course.)

mary meagher

3rd Dec 2016, 09:28

Alas para volar in quoting Andy JS, post 511, reminds us that it is not usually the fire that kills in an aircraft accident. It is, of course, the sudden stop at the end; if like the Gimli glider you have daylight, the pilot despite his mistake that ended up with no fuel, kept his wits together....he remembered an old airfield used only by gokarts and gliders, and put his Air Canada plane down there with very little damage and no loss of life. Even a farmers field might have served in an emergency....in daylight.

The LAMIA T28B pilot had done this trip before. In this day and age every mobile phone includes a GPS..and a torch/flashlight. If he was fit to fly he might still have saved the situation, with help from the copilot, and from the controller. He should have established priority, called a Mayday.

Was he fit to fly?

alemaobaiano

3rd Dec 2016, 09:28

LiveLeak.com - Chapecoense team aboard doomed plane before taking off for Colombia (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=32b_1480556495)
No, she was not the co-pilot on this flight. Sisy Arias was an observer, still under training. She was on the flight deck but not operating the flight. I suspect that there was an element of publicity involved in her presence.

Ovar Goytia was acting as FO for this flight, as confirmed by both families.

Double Back

3rd Dec 2016, 09:46

In the crew list I see the rank of the F/O as capt also. So two cpts and one F/O on her first, or training flt.
I have flown enough with two cpts but both need to do some role playing iso the normal way of behaving is my experience.
Only once I experienced it as a burden, however that was not about a safety issue, but I was a little disturbed the rest of the flight which is of course not optimal.
It will be one of the many issues in this accident that possibly contributed.

Trim Stab

3rd Dec 2016, 09:48

suspect that there was an element of publicity involved in her presence.

Yes - note that she is wearing three stripes whereas Goytia is wearing two...

deefer dog

3rd Dec 2016, 10:03

As two others have noted, something doesn't seem quite right with the flight plan we've seen.

Any pilot wanting to fudge the figures and circumnavigate the regs to "make the flight work," is very unlikely to highlight his endeavors by stating on the flight plan that the estimated elapsed flight time is exactly equal to the fuel endurance.

Toruk Macto

3rd Dec 2016, 12:19

For some reason they held no fear of the authorities ? No one submits a flight plan showing no reserves unless you know you can't be challenged .

noflynomore

3rd Dec 2016, 12:54

Post 329 demonstrates the attitude the despatcher, the Captain and the company had towards an accurate flight plan. Is this a "normal" attitude in that area? Is the flightplan regarded as an unnecessary and pointless embuggerance as these people clearly did? Presumably the authorities do too or they'd never have tried to file such a faulty document. The attitude seems to have been that it wasn't important enough to bother with and an attitude like that can really only come from prior experience that there will be no follow-up. There are parts of the world where merely filing a document is enough, it matters not a jot what's actually written on it. Is this a recognisable S American attitude? It certainly sounds as though it might be so.

They filed no second diversion, no SID, despatcher failed to append his name and as we know refused to change the EET/Endurance figures.

This cavalier attitude to flight plans might logically be carried over to other paperwork. Having flown the 146 extensively (tho not the RJ) I would love to see the loadsheet for starters.

My take on the incident is Capt and Owner has done the trip before - refuelled en route and reckons he could have just done it - just - unrefueled. He overrides/"explains" to any FO objection that overflying the primary diversion enables a last minute calculation of fuel to destination - a kind of unofficial en-route diversion procedure. Authority gradient makes it stick. Hey, we'll look at it as we go along, OK?
Overflying Bogotà they do indeed appear to have fuel to enable a landing at Medellin - waaay below minima but still "enough". Probably just 10 mins absolute. Skipper wants to save money and time plus not look silly to "celeb" pax by landing for fuel just 150 miles short of destination so the decision is made. The CVR at this point would make fascinating listening.

It would have worked except someone else got priority at destination. Can't go back so imagine the dilemma, a highly publicised fuel mayday, lose the prestigious footie contract, attract all sorts of unwelcome public and governmental attention or just keep shtum for a few more minutes and land asap right after the other one. How long can they take after all, they're in a hurry too?

Sure, that's all speculation but it's a very feasible mindset and it fits the picture. It has to be something pretty close to that, not so?

The loadsheet will be a telling document if/when it comes into the public domain. I'll bet that too bears only an Alice in Wonderland connection with reality.

No one submits a flight plan showing no reserves unless you know you can't be challenged .

Quite...tho I'd substitute "won't" for "can't".

RAT 5

3rd Dec 2016, 13:20

Skipper wants to save money and time plus not look silly to "celeb" pax by landing for fuel just 150 miles short of destination

That would suggest the customer was not advised in advance that a fuel stop would be made. Surely the charter price would have included such a stop and priced accordingly. Thus the customer would have known. That should be easy for the investigators to discover.

Chris2303

3rd Dec 2016, 13:33

Two things from SLF/airline reservations.
If ATC get a plan that EET 4h22m / endurance 4h22m can't they refuse the plan?
IMHO when they flew over BOG without refuelling they condemned all aboard to death.

Joejosh999

3rd Dec 2016, 14:24

alanda

3rd Dec 2016, 14:31

If it's true they elected to give up a fuel stop looking for a passenger,s game----it was not fate but stupidity that was hunting them. Imo.

Otoh, that's a big IF.

Whatever the reason, they took off late, and then couldn't land at Cobija because it had no lighting.

Melax

3rd Dec 2016, 14:41

The flight plan stamp is applied to the bottom right area labelled "additional information" instead of the center labelled "accepted by".
Can someone familiar with how they conduct business down there clarify why ?
I'm under the impression that more info was requested or the person who stamped the form turned a blind eye ?! Do they just stamp the form anywhere like in some West African states ?
(ETE 4:22 / Endurance 4:22):ugh::ugh:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/12/03/09/3AFBF10100000578-0-image-m-8_1480758830343.jpg

neila83

3rd Dec 2016, 14:51

I'm an ex RJ-85 pilot, and while I've no idea what they used for their planned diversion, I wouldn't be surprised if this flight was planned as a 're-clearance' operation.
In other words, you plan the flight with somewhere en route as the 'destination'.
When you are about there, you see if you have enough to proceed to your 'diversion', which is really where you wanted to land anyway.
If you have enough gas, you continue- if not, you land and refuel.

I've done this a few times, and in my view while legal, it can turn into a trap for fools.

If you go on to your 'diversion' then you KNOW that you are going to use:
Start and taxi fuel, sector fuel and diversion fuel. Thus you know that you will land with final reserve and maybe some of your contingency fuel, but that's it.

As usual, it will all come out in the wash, but I'd like to think that in these enlightened times, the days of airliners crashing simply because they 'ran out of gas' are behind us. But then, I don't fly in Columbia.....

Not arrguing with your point, but your your last line is a bit off. This was a Bolivian plane, Colombia's only involvement was ATC and as has been noted that was exemplarary.

Before talking about culture too much, contributors should bear in mind that despite being a very large aviation market, as it's geography makes road travel difficult, and despite having a very hostile topographic and meteorological flying environment, Colombia's airlines have a very impressive safety record. Since terrorism stopped being a concern here, there hasn't been a significant accident I believe.

Which suggests to me they're doing something right. As has already been noted, ATC is generally very good. It has to be! Their pilots seem well able to fly several times a day through some of the worst areas of CB activity on the planet.

So I wouldn't tar all south Americans.

cappt

3rd Dec 2016, 14:54

What's most astonishing to me is how desperate and unprepared the crew seemed in the last few r/ts. From the start they knew they'd arrive w minutes to spare at best. You'd think they'd know the airport info by heart , esp that the VOR was 9 mi short of threshold....the heading they'd need from there....be prepared to glide if necessary...and on and on.
Yet they seemed completely not ready to deal with a circumstance that they were very well aware could occur.
Incredible.

In todays airline environment we call that identifying threats and making a plan to mitigate them or "TEAM" for another acronym. Of course this applies to the planning/dispatch stage as well and continues to the completion of the flight.

I'm curious were the Captain got his type rating and what kind of training and experience he had in the RJ85?

Hippy

3rd Dec 2016, 15:49

If ATC get a plan that EET 4h22m / endurance 4h22m can't they refuse the plan?

ATC don't see the endurance. That part of the plan is not transmitted when the plan is filed. That part of the plan is only disseminated when overdue/SAR action needs to be taken.

Airbubba

3rd Dec 2016, 16:39

GE plot of the taxy out and take-off.

http://www.avgen.com/LMI2933%20taxy%20&%20takeoff.jpg

The ADS-B offset looks pretty close to a mile to me :O. It's highly likely that a similar offset applies to the published track of LM2933 in the hold, but I agree it's still not enough to put it over the VOR.

You are right (as usual, I'm afraid ;)). I was looking at the track in this link I posted earlier:

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/cp-2933/#bbef1b9

It doesn't show the taxi at Viru Viru and since most of the shift is aligned with the runway, the track starts near the pavement, perhaps at liftoff.

Flightradar24's blog has this comment on the transponder in the RJ85:

Positional Accuracy

CP-2933 was equipped with an older ADS-B transponder which may be subject to positional accuracy issues. The position of the aircraft is calibrated prior to take off and the on board computer calculates positions based on speed and direction of the aircraft. With certain types of flying (including holding patterns), the calculation can become inaccurate.

Also, FR24 has this playback of traffic in the Medellin area near the time of the mishap:

https://www.flightradar24.com/2016-11-29/02:30/12x/6.14,-75.5/10

Many of the other planes drop out of ADS-B receiver coverage from time to time and give jagged plots but it appears that they are holding at the VOR while LMI2933 is holding several miles south of the navaid.

Has anyone found other plots of the holding on other ADS-B trackers like RadarBox24 or FlightAware? Also, on the RJ85 are the nav instruments and computers updated with radio nav and maybe as Dave says, the transponder only sends inertial position? The holding pattern does look like it is nicely plotted, just not in the right place.

Any 146/RJ operators prepared to admit one of those 'Doh' moments when using the GNS fuel planning page as an inflight guide - 'how goes it', forgetting that the system requires manual updating.
Memory fades, but only part of the system, fuel contents or fuel flow, was automated.
Well, yes; I managed at least one Ooops during in-flight planning. More seriously, witnessed at least two Doh moments, one involving a tech stop to refuel.

Recall the A300 at Vienna landing without fuel; as an industry we tend to forget safety lessons.

It was an A310 at VIE that ran out of gas, but as in this crash, they were very late in confessing the problem to ATC.

Years ago I flew a bizjet, perhaps a Lear, with partially automated fuel tracking and prediction supplied to the nav computers. It was as you described, helpful but a real gotcha if you forgot to initialize it each leg.

And, I've been sitting in a holding pattern in a Boeing, trying to figure when to go to plan B. Obviously, doing rough calculations in my jet-lagged head, and then looking at the FMS prediction. Whatever algorithm the box used made the landing fuel look great when on the inbound leg and then it dropped by several thousand pounds turning outbound.

Airbubba

3rd Dec 2016, 17:02

I found this FlightAware plot of the holding:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/LMI2933

It seems to agree with the Flightradar24 plot and it looks like the pattern is not as closely aligned with inbound course to the runway as I had first thought.

DaveReidUK

3rd Dec 2016, 17:27

The FlightAware plot stops about 2 minutes earlier, so it doesn't add much to what we already knew from the FR24 data, except that it does usefully include groundspeed.

Looking at the GS inbound/outbound in the hold, there appears to be a slight headwind (northerly) component of about 15-20 kts (at FL210).

GS in the cruise was about 375 kts, again suggesting a similar headwind at FL300, which can't have helped under the circumstances.

Livesinafield

3rd Dec 2016, 18:02

Really suspicious of this flight plan talk...I think it stinks of a hoax

Chronus

3rd Dec 2016, 18:15

ATC don't see the endurance. That part of the plan is not transmitted when the plan is filed. That part of the plan is only disseminated when overdue/SAR action needs to be taken.
Not that I would claim any in depth knowledge as to the precise reasons and authority for refusing FP`s, but had such a FP been stuck under my nose, my inclination would have been to turn it down on the basis that it lacked AAR data.

YRP

3rd Dec 2016, 19:27

The idea of the fuel stop in Bogata is curious. If the distance is 116nm as someone posted, that gives about 15 minutes less time. Bogata might have been possible to make, but certainly not legal -- no alternate/reserve fuel.

About ATC acceptance: ATC has no ability to confirm the actual legality of fuel for each flight. They'd need the fuel performance tables for the type, actual fuel and weight, plans for alternates, contingencies, etc. They don't have the knowledge to do that, not being flight dispatchers or ATPL, so can't reject flight plans for illegal reserves. Give them a flight plan legal and one just short, they wouldn't know.

The only reason "Celia" spotted it here was that it was egregiously obvious: only enough to make it with dry tanks.

YRP

3rd Dec 2016, 19:28

Really suspicious of this flight plan talk...I think it stinks of a hoax
LivesinaField, I wonder about that myself. One thing that does give it credence: it matches where they ran dry...

Chronus

3rd Dec 2016, 19:46

ATC Watcher

3rd Dec 2016, 19:51

The PLN is not the key to this accident . whether it is a hoax or not does not change the subsequent facts since they were apparently from the beginning intending to stretch the flight beyond legal reserves.
They could have put 3 alternates and 5h endurance and sign it as Jan Smith and the PLN would have been "perfect" for the ARO and ATC. No one on the ground knows how many (extra) tanks any aircraft carries in reality ( I have seen PLNs with 10h endurance on cross Atlantic Ferry Cessna172s) , and nobody can force you to land at your alternates anyway. ALTN are just there for info and the Endurance / EET part is only for SAR not for ATC. ( as someone said earlier those boxes are not even transmitted/processed to ATC)

It is the attitude of the Dispatcher ( and possibly the Captain) which is interesting in Miss Celia memo , not the PLN itself.

TowerDog

3rd Dec 2016, 20:08

. ATC don't see the endurance. That part of the plan is not transmitted when the plan is filed. That part of the plan is only disseminated when overdue/SAR action needs to be taken.
Hippy is offline Report Post

I did not know that, but it would explain why this flight plan was "accepted" by the various ATC agencies. Seems the local ATC in VVI did not raise an eyebrow as they saw the whole flight plan before they entered the info into the ATC system.
I sure had plenty FPs turned down or questioned if I made a small mistake or forgot to dot an I or cross a T in various third world countries where we filed manually and in person at the local office.

Chronus

3rd Dec 2016, 20:17

ATC Watcher "The PLN is not the key to this accident . whether it is a hoax or not does not change the subsequent facts since they were apparently from the beginning intending to stretch the flight beyond legal reserves."
Does this not mean that the intention was to actually commit an illegal act.
But of course it would be expected for a C172 on a Atlantic ferry flight to "declare" a 10 hr endurance. What would anyone think if 2 hrs was declared on the FP of such a flight.

MungoP

3rd Dec 2016, 20:25

I for one have never submitted a FP where I've calculated and then listed endurance down to a single minute.. Usually rounded to the nearest 15 min. Seems odd to me .. but then so do many things.

Livesinafield

3rd Dec 2016, 20:35

I just think the 4hrs 22 Endurance and the 4hrs 22 EET looks too obvious, if you where on the jimmy riddle, why would you put that ? maybe put 5hrs 22 whether atc see it or not its just looks really dodgy.

I am really struggling to believe this FPL is genuine, as someone has already said it doesn't really matter, they clearly didn't have enough fuel for the trip.

Is anyone else finding it really hard to believe why a professional pilot with some degree of experience would be happy flying to an aerodrome and arriving with approx 7 minutes of fuel until engines stop working at night?? I was looking at the maps and if they had to make an approach via the North onto runway 19 they would have likely ran out of fuel on the approach....

They must have flown over the top of Bogota airport nearly into their Final reserve, it just doesn't make any sense

Lancelot de boyles

3rd Dec 2016, 20:56

a professional pilot with some degree of experience
...does not necessarily infer a 'competent professional, with some degree of knowledge'

In a previous job, I was unfortunate enough to encounter an experienced co-pilot, with an ATP from the FAA along with another from his country of origin. His understanding of fuel capacity, management, reserves etc are eerily similar to many of the failings highlighted in this case. That attitude complemented an equally cavalier attitude by the management towards aircraft maintenance. Sadly, it matters little how much you pay for the aircraft (new and fairly prestigious in our case) and the staff, or the value of the contracts; if there are folk involved devoid of integrity or genuine knowledge, the tragic outcome is likely only a matter of time and luck.

one phrase that keeps coming to mind as I read this is 'normalisation of deviance'.

Toruk Macto

3rd Dec 2016, 21:10

To put the same figure for EET and endurance is in my opinion an egotistical bost .

AndyJS

3rd Dec 2016, 21:28

"Really suspicious of this flight plan talk...I think it stinks of a hoax"

I would agree with you if the pilot was attempting to hide something. But I don't think he was trying to hide anything.

fdr

3rd Dec 2016, 21:40

The information on the FPL and the response by the ATC Officer is disturbing. Celia's email to her manager appears to pre date the crash, and it indicates that she did not accept the ATS FPL. If so, how did the aircraft end up 1600nm away following an IFR flight. When was the FPL accepted by ATS, and by who, and with what presumed intervention to Celia's legitimate complaints?

This aircraft was never legal to operate this flight under any ICAO Annex 6 Part 1 compliance. This particular part is not recommended practice it happens to be a minimum standard. Para 4.3.6.3 doesn't allow you to be so criminally cavalier as this operation has been, nor does it allow the state to waive the rules if they are ICAO signatories.

These unfortunate passengers and hapless crew have been killed by the actions of the PIC and the dispatcher, and those others that facilitated this dispatch, and the operation of such a reckless program operating outside of the law.

peekay4

3rd Dec 2016, 22:04

Many of the other planes drop out of ADS-B receiver coverage from time to time and give jagged plots but it appears that they are holding at the VOR while LMI2933 is holding several miles south of the navaid.

Has anyone found other plots of the holding on other ADS-B trackers like RadarBox24 or FlightAware? Also, on the RJ85 are the nav instruments and computers updated with radio nav and maybe as Dave says, the transponder only sends inertial position? The holding pattern does look like it is nicely plotted, just not in the right place.

If these RJ85s are really transmitting at NUCp 0 data quality level as Dave says then forget about trying to match positions. NUCp 0 means the position error could be greater than 10 nm.

Garbage In, Garbage Out. All that can be determined from the data is that the aircraft was somewhere within the vicinity of the VOR.

archae86

3rd Dec 2016, 22:08

Is anyone else finding it really hard to believe why a professional pilot with some degree of experience would be happy flying to an aerodrome and arriving with approx 7 minutes of fuel until engines stop working at night?

I'm not a pilot, but spent years in responsible positions in very high-value, high-technology factories. A lesson there is that maintenance of even the most critically important equipment was less likely to be successful for aspects of operation not having any impact in normal circumstances.

Obviously normal fleet operation does not involve frequent exploration of the zero-fuel end of fuel-state operations. I wonder whether there are plausible failure modes which might have introduced a modest zero-offset in the fuel readout of this aircraft, and whether (possibly slopply) maintenance and normal operational experience might have left that error in place for weeks.

If such an error was already in place on previous excessive range flights, all concerned might not have detected just how close those flights came to exhaustion. If the error was in place on this flight, alerts and indications may have come later than people posting on this thread are assuming.

Since normal operations seem unlikely to verify the zero-fuel readout point directly, what special procedure or maintenance is done which would catch such an error? How frequently?

None of which is in any way to suggest such an error as a primary cause here, but specifically a possible explanation to some of the late-stage lack of urgency.

dmba

3rd Dec 2016, 22:08

Am I wrong to say that this could have all been avoided if Celia had not permitted the flight to take off without raising the issues further instead of backing down...where does the buck stop? Aren't these systems in place to avoid this kind of thing?

Livesinafield

3rd Dec 2016, 22:10

I dont think Celia had the power to do that

dmba

3rd Dec 2016, 22:12

It just seems to me that if one side is going to back down it shouldn't the one who has discovered the irregularity.

tdracer

3rd Dec 2016, 22:13

References to the "Swiss Cheese" model for this accident are misplaced. This wasn't a case of the 'holes lining up' - the holes were aligned before this aircraft ever left the ground when they dispatched with insufficient fuel. This was a case of playing Russian Roulette with the lives of over 70 people, further magnified by the flight crews apparent reluctance to admit what they'd done and declare a fuel emergency as soon as they were directed to hold. If they did indeed do this previously and got away with it, it was simply dumb luck - the bullet wasn't in the chamber that time.+
Those responsible (that didn't perish in the crash) should go to prison for a very long time.

testpanel

3rd Dec 2016, 22:55

archae86:

I'm not a pilot, but spent years in responsible positions in very high-value, high-technology factories. A lesson there is that maintenance of even the most critically important equipment was less likely to be successful for aspects of operation not having any impact in normal circumstances.

Obviously normal fleet operation does not involve frequent exploration of the zero-fuel end of fuel-state operations. I wonder whether there are plausible failure modes which might have introduced a modest zero-offset in the fuel readout of this aircraft, and whether (possibly slopply) maintenance and normal operational experience might have left that error in place for weeks.

If such an error was already in place on previous excessive range flights, all concerned might not have detected just how close those flights came to exhaustion. If the error was in place on this flight, alerts and indications may have come later than people posting on this thread are assuming.

Since normal operations seem unlikely to verify the zero-fuel readout point directly, what special procedure or maintenance is done which would catch such an error? How frequently?

I think i understand you, as electronic engineer and now an airline pilot, having flown both small props, turboprops, medium jets and now heavy jets.

Problem is (and always will be) the human being.

There are numerous procedures in place to operate/maintain and dispatch a(ny) commercial airplane.

(just try to imagine how can boeing/airbus/embraer/bombardier/fokker/atr etc etc sell aircraft all over the world)

All those manufacturers need to sell airplanes and make sure, south-americans, african, asian, european even american companies and pilots know how to operate those airplanes.

So, to prevent major court cases and lawyers at work, 99,9% is all written down.

Problem is how any company and/or pilot or crew is implementing it all.
Family-life, finances, kids, company-future, fatigue, rank, knowledge, pressure (or delays), etc etc

Inop fuel-gauges, instruments, sensors etc etc may be in the MEL.
(manufacturers make this very clear) problem may be how the company or engineer(s) or the pilot(s) comply with it.

tdracer:
References to the "Swiss Cheese" model for this accident are misplaced. This wasn't a case of the 'holes lining up' - the holes were aligned before this aircraft ever left the ground when they dispatched with insufficient fuel.

First of all you are contradicting yourself.
How can you explain "this wasn't a case of the holes lining up vs the holes were aligned ?

FYI the famous cheese model can start everywhere, from waking-up, entering head-quartars, meeting with the CEO/owner/engineer/cleaner/cabin-crew/refueler/first-officer/captain/ATC etc etc.....

jack11111

3rd Dec 2016, 22:57

Previous uplift tickets for fill-ups will reveal how many times they pulled this malfeasance.

paperHanger

3rd Dec 2016, 23:13

"This was a case of playing Russian Roulette with the lives of over 70 people"

Not really Russian Roulette. Even the crazy Russians only play that game with one live round out of 6, this game was played with all 6 chambers loaded ...

AtomKraft

3rd Dec 2016, 23:55

In addition to what appears to be crazy or non-existent flight planning, there comes the issue of what to do when it all goes quiet......and dark, as it surely will when the motion lotion has been consumed.

When I was trained on the RJ- (thanks Dai), we explored this in the sim. First time, even though I could see the field, I just had no idea how much height I needed or how far the thing would glide with the height we had. As a result one made a spectacular cock of the exercise arriving over the threshold way too high and fast to land.

But, having seen how the thing glided (MUCH better than I expected), and how fast to fly it, the re-run was quite straightforward.

I wonder if these guys had the benefit of such thorough training? It would be a jolly talented pilot who could pull off a deadsticker in the RJ without a little practice...

TowerDog

3rd Dec 2016, 23:56

. These unfortunate passengers and hapless crew have been killed by the actions of the PIC and the dispatcher, and those others that facilitated this dispatch, and the operation of such a reckless program operating outside of the law.

Did they even have a dispatcher.?
That position was put in place as a quality control to make sure us pilots would not do stupid sh!t like taking off without required fuel.

Airbubba

4th Dec 2016, 00:20

If these RJ85s are really transmitting at NUCp 0 data quality level as Dave says then forget about trying to match positions. NUCp 0 means the position error could be greater than 10 nm.

I think Dave is saying that the NUCp is set to zero because the RJ85 ADS-B installation is not compliant with the local regulations even though its accuracy may be much better than 10 nm.

For example, in Australia:

It is critical that aircraft only transmit ADS-B from approved equipment configurations. Transmissions from unapproved equipment configurations could mislead aircraft with ADS-B IN capabilities and could also mislead ATC.

It is the responsibility of aircraft owners and operators to ensure that their aircraft comply with the related CASA regulations.

The relevant CASA regulations have been in place for some years, and say :

“If an aircraft carries ADS-B transmitting equipment which does not comply with an approved equipment configuration, the aircraft must not fly in Australian territory unless the equipment is

(a) deactivated; or

(b) set to transmit only a value of zero for the NUCp or NIC.”

Mandate to deactivate some ADS-B transmissions | Airservices (http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/projects/ads-b/ads-b-transmissions/)

tdracer

4th Dec 2016, 00:45

Testpanel
To be a little more clear, the 'Swiss cheese' model assumes several random events occur in such a way that the 'holes' in the system align. That's not applicable when the holes are lined up by deliberate acts prior to dispatch. When it's done by a deliberate act (or combination of acts) it's no longer the Swiss cheese model since it's not random - it's simply gambling.

9 lives

4th Dec 2016, 02:12

I'm not defending the pilot's actions, or what I view as egregious poor fuel planning, but as for the 4:22 in two places in the flight plan, that could just be a brain fart. I've been know to transpose numbers, this could be just that. I agree, I would never state my endurance to precision greater than half an hour.

But, as a pilot, I'm still offended by this pilot, and co pilot, that they would fuel plan so poorly, perhaps to the point of violating the regulations requiring fuel reserves.

cats_five

4th Dec 2016, 02:29

TowerDog

4th Dec 2016, 03:13

. I'm not defending the pilot's actions, or what I view as egregious poor fuel planning, but as for the 4:22 in two places in the flight plan, that could just be a brain fart. I've been know to transpose numbers, this could be just that. I agree, I would never state my endurance to precision greater than half an hour.

But, as a pilot, I'm still offended by this pilot, and co pilot, that they would fuel plan so poorly, perhaps to the point of violating the regulations requiring fuel reserves.

Just a brain fart on the flight plan?
Obviously not as they did not land safely with :45 minutes in the tanks.
The numbers Captain Einstein put down was the real deal, and he proved it.

Perhaps to the point of violating the regulations?
I would scratch perhaps and insert obviously.

HighAndFlighty

4th Dec 2016, 04:11

A lot of people have clearly not bothered to read the thread. I'll just repost earlier contributions from HDP (post #320) and Pseudo Pro (post #329) here.

From HDP - the original flight plan lodged at Santa Cruz, and the accompanying note from Celia Castedo Monasterio, who reluctantly accepted (but did not approve) it.

http://www.pprune.org/<a href=http://s287.photobucket.com/user/Abacus9999/media/Pprune/informe-de-aasana-y-foto-de-la-hoja-de-ruta-de-lamia-1-638.jpg.html target=_blank>[IMG]http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/Abacus9999/Pprune/informe-de-aasana-y-foto-de-la-hoja-de-ruta-de-lamia-1-638.jpghttp://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/Abacus9999/Pprune/informe-de-aasana-y-foto-de-la-hoja-de-ruta-de-lamia-1-638.jpg

http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/Abacus9999/Pprune/por-5-observaciones-avin-de-lamia-no-deba-volar-1-638.jpg

From Pseudo Pro - the translation of Celia's note.

Subject: Notification about received FPL LMI2399

I inform that in date 2111162010 [note: ddmmyyhhmm] Mr. Alex Quispe (+), Lamia's Dispatcher, presented himself to the OF. ARO-AIS/SLVR presenting the Flight Plan FM/SLVR TO/SKRG (Rio Negro, Colombia).

I stated 5 observations about the FPL (NO ERRORS IN THE FLIGHT PLAN):

1. SID - Not provided.
ANSWER: DISPATCHER: Please, Mrs., add NOMAJ DCT VIR. (Didn't do that, asking to request at TWR).

2. ALTN AD: I pointed several times and asked to add another one (there's just one ALTN, SKBO)
ANSWER: DISPATCHER: This is what the Captain told me. Please leave it as is, Mrs. Celia

3. AUTONOMY: (EET same as Autonomy)
ANSWER: DISPATCHER: This is it, this is what they and Captain told me.
ANSWER: ESP. ARO-AIS: This is not right, please check it throughly and update the flight plan.
ANSWER: DISPATCHER: These are the data, Mrs. Celia, these are the data that I was given for the FPL.
ANSWER: ESP. ARO-AIS: But the EET and Autonomy are just the same, you have mistaken it and you don't want to change it
ANSWER: DISPATCHER: No, Mrs. Celia. This is the autonomy that I was given, it is good enough.
ANSWER: ESP. ARO-AIS: No, because this the same as EET.
ANSWER: DISPATCHER: Yes, this is it as we filed, we will fly in less time, don't worry. This is it. Keep calm, this is fine. Leave it the way it is.
ANSWER: ESP. ARO-AIS: No longer insists, given the dispatcher's obstinacy.

4 - Dispatcher's name (just the signature)
ANSWER: DISPATCHER: Ah, yea, but here is my licence number.

- After these and other observations, the dispatcher was gone, pointing that, yes; there were due changes in the FPL, specially these 2 OBS (ALTN and AUT) and bring me another FPL when coming back to check the AIS MET and NOTAM information
- He was back after aprox. 30 minutes collecting the flight information (MET-ARO AIS) and sustained that everything was just the same and there was no other changes in the FPL.
Given that answer, I expressed my discomfort stating that several times the dispatchers does not takes our observations seriously.

NOTE:
FYI, there were at work:
MET Circuitry: Mr. Javier Gunter
COM Circuitry: Mr. Roger Roca.

Celia Castedo Monasterio

truckflyer

4th Dec 2016, 05:04

With the "facts" that have been leaked and "facts" that we understand to be true, and specially the ATC recording.

There is a couple of points, I normally don't like to jump to conclusions, however this accident it's looking pretty slam dunk.

A Captain, with clearly conflict of interest, money vs safety!

But for me it's an accident that makes me angry, because this is not an "accident" in terms of the definition of the word in traditional sense.

Accident = "an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury."

If the Flight Plan is correct, 4:22 / 4:22, in addition to the fact that the crew never seemed to have declared a Mayday - it's seems that this word Mayday has been omitted from many accidents I have read about, there seems to be a fear amongst some to use this word, most likely due to the potential paper-work and repercussions that follows after.

It seems rather they take the chance to end up dead, then utter this Universal ICAO emergency word, MayDay.

However I am in no doubt, this is the first time in a long time I have come to the conclusion that heads must role, and a few people have to be sent to 20 - 30 years in Brazilian / Bolivian prison, because this is a criminal act, and most likely it has been a culture of circumventing normal laws and regulations regarding fuel policy.

This is not accident, but a criminal act, that was made to save money, and sooner or later this would be the result, it's Murphy's Law!

I feel deeply sadden by these innocent young people who was murdered! They played Russian roulette, however in reverse style, there was only one chamber without a bullet, and this time the company ran out of luck.

HighAndFlighty

4th Dec 2016, 05:12

@truckflyer

I don't know whose heads you would have roll. It seems all the active participants went down with the aircraft.

surplus1

4th Dec 2016, 05:14

http://www.ifalpa.org/downloads/Level1/Briefing%20Leaflets/Air%20Traffic%20Services/13ATSBL01%20-%20ICAO%20changes%20for%20minimum%20and%20emergency%20fuel.p df

Thank you for posting that Douglas, it may help to clarify procedures for many in this thread.

However, in the real world of LaMia2933 it would not have been helpful.

1. I doubt they belong to any IFALPA outfit and therefore, even though the bulletin is 4 years old, they would never have seen it. And, if by some chance they did see it, they would have ignored it -- just as they chose to ignore all of the pertinent regulations governing required fuel. Not by accident or human error - intentionally.

2. With respect to the specific accident [LaMia2933] - calling MAYDAY when you know you will go into your "reserve" fuel is a moot point.

3. Shortly before departure the LaMia Dispatcher took the Flight Plan to the airport office that accepts flight plans. The worker charged with recieving the FPL told the dispatcher that the flight plan was unacceptable because the aircrafts endurance and the estimated time enroute were identical. The dispatcher told her not to worry they would make it in less time. She told him he would have to recalculate and change the flight plan. Thirty minutes later the dispatcher came back for the weather. The worker again asked for the revised FPL. The dispatcher said that was the information he was given and approved by the Captain. There would be no changes to the FPL. She refused to approve it . She told him he would have to get approval from the TWR [which he obviously did. The dispatcher also refused to list his name on the FPL but did sign it and wrote his license # in the space provided. BOG was listed on the FPL as the Alternate but based on the FPL there was no fuel to get there and no reserve fuel. That information is in writing and I have seen pictures of the actual FPL.

The operator in the flight plan office wrote an electronic memo to her supervisor outlining the incident and conversation with the dispatcher and stating her reasons for rejecting the FPL. I have also seen a photo of her memo.

Now that takes cojones on the part of the dispatcher and the Captain. That's the first time I have ever seen a Flight Plan on which the aircraft's endurance and the time enroute were the same - in writing and signed. I'm retired now but I drove commercial airliners for 40 years before retiring. That's incredible, but it is also true. I can't believe it But, I've seen the actual documents. They knew exactly what they were doing and just didn't give a damn. IMO, that is MORE than negligence, it is indicative of criminal intent. This flight plan was NOT transmitted, it was delivered, in person by the dispatcher and he was advised, in person, of the errors. Blatant disregard of the law and of safety.

There is not human error here, it was intentional. Totally irresponsible and 71 people, including this so-called captain, are now dead because of it.

It is pretty obvious that this flight would have had to call MAYDAY... during taxi and PRIOR to departure at the airport of origin in Bolivia. There was NEVER any Alternate or Reserve fuel in the tanks to begin with and only enough fuel, full tanks, to just reach Medellin with about 10 minutes left until flameout [B]IF EVERYTHINGwent perfectlyenroute, i.e., no contingency fuel, no alternate fuel and no reserve fuel.. Something as small as being unable to get the requested FL could have caused fuel exhaustion before reaching the Medellin area. And, he didn't have the chance of a snowball in hell of reaching the filed Alternate.

They did NOT have an electrical emergency. The generators always stop running when the engines fail due to fuel exhaustion.

I've never written anything like this before and pray that I never will again but, IMHO, this was no "accident". The pilot in command made 3 very deliberate decisions that resulted in this crash.

A. He elected to depart with insufficient fuel to legally complete the intended flight legally and he knew it before the fact.
B. He elected to overfly Bogota where he could easily have refueled and thereby avoided this planned disaster.
C. He intentionally departed on a flight with the full knowledge that his planned time enroute was equal exactly to the aircraft's maximum endurance.

They also chose to ignore the warning lights on the annunciator panel that come on when fuel in the individual feeder tanks come on - all 4 of them. They mean that there is 23 minutes of operation remaining before the respective engines flame out. IF they had declared an emergency when those low-fuel lights came on they'd probably all be alive today. When impact ocurred, they were only about 8 miles from the airport.

That is not an accident. It is much more like a mass-murder/suicide. Very harsh words I know, but the evidence will substantiate it. I'm so angry I could scream!:mad::mad:

AtomKraft

4th Dec 2016, 06:09

Indeed.
Had this Captain survived the flight, I've no idea what possible justification he could have provided to the accident investigators.

I think that macho culture, found so often in Latin America, played a part in this tragedy. Certainly all the factors seem to be in place....

truckflyer

4th Dec 2016, 06:17

100% agree Surplus.

And I believe this "Ops Procedures" probably been going for some time, I doubt this was the first time.

This is not just about the Captain, but the culture within this company and how they operated. And the handling of this with regards dispatcher and other staff connected to this tragedy.
The Captain had ample time to divert enroute, and the last dice he could have declared an emergency before entering the hold.

His fuel alarms would have been going off long before he first announced any kind of emergency scenario, but he didn't tell anybody until his engines started cutting out, creating his electrical problems. The only chance he, (and more importantly, his passengers and crew), had, was if he announced his emergency fuel state BEFORE he accepted a hold clearance. Then, they may have had the time to clear him for a straight in.

CONMEBOL, the South American football confederation, reportedly had endorsed LAMIA as its recommended charter carrier.

Those of us whose memories go back even a few months are aware that countless CONMEBOL officials have been arrested, extradited to the USA and charged with RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations) offences.

All of this raises the issue as to what had led CONMEBOL to make LAMIA its preferred carrier.

Additionally, the other flight of lengthy distance that the carrier recently undertook non-stop as mentioned on this thread was Buenos Aires to Belo Horizonte, which clearly was the recent CONMEBOL World Cup qualifier.

It makes me wonder what inducements may have been involved for both CONMEBOL and the clubs and federations which used this carrier. And whether fictitious fuel stops were a common practice.

A0283

4th Dec 2016, 06:27

You would hope that the safety investigation will ultimately have a scope that goes far beyond a captain/co-owner apparently 'taking' a series of 'amazing' decisions.

MungoP

4th Dec 2016, 06:28

The reluctance to declare a fuel emergency or call a MAYDAY isn't simply the issue of paperwork..
Declaring a fuel emergency will result in an enquiry that under circumstances such as these is likely to reflect badly on the captain's decision making and result in a blemish on the pilot's record that will affect his future employment prospects with a major airline, or even threaten his current employment status.

This threat combined with what psychiatrists term 'cognitive dissonance', (the unwillingness to accept what's happening) results in an extremely strong reluctance to act rationally to a set of circumstances.

Many pilots reading of these events would be surprised at how susceptible they themselves might be to these pressures even had they'd not felt themselves guilty of any rash or imprudent actions during the flight planning stage.

deefer dog

4th Dec 2016, 07:11

Surplus, if I may;

That information is in writing and I have seen pictures of the actual FPL.

You believe you have.

I have also seen a photo of her memo.

You have seen an untimed memo that you believe was written by the operator in the flight plan office.

Now that takes cojones on the part of the dispatcher and the Captain. That's the first time I have ever seen a Flight Plan on which the aircraft's endurance and the time enroute were the same - in writing and signed. I'm retired now but I drove commercial airliners for 40 years before retiring. That's incredible, but it is also true. I can't believe it But, I've seen the actual documents.

Leaving aside your repeated belief that you have seen the actual documents, doesn't your observation that you have never in 40 years seen a flight plan quite like this one strike you as odd? Surely only an idiot would advertise in advance that they were about to conduct a flight with zero fuel reserves and only one alternate?

If any pilot fudges anything, be it fuel, duty times or an MEL item, they make every effort to ensure that the paperwork looks straight. I would be astounded if the Captain authorized the figures on the flight plan we have seen, and agree that some other more junior person might have been trying to highlight a problem that they may have had difficulty in voicing.

thcrozier

4th Dec 2016, 07:17

The translation or interpretation at 602 is debatable. A few, but certainly not all points:

I'll try to translate literally to demonstrate how hard it is to convey meaning from one language to another.

"No señora Celia, esa autonomía me han dado, nos alcanza bien."

"No Mrs. Celia, that autonomy they (who is they?) have given me, it fits us (who exactly is us?) (could mean it fits our plans, or we can fit our flight time within that time envelope) well."

"Ya no insiste mas al ver la terquedad del despachador."

I think this is a typo and she may have said "...no insistí mas..." I didn't insist more."

So: "At that point I didn't insist more upon seeing the (obstinacy, stubbornness, intransigence) of the dispatcher."

Almost every sentence has such ambiguities, but the gist remains the same. She argued with the dispatcher but ultimately gave up, presumably because she felt he had more authority than she did.

Pero al fin fue el despachador que se turqueó.

Mozella

4th Dec 2016, 07:28

......... snip............
Many pilots reading of these events would be surprised at how susceptible they themselves might be to these pressures even had they'd not felt themselves guilty of any rash or imprudent actions during the flight planning stage.
No doubt, but "many" pilots certainly aren't "all" pilots. Any military or professional pilot has occasionally been subject to pressures to do something which was close to being sketchy or, in some cases, downright dangerous/illegal/stupid. Furthermore, it's not always clear just how close you might be to doing something imprudent.

In those cases I always asked myself how comfortable I would feel when I was either on a judicial witness stand or appearing before a board of inquiry where you are seated at one end of a long table with a group of your superiors are seated at the other end and all the ash trays are on their end.

If my hypothetical story was going to cause me me squirm, lie, be embarrassed, or otherwise feel uncomfortable while I was trying to explain myself, then I was pretty sure the proposed course of action was unwise; go to plan B. This worked for me for over 40 years of professional flying.

Perhaps the captain in this instance should have asked himself how comfortable he would be explaining that his en-route fuel burn was the same as his fuel on board at take off............. oops.

tdracer

4th Dec 2016, 07:46

AtomKraft

4th Dec 2016, 07:54

I think the reason that both numbers (elapsed time/ endurance) were the same, is because the elapsed time on the route was expected to be 4:22. There's not really much you can do to 'sharp pencil' that.

The aircraft on the other hand, would have had a number for endurance (don't forget, this a/c was full of fuel and nearly maxxed out pax wise, so real heavy) of less than 4:22

So they increased the 'endurance' number so as it would not be less than the 'elapsed' number.

I don't remember too much about the RJ limitations now, but can you fill it right up with fuel and then add 81 bods?

Must have been mighty near MTOW

MungoP

4th Dec 2016, 08:09

TD Tracer

I'm not in any way defending these irrational actions merely pointing out that they are known to be a factor in some accidents and incidents. We're dealing with fallible human beings. If we can bring peoples' attention to these events then it's the first stage in learning to recognise them in ourselves and guarding against them.

dsc810

4th Dec 2016, 08:13

@TDracer
Had he declared a Mayday then the resulting investigation would have had far worse consequences than post @MungoP suggests
They would have slung in jail the next day the company ceasing and the possibility that during the investigation various other "activities" might have come to light. All of this may have led to him suffering what might be termed an "accident" while in jail.

So I can see a situation here where the options for him might have been:
1. Carry on and hope he gets away with it on the basis that it won't happen to him.
2. Declare an emergency and then the sh*t would really hit the fan for certain.

So he simply cannot declare a Mayday due to the perceived consequences - until of course the whole thing collapses, it is too late the fuel has run out and the panic takes over.

dmba

4th Dec 2016, 08:19

It would be interesting if they would kindly post images of previous flight plans. If they had "got away with it" before, then would they not have been repeating their process this time and submitting the flight plan in a similar fashion?

Isn't it important to consider that the Celia is still alive to give "evidence" whereas Alex Quispe is dead. He is therefore not able to give any response to what is being quoted as his words. Isn't it convenient that the documents released would appear to place the blame on somebody who cannot give their side of the story?

An official investigation has reportedly been initiated against Celia, who is accused negligence, failing to fulfil her duties. The images of the flight plan were leaked by who exactly?

surplus1

4th Dec 2016, 08:23

Surplus, if I may; By all means you most certainly may.

You believe you have.
You are correct, I do "believe" that I've seen a photo copy of the actual FP complete with dated seal. I can't think of why or who might go to the trouble of faking it, or what might be the motivation.

You have seen an untimed memo that you believe was written by the operator in the flight plan office.

The header of Celia's alleged memos is missing so, we don't know to whom it was addressed. However it is both dated and timed as 291650. The language and style of the memo is, IMO, typical of what someone in that position might be expected to use. Someone attempting to create such a phony memo is highly likely to be much more articulate and grammatically correct than Celia was. BTW, for what it's worth I am fluent in the Spanish language so I did not need a translator and was able to pick up on the nuances. I do believe that the photocopy of the document is genuine.

Leaving aside your repeated belief that you have seen the actual documents, doesn't your observation that you have never in 40 years seen a flight plan quite like this one strike you as odd? Surely only an idiot would advertise in advance that they were about to conduct a flight with zero fuel reserves and only one alternate?
BTW, unless the weather is really crappy two alternates are not required. Celia blew that part.

Yes, it does strike me as very odd - another reason I believe the documents are genuine. Only an idiot would plan a flight and depart with inadequate fuel to reliably reach the destination, let alone meet the legal requirements. What you had in the left seat of that airplane is exactly that: The Village Idiot!

The level of arrogance and imagined impunity overall of the pilot, who has flown this same route at least twice previously with insufficient fuel (and god knows how many others pushing the limits) and gotten away with it, is typical of a teenager who blithely texts on his smart phone while driving at 70 mph on a two-lane country road is both (but for that damned tree) fat, dumb and happy.

Running out of gas happens to other pilots but not to him. So, don't worry, be happy. The local Top Gun is in town.

If any pilot fudges anything, be it fuel, duty times or an MEL item, they make every effort to ensure that the paperwork looks straight. I would be astounded if the Captain authorized the figures on the flight plan we have seen, and agree that some other more junior person might have been trying to highlight a problem that they may have had difficulty in voicing.
There you go again, assuming that this fellow is concerned about what looks straight and what doesn't. He's not in the least bit concerned about that. In fact the flight plan may even serve as proof of his exceptional skill level. Our "Ace" will go anywhere with less fuel than required but never without paperwork, the content of which HE and HE ALONE dictates. What really matters is that "Official Seal" in the lower right hand corner.

The junior person in the equation is none other that the so-called Dispatcher. He has a license for effect but he's really just the captain's errand boy. He fills out the paper work as instructed by the "Capi" [which is what he told Celia], delivers it to the office and comes back with the weather info - which our astronaut sticks wherever it fits and ignores. What does it matter what the weather says, do you really think he's going to cancel the flight for that?

lemme

4th Dec 2016, 08:31

I have plotted the ADS-B data from flightradar and associated all tech data I could find. Conclusions are that the Fuel Lo Level warning would have been raised at least 150 km from SKRG. The outbound turn on the second holding circuit crossed the line of any hope. The captain pit the airplane into landing configuration just after starting to descend from the holding pattern, which crippled their glide ratio.

Happy for any corrections or suggestions. Main effort is to show how useful ADS-B can be for accident investigation. Read the report knowing the data is limited and that there are many other aspects to analyze in the official investigation.

Satcom Guru: LMI2933 LAMIA AVRO RJ85 Medellín Deadstick (http://www.satcom.guru/2016/12/lmi2933-lamia-avro-rj85-medellin.html)

pax2908

4th Dec 2016, 08:32

Should it not be made mandatory to call law enforcement when presented with such a flight plan? Same as when it is suspected that someone is under the influence [...]

noisytiger

4th Dec 2016, 08:40

IMHO the 'holes in the cheese' of this disaster were starting to line up way back when the Capt/Co-owner of Lamia, and probably others, started to be influenced by football money and privileges. The game causes corruption everywhere, least not in S America as has been documented recently. Why would any team heading for it's biggest occasion ever, use an airline with one operational, fairly aged aircraft? Whenever the company I worked for operated football charters, also using Avro RJs incidentally, the clubs, ok maybe more wealthy, would insist that a standby aircraft and crew were available. Or at the very least some slack in the program on that day incase everything went belly up. These trips are critical to the big teams. There was possibly a close connection between the owners/pilots and the club, a connection which may have over time, fundamentally altered the thinking and prioritisation of what was probably a safe operator in the past. Extreme reckless risky-shift tantamount to destructive addiction to wealth and ego-inflation. Selfishness beyond comprehension, combined with an associated mental illness? All my speculation of course.

I have to also say that I'm amazed such a slack system is in place , where a commercial aircraft can pull onto stand with fumes in the tanks and little else, and nobody raises an eyebrow. I'm assuming the reports are correct that they got away with this a few times before. In my company I seem to remember that if the engineer(s) receiving the aircraft saw less than a nominal reserve figure remaining on the gauges they would have to file an Air Safety Report or MOR . If memory serves me it was around 750kg on the RJ100.

If they (he?) did get away with dodging the bullet a few times prior to this awful event, then maybe an element of environmental capture was altering the thinking. 'This is how I've seen it before, this is how I will expect to see it today' When the expected turns into the unexpected, disbelief and shock can hinder clear thinking. Very sadly indeed.

cooperplace

4th Dec 2016, 09:33

Because getting killed in the resultant crash is so much better :ugh:
This literally falls into the Darwin Award category, unfortunately with a bunch of other victims.

I'm just a private pilot (but I do fuel planning every flight), so what would I know? But I think tdracer has very succinctly summed it up. Remember, this guy, we're told, owned the airline; he didn't have management pressuring HIM.

portmanteau

4th Dec 2016, 10:17

Not sure I buy all this " not declaring Mayday because of its consequences...." It seems nothing much happened to anybody when the same crime was committed before. It must have been known by numerous people including those refuelling the near empty tanks.

A0283

4th Dec 2016, 10:56

Update 2 - impact and break-up sequence based on publicly available photo and video material - status morning December 3rd.

The available material is limited and the quality if the photos is quite low. Video material is even more limited and of very low quality.

+
Identification

In the hollow. Identified components (high probability) are the almost complete right wing plus engine number3 (completely stripped of the cowling). A significant part of the left wing. The left hand aft pax door with 5 1/2 window in front of it. One other pax door. One engine nacelle.

On the high ridge. One elevator half. The tail-mounted-speedbrake plus part of the vertical tail.

At this moment in time no trace of the other 3 engines. No trace of the cockpit section. No trace of the forward fuselage section. No trace of avionics 'boxes'. Limited wiring.

Which means 3 of the 4 corners can be identified.

+

At this stage a very very premature guesstimate of a more probable impact and break-up sequence could be:

a. plane in a slightly pitch up attitude, pointing approximately in the direction of the VOR, at a relatively low forward speed,
b. hits the high ridge, which breaks off the tail section behind the aft pax door, and leaves the tail and elevator with the tailspeedbrake on top of the high ridge,
c. the front of the plane pitches forward and contacts trees and ground, which breaks off the cockpit section and fuselage section in front of the wing, the cockpit and front section (and maybe one or more engines) then sliding down the high ridge,
d. the center section plus wing plus aft section is projected forward and impacts the hill opposite (!??),
e. this impact breaks off the wing with part of the associated fuselage structure, wing plus flips over forward, the aft fuselage section continues the movement forward and slides over the wing and comes to a halt,

There are other possible sequences but with the material that i have this would be the most probable.

The question with this scenario is, how did anyone survive? At least two different answers might be applicable.
The first is - pure luck - there are a number of possible explanations that improve chances.
The second is - based on a maximum energy dissipation and lowest G's scenario - people sitting (probably on the left hand side) in the fuselage section aft of the wing and before the aft doorframe. Cabin crew having taken a passenger seat aft or in aft facing folding crew seat inclusive.

Finding photo's of the cockpit section would be priority1 if you would want to reduce the number of possible scenario's.

Uplinker

4th Dec 2016, 11:15

The reluctance to declare a fuel emergency or call a MAYDAY isn't simply the issue of paperwork..
Declaring a fuel emergency will result in an enquiry that under circumstances such as these is likely to reflect badly on the captain's decision making and result in a blemish on the pilot's record that will affect his future employment prospects with a major airline, or even threaten his current employment status.

Because getting killed in the resultant crash is so much better
This literally falls into the Darwin Award category, unfortunately with a bunch of other victims.

I agree.

I suspect he just carried on hoping - hoping - hoping he would make it. Pretty girl on the flight deck, doesn't want to lose face, hence the apparent calm and the 'senorita' used to address ATC.

Only when the engines started failing did he finally accept how deep into the shxt he had gone.

I just hope the XAA makes an urgent review of all flight planning by all airlines in their country after this ridiculous crash.

noflynomore

4th Dec 2016, 11:22

I can well imagine the despatcher trying to get numbers out of the Capt who was too busy whooping it up with the pax and not having time to give a proper answer. "Ah! Just use the figures we did last time!" or similar. And so the numbers just got made up. Or he simply dug out the previous plan and re-dated it. All perfectly feasible.

Speculation I know, but then all of this is as the protagonists are all dead bar the brave Celia.

Let's see the previous flight plans first and note the similarities.

Re the word "Autonomy". To avoid confusion could we please use normal English and refer to this correctly as "Endurance"? Autonomy is the sort of completely inappropriate but not quite completely incorrect word an autotranslator comes out with.
An aircraft's flight time available is called "Endurance". Everyone understands that word, because it conveys the correct meaning, autonomy has no such meaning - it means self-governing or independent operation. Plus it is never used in normal English.
Please?

Xeque

4th Dec 2016, 11:49

Cheapest bidder always wins.
The PIC was also the owner of the charter operation.
Chances are the rate that got them the job was on or below the red line.
He's going to do whatever he can to drag some kind of profit out of this charter.
The results we now know.
A few days ago 74 construction workers were killed in China. Same deal. The scaffolding contractor most likely got the job because he was the cheapest bidder.
71 passengers and crew are now dead for what could well be the same reason.
When will business learn that "the cheapest bidder" is never the right way to go?

Hippy

4th Dec 2016, 11:56

3. Shortly before departure the LaMia Dispatcher took the Flight Plan to the airport office that accepts flight plans. The worker charged with recieving the FPL told the dispatcher that the flight plan was unacceptable because the aircrafts endurance and the estimated time enroute were identical. The dispatcher told her not to worry they would make it in less time. She told him he would have to recalculate and change the flight plan. Thirty minutes later the dispatcher came back for the weather. The worker again asked for the revised FPL. The dispatcher said that was the information he was given and approved by the Captain. There would be no changes to the FPL. She refused to approve it . [B]She told him he would have to get approval from the TWR [which he obviously did. The dispatcher also refused to list his name on the FPL but did sign it and wrote his license # in the space provided. BOG was listed on the FPL as the Alternate but based on the FPL there was no fuel to get there and no reserve fuel. That information is in writing and I have seen pictures of the actual FPL.

When she told him he would have to get approval from the TWR she was referring to the fact that no Standard Instrument Departure (SID) had been filed and his request to 'Please, Mrs., add NOMAJ DCT VIR' (which makes no sense in itself - NOMAJ is not a reporting point that I know of, VIR is the radio becon on the airfield. Maybe 'Nomaj' needs translating from Spanish?) would have to be made to the TWR.
It's important to note that TWR would have had no indication of the fuel state of the aircraft or the discrepancy between EET & endurance. Whatever approval the flight got from the tower would only have concerned the initial departure proceedure.

RAT 5

4th Dec 2016, 12:23

Thanks Hippy: I was wondering the same; why did TWR give takeoff clearance? If the FPL office had advised the TWR of the situation then TWR could have held the a/c, yes/no?
Early on it was said that there was a company RHS pilot and the lady was an observer. There was even speculation the F/O was a captain. I think that has not been confirmed; nor any data about the F/O. Indeed their role in this event is not mentioned by anyone. Wanting to keep your job & wanting to stay alive are quite different. I thought S.Americans could be more assertive. We've seen this cockpit gradient problem in the Far East & SE Asia, but S.America? Mind you this one horse outfit might be the last chance for a co-jo. But what was the experience of the F/O? That must surely be known and become a factor in this discussion.
As for the dispatcher, who boarded the a/c, it's like loading the rifles of your own firing squad. Bizarre; or perhaps he had free tickets to the game.
No doubt there will be a local AAIB investigation and then a police criminal one. Follow the money. It would be no surprise to find a brown envelope link between Conmebol & LaMia.
CON ME BOL is an appropriate name, perhaps. A bit like one of Jasper Carrot's very early stories where he accepted a gig in Jersey with the flight paid for by 'Contours' only to find out it was only one way.

truckflyer

4th Dec 2016, 12:49

When the Captain in the LHS is the company owner, the gradient between him and the rest of the crew is massive, it's not a normal Captain / FO relation.

In this case the Captain had most likely a lot to gain financially from pressing the endurance to the maximum. Being Captain and owner, he is basically giving you your job, paying your salary etc.

So go figure about the massive gradient on the flight deck, very unhealthy indeed. Massive conflict of interest.

evansb

4th Dec 2016, 13:47

Fuel exhaustion/starvation is not unknown amongst airline transport category aircraft. Recall Air Canada's 767 gliding in to Gimli. Air Transat's Airbus gliding in to the Azores. United's DC-8 near PDX. Avianca's 707 near JFK..Lynard Skynard's Convair 240 fuex...the list goes on and on..nuff said.

patowalker

4th Dec 2016, 14:27

Maybe 'Nomaj' needs translating from Spanish?)

It is not NOMAJ at all. Celia misspelt NOMAS, literally "no more". In this case, the free translation is "Please Mrs, (you) just put in DCT VIR"

cappt

4th Dec 2016, 14:39

A0283

At this stage a very very premature guesstimate of a more probable impact and break-up sequence could be:

a. plane in a slightly pitch up attitude, pointing approximately in the direction of the VOR, at a relatively low forward speed,
b. hits the high ridge, which breaks off the tail section behind the aft pax door, and leaves the tail and elevator with the tailspeedbrake on top of the high ridge,
c. the front of the plane pitches forward and contacts trees and ground, which breaks off the cockpit section and fuselage section in front of the wing, the cockpit and front section (and maybe one or more engines) then sliding down the high ridge,
d. the center section plus wing plus aft section is projected forward and impacts the hill opposite (!??),
e. this impact breaks off the wing with part of the associated fuselage structure, wing plus flips over forward, the aft fuselage section continues the movement forward and slides over the wing and comes to a halt,

There are other possible sequences but with the material that i have this would be the most probable.

The question with this scenario is, how did anyone survive? At least two different answers might be applicable.
The first is - pure luck - there are a number of possible explanations that improve chances.
The second is - based on a maximum energy dissipation and lowest G's scenario - people sitting (probably on the left hand side) in the fuselage section aft of the wing and before the aft doorframe. Cabin crew having taken a passenger seat aft or in aft facing folding crew seat inclusive.

Finding photo's of the cockpit section would be priority1 if you would want to reduce the number of possible scenario's.

I reached a similar conclusion, I had imagined that the survivors had spilled out of the broken off aft section. If reports of the first responders are accurate the surviving F/A Ximena was found somewhere near the wreckage.
It also was reported it was approximately four hours before the first responders reached the scene.

Davidsa

4th Dec 2016, 14:44

Re Hippy's post no 634, I would guess that "NOMAJ" is a typo for "NOMAS".

"DCT" could be "directo", so when Sra Celia pointed out that the SID was missing he replied "please put it in yourself, madam, as [no more than/ just/simply] direct (to) VIR".

She refused , telling him to get the clearance by radio on the tower frequency.

("No mas" or "nomas" occurs several times in the document. It is a very commonly used phrase in Bolivian spoken Spanish meaning, usually, "no more", and is something of a verbal "tic". Among Paceños there are other nuances).

I understood from earlier messages that the founders of LaMia, and the now deceased Captains, were/are retired Air Force Generals, so the "Command Gradient" would have been particularly steep, both in the air and on the ground.

Poor Celia would have been exposed to Quispe's "machismo" as well.

(Many years ago I spent a couple of years teaching Science in Bolivia and have visited the country several times since. I have no flying qualifications).

broadreach

4th Dec 2016, 14:45

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a237/broadreach/1480643272870.jpg (http://s12.photobucket.com/user/broadreach/media/1480643272870.jpg.html)

O Estado de Sao Paulo claims to have analysed all the accident aircraft’s flights registered on Flightradar24 since 31 Jan 2016, during which time the aircraft made 201 flights.
22 Aug 2016 Medellin>/Santa Cruz de la Sierra 2,975km 4h28m
28 Oct 2016 Cochabamba>Medellin 2.816km 4h27m
29 Oct 2016 Medellin>Santa Cruz de la Sierra 2,975km 4h32m
04 Nov 2016 Medellin>Santa Cruz de la Sierra 2,975km 4h33m
In early November the aircraft carried the Argentine squad from Buenos Aires to Belo Horizonte and back for a game against Brazil, 2,217km. The flight north took 4h4m and the return, 3h29m.

"Normalisation of deviance" indeed.

pax2908

4th Dec 2016, 15:06

"WRZ" comes to mind

Joejosh999

4th Dec 2016, 15:45

I'm interested in how many people outside immediate Crew might know of Lamia's apparent habit of flying beyond fuel reserve limits. We've learned of the SCruz ARO Miss Celia....
But I'd also seen a comment about a Bolivian hangar tech or mgr complaining about their flights arriving w near dry tanks.
It seems these are the types of people who would indeed have knowledge.

Do we have any links for those hangar-guy complaints?

Hippy

4th Dec 2016, 15:47

Re Hippy's post no 634, I would guess that "NOMAJ" is a typo for "NOMAS".

"DCT" could be "directo", so when Sra Celia pointed out that the SID was missing he replied "please put it in yourself, madam, as [no more than/ just/simply] direct (to) VIR".

("No mas" or "nomas" occurs several times in the document. It is a very commonly used phrase in Bolivian spoken Spanish meaning, usually, "no more", and is something of a verbal "tic". Among Paceños there are other nuances).

Thanks David, that indeed does make sense. DCT is indeed aviation shorthand for 'direct to'. The reluctance to file a published SID adds to the theory that the captain knew he would be landing with near zero fuel.

Joejosh999

4th Dec 2016, 15:50

And has there been word re CVR/FDR are readable?
They looked nearly pristine.....

dmba

4th Dec 2016, 16:04

Apparently being sent to/analysed in UK

DaveReidUK

4th Dec 2016, 16:10

They were due to be sent to the UK AAIB at Farnborough for analysis.

But protocol dictates that any announcement re the findings should come from the Colombian Grupo Investigación de Accidentes.

patowalker

4th Dec 2016, 16:21

O Estado de Sao Paulo claims to have analysed all the accident aircraft’s flights registered on Flightradar24 since 31 Jan 2016, during which time the aircraft made 201 flights.
22 Aug 2016 Medellin>/Santa Cruz de la Sierra 2,975km 4h28m
28 Oct 2016 Cochabamba>Medellin 2.816km 4h27m
29 Oct 2016 Medellin>Santa Cruz de la Sierra 2,975km 4h32m
04 Nov 2016 Medellin>Santa Cruz de la Sierra 2,975km 4h33m
In early November the aircraft carried the Argentine squad from Buenos Aires to Belo Horizonte and back for a game against Brazil, 2,217km. The flight north took 4h4m and the return, 3h29m

I would take that with a pinch of salt. The flight on 22 August is reported to have departed Santa Cruz at 8h37 and landed exactly an hour and a half later at Cobijas, presumably for fuel.

RAT 5

4th Dec 2016, 16:31

But I'd also seen a comment about a Bolivian hangar tech or mgr complaining about their flights arriving w near dry tanks.
It seems these are the types of people who would indeed have knowledge.

Tech log pages, fuel uplift dockets and fuel invoices on file. Should be a strong paper trail for the CAA.

RoyHudd

4th Dec 2016, 17:15

There is usually a lot of water residue in the tanks; it is never a good idea to fly on low fuel anyhow. My guess is that Lamia never drained their tanks routinely. That would be good engineering practice, so unlikely to have been performed with this company.

As for the clown in charge of this flight, and his actions, words fail me.

But to balance the anti-South American comments made here, I know of at least one very senior British training captain who routinely browbeat inexperienced FO's into operating with fuel well below plog. (Including myself, once, 11 years back). And this idiot was not even management, simply obsessed. Thankfully he retired recently. The mania for fuel savings and time saving can exist everywhere. It has no place in safe aviation.

broadreach

4th Dec 2016, 17:19

Patowalker

Agree with the pinch of salt, ergo "...claims...". And I've not seen any other research which might confirm or dispute the OESP claim. On the face of it, if it's true that LaMia conducted four flights between Medellin (Rio Negro) and Santa Cruz de la Sierra or Cochabamba in the recent past, might one not think the LaMia pilots had discovered a neat way around the rules, considering they had a man in place in the Bolivian equivalent of FAA?

The broad brush is pretty clear as to what happened; details will be forthcoming in the days, weeks, months ahead. Doubt any could be more shocking than what we've heard already.

patowalker

4th Dec 2016, 17:36

Sin comentario.

Cobija recibe a su piloto como héroe y en Santa Cruz la congoja se apodera de Viru Viru | Diario Correo del Sur: Noticias de Sucre, Bolivia y el Mundo (http://correodelsur.com/seguridad/20161202_cobija-recibe-a-su-piloto-como-heroe-y-en-santa-cruz-la-congoja-se-apodera-de-viru-viru.html)

enola-gay

4th Dec 2016, 17:58

Do I read that headline right? The crew bodies have been returned to Bolivia as "heroes" , unbelievable

dmba

4th Dec 2016, 18:06

In another article (http://correodelsur.com/politica/20161202_fotos-revelan-que-evo-y-quintana-volaron-en-avion-de-lamia-el-15-de-noviembre.html) on that site it shows that the Bolivian President flew in that same aircraft on 15th November.

vmandr

4th Dec 2016, 18:47

@Surplus1

The header of Celia's alleged memos is missing so, we don't know to whom it was addressed.

a. not missing,
b. we know the addressees

i read, GG SLVRYGYF SLVRYGYE SLVRYGYF (herself being ZSLRZPZX ) message sent 29 Nov 1650 utc

for more on AFTN codes check http://dcaa.trafikstyrelsen.dk:8000/icaodocs/Doc%208585/DOC%208585,%20Edition%20no%20149.PDF [/URL]

TowerDog

4th Dec 2016, 18:52

. Do I read that headline right? The crew bodies have been returned to Bolivia as "heroes" , unbelievable

Heros indeed:(
Those guys were cowards, they did not do the right thing when they realized fuel would be low/non-existent: Decleare an emergency, land at the nearest suitable airport and take the consequences of poor flight and fuel planning from the beginning, and long before they got close to Rio Negro.
They literally murdered passengers and crew members.

Joejosh999

4th Dec 2016, 18:54

ehwatezedoing

4th Dec 2016, 19:17

This may be naive , but would it make sense from a policy perspective to reward airlines who regularly land above fuel mins, such as w tax breaks and so on. Yes, I realize multiple govts may be involved....but say x% tax break for y% landings above mins.
Carrot not stick IOW. Reward safety.
We see with this tragedy how punishment may affect decision-making....
Naive perhaps I know .....

That would be like asking cops to regularly stop people driving on the street to give reward tickets for those sticking to the rules.

Rules are made to instil discipline and more or less protect the dumb from themselves.

JumpJumpJump

4th Dec 2016, 19:32

PR6driver.... From belo Horizonte... for commercial aviation taking in to account runway length,fire services etc, two airports in rio de janeiro... santos dumont and Galeao (the longest runway) though both have some high ground between them and BH. There are also Vitoria and Pampulha.... all of which you could get to and be on the ground within 40 minutes from the hold at BH

TowerDog

4th Dec 2016, 19:40

Yeah, a bit naive.
To reward airlines for following the rules could backfire: No reward, no fuel..

In the past some airlines kept track of fuel burn for each Captain and gave bonuses to those who burned less fuel. One way of burning less is to load less fuel.
Several airplanes had to divert to other airports than the destination for low fuel and costing the airlines more than they saved.
I am not aware of any airlines these days having similar programs.

I was singled out once for burning more fuel than the other Captains over a 3 month period and asked about it. Told them I deviated around weather, started early descents and had plenty fuel for contingencies. Cost of doing business Gentlemen..

Flown into Medellin and Santa Cruz many times with plenty of holding, not the places to fly on fumes.
No idea what these guys were thinking:((

AndyJS

4th Dec 2016, 19:49

"I thought S.Americans could be more assertive. We've seen this cockpit gradient problem in the Far East & SE Asia, but S.America?"

You obviously haven't paid any attention to, for example, Geert Hofstede's work on Power Distance. South American countries have some of the highest ratings on this scale, just as high as many Asian countries. A high Power Distance rating basically means it's extremely difficult for subordinates to challenge the person in charge in any given situation.

https://geert-hofstede.com/national-culture.html

Flyinheavy

4th Dec 2016, 19:50

That is not an accident. It is much more like a mass-murder/suicide. Very harsh words I know, but the evidence will substantiate it. I'm so angry I could scream!:mad::mad:

Thanks for your post, reading this thread from the beginning, I can only express the same anger. Especially when hearing every time in Brazilian TV news that it had been a "very experienced" pilot, who received a heroe's funeral in his home town in the state of Acre in Brazil.
I am retired too after some 40 years of flying, but still do know the difference between accident and criminal imprudence.

TowerDog

4th Dec 2016, 19:54

Huh, the Captain was Brazilian rather than Bolivian?

Lancelot de boyles

4th Dec 2016, 19:54

Better still;
would it make sense from a policy perspective to reward airlines who regularly...

...pass a successful audit of their operation, by allowing them to continue on for another 3/6/9/12months.
(assuming that the local authority were sufficiently professional, and not simply rubber-stamping)

1ifixjts

4th Dec 2016, 19:57

Bolivian president Evo Morales said in a news conference that he didn't know that LaMia had authorization nor that it was a Bolivian registered carrier, then a video shows him boarding the same plane 15 days earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0yjUk3rM68

One thing to consider too is how up to date the owner operator was.
He had his crew flying the light weights, but when the chance of showing off his company was presented he sure did jumped into the left seat.
Landing in Bogotá was not an option for him, he knew that it will represent a delay of more than 3 hours at best.

JumpJumpJump

4th Dec 2016, 20:24

I am Currently in Acre in Brazil.... just read a very interesting article from an interview with the captains family... posting from my phone, so will sumarize... later I will dig out the article post a link and translate the relevant parts. The gist is the family are saying that it is ""cruel" and "hirtful" to blame the captain as he was a good father and "honorable" man...... no here is the chilling/intering to analyse part.....when the captain of the LaMia flight his father (also a pilot) had a severe accident resulting in amnesia, disfiguration, broken bones, height loss due to a compressed spine and one leg becoming longer than the other.... as a child the LaMia captain always wanted to be a pilot and his father often asked "but why? Don't you have fear? Haven't you seen what happened to me?" To which he always replied "father, I have no fear, this will never happen to me". I was deeply troubled when I read that.

The journal is called "Pagina 20" as I said, I'll find a link when I get to the hotel

Loose rivets

4th Dec 2016, 21:35

We see with this tragedy how punishment may affect decision-making....
Naive perhaps I know .....

The problem is, you're damned if you do, and only possibly damned if you don't . . . use the M word, that is.

Police handing out plus marks? They tried that for a while in the UK. I'm not sure you got any free points out of it.

RAT 5

4th Dec 2016, 22:11

I know of at least one very senior British training captain who routinely browbeat inexperienced FO's into operating with fuel well below plog.

I do to wish to deviate from this topic, but... if this muppet 'routinely' operated thus, then more than you knew about it. Therefore one has to assume whispers float upwards and were perhaps ignored. How can anyone, legally, operate well below plog? Certainly not on departure; so one has to suspect it was continuing en-route. 2 RWYs at LHR & LGW round the corner?
And so back to Lamia. If this behaviour was a regular occurrence someone other than FLT crew must have known and one assumes whispers float about and reach relevant ears. Were those deaf for a reason?
I'm still waiting to hear the details of the F/O. Rank & experience. The CVR could be mind blowing, either way. Much screaming/pleading from RHS or silence.

TowerDog

4th Dec 2016, 22:39

. either way. Much screaming/pleading from RHS or silence.

If the Captain is crazy and trying to kill everybody on the airplane, only the crash axe will save the day.
In this case the last resort was not utilized, too bad...

4runner

4th Dec 2016, 23:42

YRP

5th Dec 2016, 01:38

Should it not be made mandatory to call law enforcement when presented with such a flight plan? Same as when it is suspected that someone is under the influence [...]
pax2908, I don't think it ever occurred to anyone that they'd need a rule about how to handle a flight plan like this one (endurance == enroute)!

Someone going a little light on reserve, the "not quite enough holding contingency" for Heathrow kind of thing, sure, people have thought about that, hence the (local LHR) rules about no priority without declaring emergency, etc. But how could ATC or whoever accepts the flight plan check for slightly low fuel/reserves/contingency? They can't confirm the actual fuel upload and payload nor access fuel burn data for each type / engine combination / variation.

This case is something way beyond that of course. No one would ever expect someone to ever plan only just enough fuel. I expect even Celia thought they'd just miscalculated and didn't want to bother redoing the task, not that they truly were doing what they turned out to be doing.

RatherBeFlying

5th Dec 2016, 01:57

My suspicion is that they had figured out some cute trick to eke out a little bit more range: shutting down a couple engines, using Andean wave – Lord only knows:rolleyes:

Worked just fine until being put into a hold:mad:

As for the people receiving flight plans, they do not have performance and fuel consumption charts for every aircraft on Earth to verify the crew won't run dry before destination.

jugofpropwash

5th Dec 2016, 02:23

In the name of safety, would it be wiser to not penalize (at least legally) a pilot for calling a Mayday for low fuel, even when he's done something stupid to get himself into that position? It might be more effective to do random spot checks of aircraft after landing, and penalize anyone who is found to be below minimums and who has NOT called a Mayday.

Passenger 389

5th Dec 2016, 02:49

The following is an excerpt from an Associated Press article. Obviously I can't certify everything reported is accurate, but many consider the AP among the more reputable news sources. Whether "low bidder" actually was the sole reason for hiring LaMia (or whether there was a "recommendation" or "other consideration") is beyond the scope of the article.

AFA hired firm to fly Argentine team without knowing plane

By LUIS ANDRES HENAO
Associated Press

Dec 2, 2016

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) -- Argentina's Football Association hired a company that charters flights to transport superstar Lionel Messi and the rest of the national team for a World Cup qualifying game without knowing the name of the airline or the model of the plane, an official said Friday.

The plane was the same British Aerospace 146 Avro RJ85 jet operated by Bolivia-based charter company LaMia that later crashed in Colombia, killing 71 people, including most of a Brazilian soccer team.

Argentine Football Association spokesman Miguel Hirsch said Friday the AFA was forced to look for options for a roundtrip Buenos Aires-Belo Horizonte flight after the plane they often use from the Andes airline was sent for technical revisions.

The Associated Press had access to offer sheets that six companies presented.

None mentioned the name of the airline.

But the one that the AFA's national team department chose for $99,000 was the cheapest one and the only one that did not provide the model of the plane.

The second least expensive offer was about $3,000 less. [Note: that probably should read "$3,000 more"]

"I suppose that since the AFA is going through financial troubles, it was a question of costs," Hirsch said in an interview with The AP.

Gauges and Dials

5th Dec 2016, 03:54

There is usually a lot of water residue in the tanks; it is never a good idea to fly on low fuel anyhow. My guess is that Lamia never drained their tanks routinely. That would be good engineering practice, so unlikely to have been performed with this company.

If there were any water in the tank, wouldn't it be pretty much the first thing out as you started drawing from the tank, rather than the last thing you'd get as you got towards empty?

Bleve

5th Dec 2016, 04:36

If there were any water in the tank, wouldn't it be pretty much the first thing out as you started drawing from the tank, rather than the last thing you'd get as you got towards empty?

Not necessarily. I'm not familiar with the RJ fuel system, but on just about every aircraft I've flown fuel is normally drawn from the top of a standpipe with sits above the bottom of the tank. When the fuel level drops below the standpipe, fuel is then drawn from the bottom of the tank.

sAx_R54

5th Dec 2016, 05:17

...like in some West African states ?
(ETE 4:22 / Endurance 4:22):ugh::ugh:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/12/03/09/3AFBF10100000578-0-image-m-8_1480758830343.jpg

Like in some Western Europe, North America, South America, Russia....no doubt you've seen them all!

Mooney Driver

5th Dec 2016, 05:54

Not necessarily. I'm not familiar with the RJ fuel system, but on just about every aircraft I've flown fuel is normally drawn from the top of a standpipe with sits above the bottom of the tank. When the fuel level drops below the standpipe, fuel is then drawn from the bottom of the tank.
I don't believe this is EVER true. When the fuel level drops below the level of the "standpipe", the fuel STOPS FLOWING! There is no switch-over to another, lower feed. That's the definition of "unusable fuel".

sAx_R54

5th Dec 2016, 06:00

Indeed.
I think that macho culture, found so often in Latin America,....

Indeed....so very rarely found on PPruNe!

patowalker

5th Dec 2016, 07:41

I'm still waiting to hear the details of the F/O. Rank & experience. The CVR could be mind blowing, either way. Much screaming/pleading from RHS or silence.

Lt. Colonel Ovar Goytia graduated from the College of Military Aviation in 1993. From 2004 to 2010 he was employed as a pilot by TAM, the transport wing of the Bolivian airforce, which operates as a domestic airline Bienvenido a TAM | TAM (http://www.tam.bo/)

It was he who was in contact with the controller at Medellin.

FrontSeatPhil

5th Dec 2016, 08:06

Bolivian president Evo Morales said in a news conference that he didn't know that LaMia had authorization nor that it was a Bolivian registered carrier, then a video shows him boarding the same plane 15 days earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0yjUk3rM68

I take a lot of private flights similar in nature to this one. Mostly they've been on Cello's (coincidentally) RJ85, and more recently it's 737.

However, I'm racking my brain and can't think of a single other operator I've flown with, and there have been *many* of them.

I just get on the plane, sit back and relax or do some work, and wait to arrive at my destination.

Landflap

5th Dec 2016, 09:37

CONTACT APPROACH ; don't wonder. Of course they are journos looking for a headline grab & swiping hard at anyone who dares criticise their, so called, profession. Loads of trolls & armchair wanabees too. Good buddy of mine was flamed by all sorts of pseudonyms when he made recent comments on a different site, Apalling.

Steering back towards thread though ; there are loads of trashy cowboy operators out there who will try & convince you that you can land with more fuel than you left with ! Crafty paperwork & "play the game" scenarios will have you departing with less than reasonable fuel & fiddling all the way en-route to make things look better than the are. Stick your hand up and suggest a more professional attitude will have the big boys and brown nosed careerists ganging up on you, big time.

Colleague of mine had the misfortune to work for such an outfit ( no, not even a cowboy outfit) who tried to convince him that on the ETOPS, it was an ERA operation and thus, contingency reduce to 5% of the last hour was acceptable. That was the last straw in a B I G haystack & he left. Never looked back. I recall him telling me that there were two things he would never do; endanger the lives of people in his care AND, knowingly, break the law. He suggested that the outfit he worked for expected him to do both ! I quite admire him for his professional stance and avoidance of the carnage we see today, possibly by poor , pressured decisions at the vital fuel planning stage. Oh, but c'mon trolls, let's here it, altogether now.........." But you weren't there !!!!!".

comms

5th Dec 2016, 09:39

Fuel ranks & incentives for less fuel burn is sadly not a phenomenon of the past. It is very much alive today in Europe's "favourite" airline - ranking its pilots monthly (https://www.eurocockpit.be/stories/20161114/ryanair-metamorphosis-hardly-possible).

Tankertrashnav

5th Dec 2016, 10:31

noflynomore - thanks for the explanation of "autonomy" - I couldn't work it out before - makes sense now.

mosteo

5th Dec 2016, 11:09

noflynomore - thanks for the explanation of "autonomy" - I couldn't work it out before - makes sense now.

Since this thread may have attracted more Spanish-speaking people than usual, I'd add that "autonomía" is the layman term for endurance of cars, at least in Spain. I don't know what pilots use.

aterpster

5th Dec 2016, 12:56

Bolivia Files a Criminal Complaint in Fatal Colombia Crash
Airport employee accused of ‘failing to carry out her duties as a public official’ for letting plane depart

By TAOS TURNER and SARA SCHAEFER MUÑOZ
Updated Dec. 4, 2016 9:52 p.m. ET

SANTA CRUZ, Bolivia—Bolivian authorities filed a criminal complaint against an airport official here for allowing a charter plane to depart for Colombia even though its flight plan was in violation of international aviation safety standards.

The LaMia airline plane, which was carrying a Brazilian soccer team, ran out of fuel hours later and crashed at about 10 p.m. near Medellín on Nov. 28, killing 71 people aboard.

Bolivia’s airport authority, Aasana, filed the complaint against Celia Castedo, an Aasana employee who reviewed the LaMia flight plan. That plan, as well as a written transcript that Ms. Castedo prepared after the crash recalling her conversation with the plane’s onboard dispatcher, Alex Quispe, appear to indicate that the flight’s pilot and co-owner, Miguel Quiroga, knowingly put the lives of those aboard at risk by flying directly to Medellín without stopping to refuel.

Investigators say it appears the flight departed from the Viru Viru International Airport without the necessary amount of fuel, violating international regulations. The regulations, based on standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization, require commercial flights to have sufficient fuel for reaching their destination as well an additional amount for reaching an alternative airport and for a variety of other contingencies.

According to a transcript of events, Ms. Castedo said she initially objected to the LaMia flight plan. She allegedly urged Mr. Quispe to change it. The plane’s maximum flight range was about 41/2 hours—just barely enough to reach Medellín, the document said.

“That’s not OK. Go back and check. Change your flight plan,” Ms. Castedo told Mr. Quispe, according to her written version of events. But Mr. Quispe, who died in the crash, allegedly brushed off her concerns.

“Let it go,” Mr. Quispe allegedly told Ms. Castedo. “Don’t worry, Ms. Celia, that’s the range they gave me. We’ll do it in less time.”

Ms. Castedo said in the transcript that “too often flight dispatchers do not take our observations seriously.” Ultimately, though, she allowed the plane to depart.

Ms. Castedo, who couldn’t be reached for comment, faces up to four years in jail, accused of “failing to carry out her duties as a public official.”

The transcript was published by Bolivian daily El Deber, on Dec. 1 then reviewed and independently verified by The Wall Street Journal. A Bolivian prosecutor declined to comment on the transcript.

LaMia couldn’t be reached for comment and Aasana declined to comment.

An initial flight plan, drawn up the morning of the crash, included a refueling stop in the northern Bolivian city of Cobija, Freddy Bonilla, Colombia’s air safety secretary and crash investigator, said Sunday.

That plan was presented by the airline, LaMia, to the Bolivian authorities, who approved it along with other commercial paperwork required for international flights. LaMia then presented its approved paperwork to Colombian authorities who authorized the flight to enter Colombian air space, Mr. Bonilla said.

A different and final flight plan, however, was drawn up later that day, at about 4:30 p.m., by the LaMia crew at the Santa Cruz airport in Bolivia, Mr. Bonilla said. This one didn’t include a stop in Cobija, which aviation officials have said lacks lighting after dark. The direct-flight plan, which pushed the aircraft nearly to the limit of its fuel range, was approved by Aasana, the airport authority, over the apparent initital objections of Ms. Castedo, investigators said.

LaMia has flown from Santa Cruz to Medellin in the past, officials said, but as far as they have learned, such flights always included a refueling stop in Cobija. They are trying to determine why the doomed plane’s final flight plan didn’t include that stop, and have said it may have been because of the late hour.

Mr. Bonilla said investigators are looking into whether the ill-fated Avro RJ85 could have had a fuel leak that might have contributed to the crash.

Jorge Cabrera, head of the Aasana employees union, said the labor group stands by Ms. Castedo. The union will present its view of the accident on Monday, he said.

Roberto Curilovic, head of International programming at Corporación America, an Argentine conglomerate that operates 53 airports around the world, said “there’s no way that flight plan should have been approved.”

“Accidents don’t just happen. There was bad intent there,” Mr. Curilovic said, referring to the decision to make the flight despite the risks.

Bolivia’s defense minister, Reymi Ferreira, said Friday that the country itself could face aviation sanctions, potentially making it more difficult for airlines to operate here.

Bolivian President Evo Morales has called for an aggressive investigation into the crash, and the government has laid off several officials, including the son of one of the charter plan’s directors who was supposed to oversee its operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------

This Google translated from a Bolivian newspaper reads "Cobija receives his pilot as a hero and Santa Cruz grief seizes Viru Viru"
Cobija recibe a su piloto como héroe y en Santa Cruz la congoja se apodera de Viru Viru | Diario Correo del Sur: Noticias de Sucre, Bolivia y el Mundo (http://correodelsur.com/seguridad/20161202_cobija-recibe-a-su-piloto-como-heroe-y-en-santa-cruz-la-congoja-se-apodera-de-viru-viru.html)

bigal cessna

5th Dec 2016, 13:02

For those talking about water in the fuel tanks -- the bae146 fuel system is designed to pick up water , mix it with fuel and send it to the engines --- it does this by using jetpumps in the output of the boost pumps -- these jet pumps are a small venturi devices sucking fuel from the lowest point in the fuel tanks , sending that small amount of fuel and water to the highest part of the fuel tanks ,to a header tank - thus keeping any minute amount of water in the fuel mixing all the time with the fuel and when it reaches the engines is safely expelled = licence lame on 146

noflynomore

5th Dec 2016, 13:25

Poor Celia. She did her best, more I daresay than many would do and gets hung out to dry simply for being the lowest ranking pèon still standing.
What an uncivilised way to behave, eh?

chuks

5th Dec 2016, 13:37

Given that we already know not to depart with less fuel that it might take to complete a planned trip, meaning not even to cover the straight-line distance flown, there's not a lot to learn from this one.

If you are the sort of jerk who wants to really, really push his luck, push it really hard, then you will just think that the accident crew made a mess of that one, something you would never do, somehow.

If you have any sense at all, you will just wonder, "What were they thinking?"

I must have a criminal mind, but I can think of a way to have got away with that, probably:

A. Make up a story inbound to destination about a fuel leak of my own. Even declare an emergency if I have to, but get cleared for a priority landing in good time. Being put into the hold, Number Three for the approach with just minutes of fuel remaining ... not an option, no matter what.

B. After landing, fix the imaginary problem. Just a leaking quick drain. "Tap-tap-tap .... See? It's fine now. No problem."

C. Refuel, refile, and depart soonest for some friendly jurisdiction where sympathetic people can deal with any lingering questions from back at your destination! The sheer mind-boggling notion that someone just flew a trip with less fuel than the book says he needed ... who thinks of that explanation right away?

Of course there are always unforeseen things that can come up to scupper finely-worked schemes that might see you arriving running on fumes yet still managing to land safely. This is the reason why we have all those boring rules about having an alternate and contingency fuel and all that sort of stuff that takes all the fun and adventure out of aviation. You'd be a fool and some sort of criminal to try this in the first place, but it's still easy to think of a way to behave in such a damned risky manner yet still hope to survive your own folly.

With this one, it really reads as if the accident crew, having already put themselves in a situation of grave danger, finally tamely followed orders that were bound to kill them. That suggests that the crew had finally got themselves into so much trouble that they were not able to think things through any further.

I remember once asking our dispatcher, who had survived a crash while sat on the jumpseat of a BAC 1-11, a crash that killed both flight crew, what was going on during the last few minutes of the flight, when they had to shoot multiple approaches in a sandstorm to a destination out in the middle of the Sahara. He told me that the Captain had to do it all by himself, shooting those approaches, so that I asked him what the FO was doing then.

"Ah, he was praying."

The big disappointment was wanting to be told what happened when they hit the fire station, after they made that last approach followed by a more-or-less blind landing. "I had my eyes closed then," he told me. "I do not know what happened."

When he opened his eyes, there he was in the wreckage of the cockpit, one dead Captain to his left, one dead FO to his right, and no rush to evacuate because there was no fire.

Evanelpus

5th Dec 2016, 13:39

Poor Celia. She did her best,

Really?

How high up the greasy pole did she voice her concerns for the flight plan?

Ms. Castedo said in the transcript that “too often flight dispatchers do not take our observations seriously.” Ultimately, though, she allowed the plane to depart.

Not high enough it would seem.

The sad fact is that this individual had some authority which would have preventing the flight from taking place. Why did she just buckle and allow the flight to take off. Hopefully we will find out in the fullness of time

Sandlandman

5th Dec 2016, 13:44

I saw a comment that said the swiss cheese model didn't apply here. I think it is still relevant even if this is a tad outside what it was intended for. It attempts to minimise the possibility of a hole through the cheese by using actors, systems and processes. In this case the bloke pitched up with a piece of cheese with a hole he had bored all the way through it and made no attempt to hide it. Poor old Celia held it up to the light and looked through it "Oi mate, you've got a hole through your cheese" she said, or something similar. More than once. But there were no errors in the flight plan in that it was correctly filled out. The numbers were in the right places. Then apparently it is no-one's job in our safety conscious industry to stop the cheesemonger from taking off ! Not for the first time it seems the industry is saying "hmm - we never thought of that". It's difficult to put ourselves in the position of someone with no sense of self preservation - never mind the preservation of all the souls under their command. I'm not saying I know what can be done either - that will have to be decided by all the clever folk in the industry bodies that put the regulations together - but this was way too easy !

Teevee

5th Dec 2016, 13:52

Well now, how high might that be? From my reading of this whole thread and the power factors involved the choices she had were (a) ... refuse to allow the plane to depart ... result (potential) loss of job. (b) allow plane to depart, plane doesn't make it ... result, (potential) loss of job. (c) allow plane to depart, hope as in the past they make it ... result keep job .... This sounds like an aggressive intent to make the flight by people with connections and power ... she wasn't in a nice position ...

HundredPercentPlease

5th Dec 2016, 13:57

Not high enough it would seem.

The sad fact is that this individual had some authority which would have preventing the flight from taking place. Why did she just buckle and allow the flight to take off. Hopefully we will find out in the fullness of time

So, you want to "blame":

The clerk who queried odd looking numbers in a flight plan.
All those in ops who knew of this practice and who had not reported this to the authorities.
All FO's (etc) who have seen this operation before and not raised concern with the authorities.
etc

This is about culture (and fixing it), and not about finding a scapegoat and roasting it.

Evanelpus

5th Dec 2016, 13:57

If she was worried about losing her job, I know one thing's for certain. She'll never release another aircraft, EVER, if she has fears for it's safety as this poor woman has to live with her decision for the rest of her life......now, that's what you call not a nice position.

This is about culture (and fixing it), and not about finding a scapegoat and roasting it.

I agree 100% with what you said, the culture needs to change but I've worked in the aviation industry in South America and believe you me, unpalatable as it may seem to you, there will be a scapegoat found for this particular tradgedy

chuks

5th Dec 2016, 14:03

Consider that the dispatcher pushing for acceptance of the flight plan boarded the flight! That must have been somewhat persuasive that he knew what he was doing when he filed the flight plan.

Sure, the numbers were wrong, but those are just numbers. Who really flight plans 4:22 with 4:22 fuel on board? What, they were planning on being towed off the runway? So the woman accepted the flight plan with this tell-tale mistake on it, when she should have made that fool dispatcher come back with one reading 3:52 and 4:22 instead, as I suppose he would have done.

The Swiss cheese model does not work when there's criminal negligence involved. If there's one guy not playing by the rules, then the system breaks down very easily.

AndySmith

5th Dec 2016, 14:08

Roberto Curilovic, head of International programming at Corporación America, an Argentine conglomerate that operates 53 airports around the world, said “there’s no way that flight plan should have been approved.”

If I am not mistaken, this is one of the 2 Super Etendard pilots that successfully attacked the Atlantic Conveyor on the 25th May 1982 during the Falklands conflict.

noflynomore

5th Dec 2016, 14:21

Given what we've heard of the local authority gradient I find it impressive that a mere AIS clerk would take her objections as far as she did. We should be very very careful before blaming her for anything. If blame must be attached blame the authority for accepting the plan, not the poor clerk for merely filing it after being repeatedly belittled by the despatcher.

I can well believe that stringing up some minor player in the matter is important to protect those above from too much criticism but its a pretty shoddy way to treat the only person who seemed to object to it.

truckflyer

5th Dec 2016, 14:24

Regarding Celia, this is disgusting but not surprising behaviour by Bolivia.

Ultimately it's the Captain (and Owner), who is responsible, the buck stops with him, and in such a Latin American country, dominated by "macho" culture, and fairly poor CRM, it's pretty obvious that she stood no chance in stopping this flight.
Who knows what was said, end of the day en-route the flight crew should have had enough SA to see that they was going below Final Reserve, gone to alternate refuelled or / and made a Mayday call prior to going into their final reserve.

Then again no surprise, easier to blame Celia who is on $300 a month, kind of makes you wonder with the article about the Captains bodies hero return in Bolivian news, ironic.
No doubt the Captain did not set out that day to end up dead, and nobody is saying his a bad person, but what he did on this day was criminal, it was a completely avoidable.

slast

5th Dec 2016, 14:34

from AndyJS - You obviously haven't paid any attention to, for example, Geert Hofstede's work on Power Distance. South American countries have some of the highest ratings on this scale, just as high as many Asian countries. A high Power Distance rating basically means it's extremely difficult for subordinates to challenge the person in charge in any given situation.

Authority gradient issues may well turn out to be a factor, but be very cautious about using Hofstede's work on Power-Distance Index in this context. It is very general and not necessarily applicable to the pilot community.

Hofstede's data was prominently used by Malcolm Gladwell in his 2008 book "Outliers" to promote his "ethnic theory of plane crashes" which he summarises as "The single most important variable in determining whether a plane crashes is not the plane, it is the [national] culture the pilot comes from". He used 2 particular accidents to demonstrate this - Avianca B707 fuel exhaustion New York which has already been mentioned in some media as being like this accident, and Korean Air CFIT at Guam.

There are often generalisations on PPrune about accidents in particular parts of the world quoting specific pilot groups as susceptible to high Power-Distance index etc. and Hofstede is sometimes used to justify them, in order to show that some cultures are inherently less safe than others.

For example the useful reference AndyJS provides goes on to say "Subsequent studies validating the earlier results include such respondent groups as commercial airline pilots and students in 23 countries, civil service managers in 14 counties, 'up-market' consumers in 15 countries and 'elites' in 19 countries."

This implies you can take Hofstede's statements about a national culture as being applicable to all pilots from that country. The actual study of pilots PDI was by Ashleigh Merritt, a colleague of well known CRM expert Bob Helmreich. Gladwell specifically refers to it as justifying his "theory" but he seriously misreports it.

The study actually noted that many factors make commercial pilots DIFFERENT to the general populations studied by Hofstede. Merritt's paper validated that Hofstede's research methods could be applicable to pilots, but went on to show that the actual results for pilots could then be very different to the general populations.

So while many people think Hofstede says for example that all Korean pilots have high PDI and American pilots very low PDI, the research showed are actually very similar.

The four elements of Merritt's study are shown below. Ashleigh confirmed a few months ago that these graphs of her data are valid, and went on to say "Why Gladwell made that huge leap from a couple of accidents to his "theory" is beyond me."

http://picma.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/rationale/hof_PDI_0.png

http://picma.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/rationale/hof_masc.png

http://picma.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/rationale/hof_unc_avoid.png

http://picma.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/rationale/hof_individ.png

Flying Palm Tree

5th Dec 2016, 14:47

It seems odd that the pilot didn't ask for a straight in approach from altitude before he entered the hold? Did I miss something?

deefer dog

5th Dec 2016, 14:55

chuks

5th Dec 2016, 15:16

Actually, that Avianca crash in New York was an example of something other than a steep authority gradient, if I remember the report correctly.

From Wikipedia:

The report references the 360° turn that the flight was ordered to make at 20:54 as evidence that the crew should have known that they were being treated routinely and not given any emergency priority. Instead, the CVR revealed that the flight crew was convinced that they were being given priority. Additionally, the NTSB criticized the first officer for failing to use the word "emergency" as the captain had insisted he do. Compounded with the apparent inability of the captain to hear or understand the radio communications, the NTSB called the situation a "total breakdown in communications by the flightcrew." Summarizing, the investigators cited "the flightcrew's failure to notify ATC of their fuel situation while holding at CAMRN in order to ensure arrival at the approach fix with an adequate approach minimum fuel level and a breakdown in communications between the flightcrew and ATC, and among the flight crewmembers" as the two main factors that led to the crash.

For some unknown reason the FO did not make a "Mayday" call as he had been ordered to by the Captain, so that this accident was not due to a steep authority gradient but something more the opposite.

alemaobaiano

5th Dec 2016, 15:16

I feel for Celia but unfortunately it's a third world country that only knows how to dispense third world (rate) justice.

The authorities here will look for anyone still alive who could have broken the chain of events - irrespective of whether it was within the realms of their area of competence or authority.

Maybe, but the usual trick is to pick on some lower level individual and hang it all on them. Those with the right connections never suffer the consequences.

Lonewolf_50

5th Dec 2016, 15:23

If I understand the information currently available, a person related by family to the owner of the company worked in a government aviation regulatory agency (the same one Celia worked for?) which means that this company had "pull" and could (and possibly had in the past) try to intimidate a lower level functionary with that connection if (as she noted before) she had previously raised questions and they did not (in her terms) take her objections seriously. She doesn't want to lose her job. Putting a human face on how one deals with corruption or undue influence in any nation (not just in Bolivia) is what I am trying to do here.

I am also unclear on the following point: did she have the authority to disapprove / reject the flight plan submitted? I don't understand clearly what her position is.

BigFrank

5th Dec 2016, 16:04

If I am not mistaken, this is one of the 2 Super Etendard pilots that successfully attacked the Atlantic Conveyor on the 25th May 1982 during the Falklands conflict.

Is that a commendation?
A criticism?
Supplementary information; allowing readers to make an informed and balanced judgement as to the reliability of the information provided by the person in question ?

Just curious ... so far.

RAT 5

5th Dec 2016, 16:40

Why did she just buckle and allow the flight to take off. Hopefully we will find out in the fullness of time

Are you suggesting she should have buckled herself to the nose wheel? She could have informed the tower not to give clearance, and then what? This muppet could have still rolled and flown off. It's the cry for blood that is fuelling this process, and blood is only taken from the living. I hope her lawyers are beyond reproach and will do a diligent and worthy job of booting this out of the park.
As for cockpit gradient? It seems RHS was ex-military, mid-hi ranking officer and must have known the basic civil rules and those of airmanship. He was not a fighter jock who sat on an escape route if it all went quiet. I suspect some of them are almost on fumes at TOD when returning under radar PAR. The CVR will prove very enlightening.
Roasting the most junior lady in a male macho world would be beneath even them, surely. Let the local priest call down the raining fires of damnation if they try.

slast

5th Dec 2016, 16:48

Chuks, the Avianca example was Gladwell's to make his point about cultural inadequacy, not mine. I referred to it to put his use of Hofstede's data in context.

The F/O doing the comms was literally translating the Captain's requests (from Spanish to English and vice versa) and urgency got lost both in language translation and mitigation between the parties (Capt-F/O-ATC-F/O-Capt). The Captain didn't ever specifically order a Mayday call as far as I can see, the CVR translation reads "tell them we are in emergency". It appears to me that there were other authority and workload management issues but the comms problem was certainly primary. I have the full report, PM me if you want it.

vmandr

5th Dec 2016, 16:56

Lonewolf:
I am also unclear on the following point: did she have the authority to disapprove / reject the flight plan submitted? I don't understand clearly what her position is.

Think of atc as 'traffic police'. they are there to enforce regulations.
ARO is -usually- part of ATC which enforces ICAO and country rules and regs.
So ARO has executive authority.
Often though to avoid arguing with 'pussy' pilots or dispatchers, they just call
the GND/TWR controller, very difficult to be reached, and when clearance is requested, the involved are informed of the ATS rejection of that flight plan.
If the individual still persist, police follows...
Mere FPL submission, does not make it a 'guarantee' the flight will operate.
IFPS in Europe rejects dozen 'wrong' FPLs every day.

HTH

BTW, Celia's report was after the accident, on the 29th, apparently forced to make. Also unknown if GND/TWR controller(s) were informed of the FPL issue, in that case they share responsibility.

chuks

5th Dec 2016, 17:22

Slast, I'm not picking on you, nor on anyone else here commenting, aside from saying that assuming that Culture X is always going to have a steep authority gradient on the flight deck is not a valid assumption.

It's just an observed tendency, not necessarily a given, that a culture of "machismo" will show that authority gradient, and it's noticeable that it was absent in that Avianca accident near JFK. The FO, for whatever reason, went his own way when speaking to ATC. One would assume that the Captain said something in Spanish about an "emergencia" and that's pretty clearly going to translate as "emergency," a word the FO never used.

Of course, one might counter-argue that the Avianca FO saw ATC as over the flight crew, as of higher authority, so that he was unduly submissive to ATC, not speaking up about their low-fuel emergency but meekly accepting those vectors away from the airport.

Another thing is that aviation is oriented towards proper behavior, towards people following the rules. When you have people exhibiting transgressive behavior, rule-breaking behavior such as deliberately ignoring fuel requirements, it's so that the system may not be geared to preventing that behavior. ATC is not primarily there to prevent us from attempting suicide-murder. It's not so, however, that such behavior always goes unpunished; this latest rule-breaker, or pair of rule-breakers, on the flight deck of that RJ85 got the death penalty!

vmandr

5th Dec 2016, 17:36

I am for leniency and compassion.

However 71 dead and those living affected by this accident, as with every other accident, demand justice.
In any judicial system - maybe with the exception of Islamic Sariah - justice cannot be served without 'apportioning blame' first.
Then we discuss the leniency.
If heads must roll, so be it.
If jobs or businesses must be lost, so be it.
If ranks, privileges etc must be surrendered, so be it.
If cultural behaviors must be condemned, so be it.

Justice must be served !

AndyJS

5th Dec 2016, 17:40

I think it's pretty disgraceful that Celia Castedo is being blamed by the Bolivian authorities while the people flying the plane are being viewed as heroes. Maybe it's a cultural thing, where it's okay to blame someone who's still alive but the deceased have to be accorded respect no matter what they might have done.

evansb

5th Dec 2016, 17:41

Few things are as keenly perceived, yet so incredibly subjective, as justice.

vmandr

5th Dec 2016, 17:44

Few things are as keenly perceived, yet so incredibly subjective, as justice.

Absolutely ! Imperfect human beings, imperfect 'justice' and so on.
Traces of something Godly in us, strive for perfection though.

H Peacock

5th Dec 2016, 17:59

Whilst I accept that the shocking fuel plan appears not to comply with the extant regulations, surely these 71 people died because the crew (captain) made a complete hash of putting his engine-less aircraft down in a considerable more controlled fashion.

I know it's not part of one's LPC, but surely aircrew do occasionally 'play' in the sim and have a go at completing an all-engine-out forced landing. Of course it's a situation you should never get yourself into, but having a very basic idea of how you'd do it is surely not rocket science.

A big difference between day/night, weather and terrain etc, but this crew appear to have had no idea what they were doing.

Forget that this crew ran themselves out of fuel. Put a competent crew in their type, established at 20,000ft in the hold at RNG and fail all the engines. Who wouldn't manage to save at least half of those on board?

foresight

5th Dec 2016, 18:02

The president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, claims he was unaware the LaMia was a Bolivian company with permission to operate in Bolivia. There is footage on YouTube of Morales on the very aircraft in question, with the crew. One photo shows him seated in the aircraft next to the young flight attendant who survived.

There appears to be an arrangement between LaMia and CONMEBOL which is likely a chummy deal made with people high up in the Bolivian government.
There is a conflict of interest between the Bolivian aviation authority and LaMia which has been mentioned in several posts.

Celia Casteda is a very minor civil servant. Like many thousands of such women in Latin America, she has done a poorly paid government job for thirty years which gives her security and a pension. She almost certainly got the job because she knew someone who knew someone who knew someone else etc. She won't be well educated.
I believe she went as far as she could without jeopardising her job -and probably her families security and future.
Most of all, to her superiors, she is utterly expendable.
Hopefully her union will fight tooth and nail for her. However union officials can be bought off and will themselves have close links to members of the government.
It seems inevitable that LaMia flight 2933 will claim another victim.
A lot of guilty people are going to get off scot free.

I don't know Bolivia, but I am very familiar with other Latin American countries and have family and many friends there. This is all horribly familiar.

vintage ATCO

5th Dec 2016, 19:18

vmandr

Think of atc as 'traffic police'. they are there to enforce regulations.I spent 40 years in ATC in the UK, I was never a policeman. I was there to prevent collisions.

ARO is -usually- part of ATC which enforces ICAO and country rules and regs.

So ARO has executive authority.They are not policeman either.

Often though to avoid arguing with 'pussy' pilots or dispatchers, they just call the GND/TWR controller, very difficult to be reached, and when clearance is requested, the involved are informed of the ATS rejection of that flight plan. If the individual still persist, police follows...Tosh in the UK

Mere FPL submission, does not make it a 'guarantee' the flight will operate.
IFPS in Europe rejects dozen 'wrong' FPLs every day.For routeing/traffic reasons. Nothing else.

SteinarN

5th Dec 2016, 20:56

@lemme

Very impressive first post with the interesting analysis you had in your link at #616

Airbubba

5th Dec 2016, 21:12

@lemme

Very impressive first post with the interesting analysis you had in your link at #616

I agree. :D

Here's a link to Peter's analysis:

Satcom Guru: LMI2933 LAMIA AVRO RJ85 Medellín Deadstick (http://www.satcom.guru/2016/12/lmi2933-lamia-avro-rj85-medellin.html)

Prober

5th Dec 2016, 21:22

Some (many) years ago now I was involved in a ‘fill-in’ contract in that part of the world. Though years have passed, I very much doubt that any attitudes have changed. The reason for our contract had some resonance with this fiasco. One became used to being given no freight and x passengers at check-in. Subsequently seeing mounds of freight being loaded and the cabin chief saying x (minus 7 or 8) all strapped in. Any queries would be met by a very disinterested shrug of the shoulders. Load sheet copies were dumped in the bin and tech log copies often followed. The XAA came to examine the operation and as a result – wait for it – we all learned the Spanish phrase ‘ayer de ante’ (excuse spelling – it was a long time ago) – which means ‘the day before yesterday’. This was required so that we could log the previous duties of the cabin crew, for the absence of which we were berated as if we were simpletons. Maybe we were! Quel surprise!!!:{::ugh::{
Prober

The AvgasDinosaur

5th Dec 2016, 21:49

Thanks everyone for a remarkably erudite thread. None of the hyperbole and aggression sometimes found on here.
Could someone with greater mathematical skills and RJ experience than I please tell me how close the actual endurance of the flight was compared to the 4h 22min on the flight plan?
In still air what is the absolute endurance of an RJ 85 (in theory).
Could some of the hangers on/ acolytes have been off loaded to lift more fuel or were the tanks at limits ?
Thanks for your time and trouble
Be lucky
David

noflynomore

5th Dec 2016, 22:16

I know it's not part of one's LPC, but surely aircrew do occasionally 'play' in the sim and have a go at completing an all-engine-out forced landing.

What company do you work for, fer fuggsake? Are you seriously telling us your Co does not train all engines out/glide approaches scenarios in the sim?

You claim to be from Yorkshire and thus UK CAA!!!

Is this possible???

I am simply gobsmacked if you are not required to do this. It has been an occasional part of my recurrent for two decades at least!

AV Dinosaur. The fuel endurance quoted appears to be at or very close to the absolute limit to dry tanks for a RJ85.
What seems more to the point is what payload could it legally carry with this amount of fuel, and how this figure fits with the number of pax and their baggage that was on board.

There may well be some discrepancy. (!!!)

There are plenty of people here who can supply typical APS and structural MTOW weights for such an RJ, (indeed for this exact RJ) and others who can supply a RTOW for the runway involved if it applies. So far this critical info has, rather surprisingly, not appeared.

Perhaps it is time it should.

RAT 5

5th Dec 2016, 23:37

What company do you work for, fer fuggsake? Are you seriously telling us your Co does not train all engines out/glide approaches scenarios in the sim?

Indeed. After BA B777 & Sully both scenarios appeared in recurrency training for a few moments. 'Have a go' is not training. That was how many years ago? Not seen before and not since: and as short visuals are discouraged/forbidden on line the day to day handling skills are weak anyway. There are the enlightened airlines and there are those who will not see. It really is the luck of the draw who you fly for as a pilot and who the pax will rely upon on that once in a lifetime moment. Standards, above minimum for LPC, are not common across the industry; sadly.

sierra5913

6th Dec 2016, 00:55

I don't know if its been posted on here already but here it is anyway

LiveLeak.com - Chapecoense team aboard doomed plane before taking off for Colombia

Both pilots interviewed. Soccer team boarding at the time.

3 stripe commander in the LHS, 2 stripe FO in the cabin.

Fris B. Fairing

6th Dec 2016, 01:10

There are plenty of people here who can supply typical APS and structural MTOW weights for such an RJ, (indeed for this exact RJ) and others who can supply a RTOW for the runway involved if it applies. So far this critical info has, rather surprisingly, not appeared.

Perhaps it is time it should.

Several posts have expressed interest in sighting a copy of the loadsheet. Given the conduct of this flight, are we naive in assuming that there was a loadsheet?

IanWorthington

6th Dec 2016, 01:57

Poor Celia. She did her best, more I daresay than many would do and gets hung out to dry simply for being the lowest ranking pèon still standing.
What an uncivilised way to behave, eh?

It is absolutely BAU here in Colombia to push responsibility for /anything/ down to the weakest person in the chain. I would anticipate that Bolivia would be no different.

CYTN

6th Dec 2016, 02:42

Brasil, lunes 5 de diciembre (ATB Digital).- Celia Castedo Monasterio, funcionaria de Aasana e involucrada en el caso del accidente del avión LaMia, buscó información sobre refugio en la Policía Federal y en el Ministerio Público Federal (MPF) de Corumbá, Brasil.

Alrededor de las 8:00 de hoy, Castedo buscó esta información en el Departamento Federal de Inmigración de la Policía de Brasil acompañada de su abogado. Luego se fue al Ministerio Público Federal (MPF), según informa el portal de la cadena Globo.

La fiscal del MPF, Gabriela Tavares, confirmó la presencia de un funcionario de la Aasana (Administración de Aeropuertos Auxiliares a la Navegación Aérea) y de su abogado.

El Departamento de Cooperación Internacional del Procurador General de la Oficina, en coordinación con el fiscal en Corumbá, ciudad de Mato Grosso del Sur que limita con Bolivia, “pedirá a las agencias federales competentes tomen las medidas adecuadas, en consonancia con las normas internacionales y la ley brasileña”, dice Globo.

Castedo tiene en su contra una denuncia penal en por incumplimiento de deberes y atentado contra la seguridad de los transportes, pues ella es la oficial de Aro Ais (encargada de la revisión de los planes de vuelo) que autorizó la documentación de LaMia en el aeropuerto Viru Viru. Horas después, este avión sufrió un accidente que costó la vida a 71 fallecidos, la mayoría del club Chapecoense.#

TRANSLATE
Brazil, Monday, December 5 (ATB Digital) .- Celia Castedo Monasterio, an employee of Aasana and involved in the case of the LaMia plane crash, sought information on refuge in the Federal Police and the Federal Public Ministry (MPF) in Corumbá, Brazil.

Around 8:00 today, Castedo sought this information in the Federal Immigration Department of the Brazilian Police accompanied by his lawyer. Then he went to the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF), according to the portal of the Globo network.

MPF prosecutor Gabriela Tavares confirmed the presence of an official of the Aasana (Airport Administration Auxiliary to Air Navigation) and her lawyer.

The Department of International Cooperation of the Attorney General of the Office, in coordination with the prosecutor in Corumbá, a border city of Mato Grosso del Sur bordering Bolivia, "will request the appropriate federal agencies to take appropriate measures, in accordance with international standards and The Brazilian law, "says Globo.

Castedo has a criminal complaint against her for breach of duties and violation of the safety of transport, as she is the official of Aro Ais (responsible for the revision of the flight plans) that authorized LaMia documentation at the airport Viru Viru. Hours later, this plane suffered an accident that cost the life to 71 deceased, the majority of the Chapecoense club

peekay4

6th Dec 2016, 03:47

Think of atc as 'traffic police'. they are there to enforce regulations.
I can only say that most major ATC & Flight Planning systems around the world do not check the "endurance" field against regulatory requirements. Only simple syntax and semantic checks are performed. ATC is not there to enforce regulations. That's the job of the regulator (XAA).

chuks

6th Dec 2016, 05:50

I did get total engine failures in the sim, but only as an extra when we had some time left over after putting ticks in all the boxes on a normal two-hour session of recurrent training. It's not something thought of as likely to happen, I suppose.

I didn't mess it up, but I never got any brief on how to handle that problem, no de-brief on how I did handle it, and no feedback from any other pilot on whether he also had been given a total engine failure, so that this was not taken seriously.

Basically you need to know your approximate speed for max L/D and then figure out how to position the aircraft on finals with enough height to make the runway, but not so much that you will over-run it, preferably in the landing configuration. That's basic airmanship, something not necessarily taught later during sim training. Try not to be "gobsmacked" that expensive sim time is not used to teach the basics; that is not what it's meant for.

When we get the report on this crash, expect to read that the accident crew probably had enough height to have made it to the runway even with all four engines out, if only they had known how to manage that. The thing is, though, someone with that level of skill probably would not have put himself in a situation where he needed to do that!

dsc810

6th Dec 2016, 07:40

Interesting development....
Allegedly Celia has sought "refuge" in Brazil
So I guess she managed to slip across the border unnoticed and is going to claim asylum
https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.atb.com.bo/seccion/sociedad/celia-castedo-involucrada-en-caso-lamia-busca-refugio-en-brasil&prev=search

sabenaboy

6th Dec 2016, 08:06

vmandr

Quote:
Think of atc as 'traffic police'. they are there to enforce regulations.
I spent 40 years in ATC in the UK, I was never a policeman. I was there to prevent collisions.

Quote:
ARO is -usually- part of ATC which enforces ICAO and country rules and regs.

So ARO has executive authority.
They are not policeman either.

Quote:
Often though to avoid arguing with 'pussy' pilots or dispatchers, they just call the GND/TWR controller, very difficult to be reached, and when clearance is requested, the involved are informed of the ATS rejection of that flight plan. If the individual still persist, police follows...
Tosh in the UK

Quote:
Mere FPL submission, does not make it a 'guarantee' the flight will operate.
IFPS in Europe rejects dozen 'wrong' FPLs every day.
For routeing/traffic reasons. Nothing else.

Vintage ATCO is correct. Blaming this ARO lady is ridiculous. Many people should expect to be punished in this case, but Celia shoild NOT be one of them. The captain/owner is the main culprit. He has already received the death penalty. It's just sad that he took 70 other people with him.

MartinM

6th Dec 2016, 08:31

Indeed. The captain and the dispatcher has been found guilty for the deliberate killing of 71 people. The sentence to death has already been executed.

Asides from this, neither the ARO lady nor the ATC lady in Medellin are guilty for anything. They did their job.

testpanel

6th Dec 2016, 08:57

From the washingtonpost:

LA PAZ, Bolivia — The airline involved in last week’s crash in the Andes left a trail of unpaid bills that forced Bolivia’s air force to seize two planes and briefly jail one of the company’s owners, Bolivian Defense Minister Reymi Ferreira said Monday.

chuks

6th Dec 2016, 09:38

Don't you suppose that the accident flight crew did not have a Plan B? Plan A probably was to arrive in a critically low fuel state, get cleared for a straight-in approach, and land with just enough fuel to taxi to the stand on two engines. Sorted!

Plan B would have meant figuring out how to cope with being put Number Three for the approach with instructions to hold: an unforeseen yet easily foreseeable situation.

There were various options available, but none seem to have been thought of, let alone used. Most basically, to have just told ATC what the problem was, declaring an emergency in good time, would probably have worked just fine in terms of landing safely.

The ironic thing is that Plan A must have been highly illegal, although it probably would have avoided trouble for the flight crew. Plan B, on the other hand, would have been perfectly legal: to declare an emergency because of a critically low fuel state, to get cleared for a straight-in approach, and to land, but with trouble almost sure to follow.

From that point, having landed safely, the flight crew might have been in a whole lot of trouble, since it might have been quite clear that the flight had been using Plan A, an arrival with almost no fuel.

Something I have seen and experienced is an escalation of risk bringing a feeling, a false one, of increased safety. That is because of what might happen becoming catastrophic, becoming literally unimaginable.

In this situation there would have been the imaginable risk to the crew of being ramp-checked, interrogated about how they came to arrive with far too little fuel, compared to the unimaginable risk of crashing the aircraft and killing themselves and most of those aboard. The imaginable risk was being avoided by courting the unimaginable risk, so to speak.

It's sort of like running from the cops by crossing six lanes of motorway traffic. If you stand there, they've surely got you; if you run you might get away with doing that. Some people go for the unimaginable risk over the imaginable risk then; it's human nature to do so, but something a pilot is supposedly trained to avoid doing.

portmanteau

6th Dec 2016, 11:47

Vivacolombia (FC8170) was given priority to land although he had not declared an emergency. Lamia was delayed 13 minutes in the hold while he and Avianca (AV 9356) beneath him, waited for 8170 (beneath both aircraft) to arrive at RNG VOR and continue on the ILS to land. No radar control seems to have occurred which might have reduced the waiting time.

deefer dog

6th Dec 2016, 12:49

Don't you suppose that the accident flight crew did not have a Plan B? Plan A probably was to arrive in a critically low fuel state, get cleared for a straight-in approach, and land with just enough fuel to taxi to the stand on two engines. Sorted!

My guess is that Plan A was to attempt the flight non-stop, and "re-evaluate" the situation (fuel, weather, delays) as they passed overhead the alternate. This is perhaps how the deal was "sold" to the co-pilot.

It will be interesting to learn what was discussed as they reached this critical point, and how much fuel was remaining. Clearly though the Captain thought there was enough. Judging by his actions he must of thought he had more than enough, or otherwise why would he have accepted a hold rather than simply make a direct to the threshold?

For sure there's gonna be a lot of human factors explained in the report. One can only guess at this stage but mine is that the Captain thought there was enough - maybe "only just enough" - as he passed his alternate. Having "convinced" his crew that to continue was okay, he kept a brave face because he didn't want to look stupid - even though he must have seen that the situation was turning dire.

The bit I simply can't get my head around is why he didn't head direct for the RW as soon as he announced the "electric problems" which surely MUST have been the result of loss of gen due to fuel starvation on one side.

RAT 5

6th Dec 2016, 12:51

The thing is, though, someone with that level of skill probably would not have put himself in a situation where he needed to do that!

Ah; the definition of a skilful pilot emerges. Using your skill to avoid putting yourself in a scenario where you need you skill to survive.

What surprises me is the lack of survival instinct in both pilots. I wonder if the dispatcher was in the flight deck as well. If so then he would have been privy to the discussion about landing for fuel or not. That 'put your neck in a noose' behaviour in a pilot is a astonishing. To then pull it tight is disturbing; to then jump is suicidal.
I had missed what Portmanteau says about so many other a/c being involved and a 13 min delay. I'd only noted the Avianca previously. That 13mins is for Murphy, but should never have been that short.

A0283

6th Dec 2016, 12:52

Update 3 - Impact and break-up sequence based on publicly available photo and video material – based on material available to me by midday December 5th. The available photo/video material was limited and the quality low. Medium quality photo and video material is now available.

+
Identification

On the high ridge. One elevator half. The tail-mounted-speedbrake with part of the structure with hatch in front of it, plus part of the vertical tail.
Half way down the middle of the high ridge one MLG plus MLG-door. The other MLG is near the fuselage below.

In the hollow below. Identified components (high probability) are the almost complete left and right wing plus engine number2 (completely stripped of the cowling). The left hand aft pax door with 5 ½ windows in front of it. The right hand aft pax door with 6-7 windows in front. Both pax doors still closed. One loose forward pax door. One engine nacelle. A large part of the fuselage belly.
At this moment in time still no trace of the other 3 engines. No trace of the cockpit section except for the loose almost intact main instrument panel of the captain (probably recovered and repositioned). No trace of the forward fuselage section. No trace of cargo hatches. No trace of any avionics 'boxes'. Limited wiring. Multiple galley carts but original position in the plane unknown.

Which means 3 of the 4 corners can be identified.

+

At this stage a very very premature guesstimate of a more probable impact and break-up sequence could have been:

a. Plane in a slightly pitch up attitude, pointing approximately in the direction of the VOR, at a relatively low forward speed, and a low vertical speed. Not known if the plane was on either an ‘aerodynamic glide path’ or by then following a ‘ballistic trajectory’. You need someone who connects the LKP and altitude with the impact location.
b. The intact and complete plane hits the high ridge. The impact breaks off the tail section behind the aft pax door, and leaves the tail and elevator with the (closed?) tailspeedbrake on top of the high ridge.
c. The plane shoots over the top. The impact banks and yaws the plane.
d. The plane pitches forward and starts contacting trees and ground. This breaks off the MLG’s and impacts the lower fuselage. Not clear if (one or more) engines already break off here.
e. The wing breaks off and takes part of the top of the center fuselage section with it. Complete wing plus engines and part of the associated torn fuselage structure flips over forward and starts the slide down. Cutting and flattening trees and uprooting and flattening a tall tree with an about 50cm diameter trunk in the last third.
f. The aft fuselage section continues the movement forward, rotates, and partially rolls over, during the slide down. The left hand aft door pointing down. At the end it slides on top of the wing and comes to a halt.

The question with this scenario is, how did anyone survive? One thing to do is comparing the actual seating arrangement with the scenario above. One seating arrangement shows players in front, journalists in the middle, and staff at the back. That layout though shows most cabin crew in passenger seats.

In Update2 I said that at least two different answers might be applicable.
The first is - pure luck - there are a number of possible explanations that improve chances. That would mean (with that seating arrangement) that the three players and the journalist were very lucky.
The second is - based on a maximum energy dissipation and lowest G's scenario - people sitting (probably on the left hand side) in the fuselage section aft of the wing and before the aft doorframe. Cabin crew having taken a passenger seat aft or in aft facing folding crew seat inclusive. That would mean that the stewardess and technician may have been seated there.

Finding photo's of the cockpit section would be priority1 if you would want to reduce the number of possible scenario's.

Sorry for the long post.

EstorilM

6th Dec 2016, 14:04

Interesting article from Fox News Latino Lamia pilot was facing trial, had arrest warrant issued for him in Bolivia | Fox News Latino (http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2016/12/05/lamia-pilot-was-facing-trial-had-arrest-warrant-issued-for-him-in-bolivia/)

The Bolivian Defense Minister - Reymi Ferreira, contends that the pilot (Quiroga) had received military training from the Bolivian air force after enlisting, then - a significant way through his training, he bailed and "retired" from service, even though his enlistment terms stated he would need to stay for a predetermined amount of time in exchange for the training.

So he bailed after (what they say amount to ~$100k USD) in training, then had enough legal stuff scheduled in the pipeline to keep him out of jail - though the article says there was indeed an active arrest warrant out for him! :=

ALSO - other articles released yesterday clearly outline corruption and manipulation tactics by LaMia. For example, the two aircraft that were out "on loan" and/or in for "heavy maintenance" were actually IMPOUNDED in 2014 along with the 3rd / crash aircraft, at a Bolivian air force facility after they refused to pay for maintenance which had been conducted there, and apparently they were able to get one aircraft out of there. Five months ago, the pilot in the crash flight (again, Quiroga) was actually detained in connection with the unpaid repairs and impounded aircraft and had been awaiting trail. :ugh:

RAT 5

6th Dec 2016, 14:49

AND this outfit had an AOC? How is that possible? There might be some nervous people twitching on hot seats in local CAA. Brazil my suddenly become crowded.

Lonewolf_50

6th Dec 2016, 14:56

The folks at CONMEBOL seem not to have minded working with this outfit. :ugh: Due diligence: how does one say that in Spanish?

Corporate culture / company culture / command culture: how does one graph that for this company, and will the investigators make an attempt to do that?

semperfubar

6th Dec 2016, 14:58

I like this news report on how apparently they transported the argentinean football team on November the 11th, Leonel Messi et al, from brazil to B.A. and it took 4hrs and 4 minutes. Looks like they were cutting that one a bit close as well, I would say this looks like a case of normalization of deviance. The pilot had done it so many times, it was just waiting for the one time things didn't work out as planned.

La aerolínea LaMia, operadora boliviana del avión que se accidentó en Colombia la semana pasada y que transportaba a los jugadores del club de fútbol brasileño Chapecoense, ya había incumplido la normativa aérea de disponibilidad de combustible en un vuelo previo con la selección argentina. Según consigna el diario brasileño "Folha de Sao Paulo", la empresa dueña del avión que se estrelló dejando a 71 personas fallecidas cerca de Medellín, había trasladado a los jugadores trasandinos el pasado 11 de noviembre, incluyendo a Lionel Messi, desde Brasil hacia Buenos Aires y había llegado casi sin combustible a su destino. Ello, luego de que las selecciones de ambos países disputaran un partido por las clasificatorias al Mundial 2018 en la ciudad de Belo Horizonte. De acuerdo con la información de Folha, el sistema de supervisión de vuelo FlightRadar 24 detectó que el trayecto realizado ese día duró 4 horas y 4 minutos, solo 18 minutos menos que la capacidad de vuelo declarada por el avión.

Source (you can google translate): Emol.com - Aerolínea del avión siniestrado en Colombia habría infringido la normativa en viaje con la selección argentina | Emol.com (http://www.emol.com/noticias/Internacional/2016/12/06/834353/Aerolinea-del-avion-siniestrado-en-Colombia-habria-infringido-la-normativa-en-viaje-anterior-con-la-seleccion-argentina.html)

baselb

6th Dec 2016, 15:37

Due diligence: how does one say that in Spanish?Que Ching?

Joejosh999

6th Dec 2016, 15:47

Do we have any posters familiar with this airport?
Would LAM have had to clear that ridge by the VOR prior to finding the ILS localizer?
It would appear he never did that, and I'm curious because the Avianca pilot related that the LAM pilot kept saying "I can't remember the f*cking code!"
So I wonder if at least one person in the cockpit was still trying to get established on ILS....

broadreach

6th Dec 2016, 16:36

Joejosh999
If you were to read through the entire thread you'd find that quite a few posters are professionally familiar with all the airports involved.

Lonewolf_50
The lack of due diligence on the part of Chapecoense's directors bothers many people here as well. They're not - at least not yet - suspected of taking kickbacks from LaMia. I think they may just have taken Conmebol's lead; if that was the case and a paper trail can be established to show that Conmebol actively recommended LaMia in spite of their dodgy past and illegal operating practices, I can see the lawyers rubbing their hands in glee.
As for the translation of "due diligence" the phrase more commonly used here is Gobernanza (SP)/Governança (Pt) Corporativa".

Joejosh999

6th Dec 2016, 17:00

Broadreach apologies for not being clear ....I was hoping we had posters familiar enough to comment on the ILS availability while S of VOR, and also the crew comments re not remembering "the code" - and if that might mean there was someone trying to establish ILS.

I have read every page of this thread to the best of my understanding and remain confused by the apparent descent to VOR 9 nm short, and how that might interplay w need to establish ILS.

jess15

6th Dec 2016, 17:56

The alleged links between LaMia & both Conmebol (and even President Morales ) have already been floated on this forum.

Eldeber has since reported that, two months ago, LaMia Bolivia was worth $16,516 and "And its declared initial capital would be $ 21,551, both figures "very low for an expensive and dangerous activity such as commercial aviation," according to the testimony collected by the former president of the Bolivian Economists Association Waldo López."

This article from ElPais explores the Conmebol in further detail, via a logistics company called Off Side.
"In the case of CONMEBOL, suspicions of corruption exceed the speed of light. The posthumous confession of one of the dead pilots adds another indication that confirms the close relationship with Lamia: "Proud to be the official carrier of the Copa Sudamericana 2016," said minutes before leaving for Medellin,"

https://www.pagina12.com.ar/6822-dirigentes-que-vuelan-bajito

PashaF

6th Dec 2016, 18:11

SStreeter

7th Dec 2016, 00:43

BBC World Service news reported at 01:00 UTC that the 'head' of Lamia, 'Gustavo Vargas', has been arrested by the Bolivian Authorities.

Listen here at 01:50:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04jh673

Interesting that the concerns of Celia Castedo (mentioned by name) appear to be being taken seriously.

(When the deaths of many prominent nationals of another country are concerned, perhaps punishing the innocent really is not an option . . )

thcrozier

7th Dec 2016, 02:14

Chapecoense plane crash: Bolivia arrests LaMia airline boss - BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-38231774)

Vargas, the chief of LaMia, is also a former pilot for Bolivian President Evo Morales:

http://m.la-razon.com/nacional/Bolivia-LaMia-accidente-Colombia-Evo-Vargas-gerente_0_2611538836.html

G-V

7th Dec 2016, 03:16

I am quite confused. In the video there is a lady in the left seat with 3 stripes and a gent in the cabin with 2 stripes.
Who was PIC? Are there any other crew member with 4 stripes on that flight?

Water pilot

7th Dec 2016, 03:17

thcrozier

7th Dec 2016, 03:35

I am quite confused. In the video there is a lady in the left seat with 3 stripes and a gent in the cabin with 2 stripes.
Who was PIC? Are there any other crew member with 4 stripes on that flight?

That would be Miguel Quiroga, whose remains received a hero's welcome upon being returned to Bolivia.

Cobija recibe a su piloto como héroe y en Santa Cruz la congoja se apodera de Viru Viru | Diario Correo del Sur: Noticias de Sucre, Bolivia y el Mundo (http://correodelsur.com/seguridad/20161202_cobija-recibe-a-su-piloto-como-heroe-y-en-santa-cruz-la-congoja-se-apodera-de-viru-viru.html)

TowerDog

7th Dec 2016, 04:56

The five bodies of the Bolivians killed in the Chapecoense club's aerial tragedy arrived Friday from Colombia to the territory of the Plurinational State on a Hercules Air Force plane (FAB).
As expected, the aircraft initially arrived in the city of Cobija to leave the body of Miguel Quiroga Murakami, who was the pilot of the plane crash of the company LaMia.
The remains of Quiroga were received by a large number of people who moved to the airport of Cobija amid a series of expressions of regret and the crying of their relatives.
Then the plane went to the Viru Viru airport in Santa Cruz to deliver to their relatives the bodies of Ovar Goytia (co-pilot), Sisy Arias (co-pilot), Rommel David Vacaflores (flight attendant) and Alex Quispe (dispatcher).
As in Cobija, dozens of people with white flowers in hand and other signs of solidarity moved to the airport to receive the bodies of the crew of the LaMia aircraft, which crashed last Monday night against the hill Gordo department Colombian city of Antioquia. To the place also came authorities like the minister of Defense, Reymi Ferreira.
The air accident left a total of 71 people dead, among them the great majority of the players of the Brazilian soccer team Chapecoense, and six survivors.
Among the survivors of the tragedy are also two Bolivian citizens, identified as the stewardess Ximena Suárez and the technician Erwin Tumiri.
At the moment both people recover from their wounds in different hospitals in Medellín.

TowerDog

7th Dec 2016, 05:05

The above translated from previous post/link via Google.

The cockpit crew may come across as heros and get sympathy for

losing their lives in such an unfortunate accident, but only because the public is ignorant and the officials are downplaying or hiding sad facts. :sad:

Tfor2

7th Dec 2016, 06:41

The real question here is that the pilot had altitude, speed, wind, pressure, distance to r/w and no power, and lacked the necessary skills to fly the aircraft until a safe landing. Coulda and shoulda made it. Sorry if this sounds harsh.

ORAC

7th Dec 2016, 06:48

Interesting development....
Allegedly Celia has sought "refuge" in Brazil. So I guess she managed to slip across the border unnoticed and is going to claim asylum

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/07/colombia-plane-crash-airline-chief-arrested-over-chapecoense-disaster

"............Earlier on Tuesday, Bolivia demanded Brazil expel a Bolivian air traffic controller (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/06/colombia-plane-crash-bolivia-air-traffic-controller-brazil)who travelled there to give authorities information about the crash.

The Bolivian interior minister Carlos Romero said Celia Castedo had illegally bypassed migration controls on her way out of the country in an attempt to flee justice. He said Castedo was being sought as part of a broad investigation into Bolivia’s air travel authority after the 28 November crash. “There is no argument to justify an asylum request,” Romero said. “Logically, in a case like this there should be a process of automatic expulsion [from Brazil].”

Federal prosecutors in Brazil said late on Monday that the woman had come to them in the border city of Corumba after the Bolivian air travel authority accused her of negligence. Brazilian TV station Globo reported Castedo was seeking asylum in Brazil and that she had questioned a flight plan showing the intended route would push the limits of the plane’s maximum possible flight time..........."

MartinM

7th Dec 2016, 06:56

Blondie2005

7th Dec 2016, 07:00

I was thinking about contributory factors and it seems to me that football team are not average passengers. They travel with a lot of baggage, and journalist equipment was also on board. What if the plane was heavier than usual? Within legal regulation but enough to eat that10 minutes they was hoping for.

I used to work for a Premier League club. Charters were used all the time for players and officials, kit was usually sent separately, usually by road in the UK - no time pressure to get the kit there and back, but a need to move the players there and back ASAP for sporting reasons (maximise training and recovery time at base in a crowded fixture list). Also cost - taking kit of course means a bigger plane.

marie paire

7th Dec 2016, 07:02

I was thinking about contributory factors and it seems to me that football team are not average passengers. They travel with a lot of baggage, and journalist equipment was also on board. What if the plane was heavier than usual? Within legal regulation but enough to eat that10 minutes they was hoping for.
Please stop throwing red herrings into the equation!. From all that is known so far, the accident occurred because:
1. Main factor:
The flight was planned with insufficient fuel for the flight in violation of ICAO and national regulations;
2. Contributing factors:
a. the PIC failed to declare fuel emergency when it became apparent that the fuel was below the established minimuns. Mayday was never heard;
b. After the flame-out, the crew did not possess the skill to glide the plane to the airport.
The investigation may unearth additional causes. But, discounting an attempt at a cover-up, it would be extremely surprising if it came out with something substantively different from the above.

DaveReidUK

7th Dec 2016, 07:06

I used to work for a Premier League club. Charters were used all the time for prayers and officials, kit was usually sent separately, usually by road in the UK - no time pressure to get the kit there and back, but a need to move the players there and back ASAP for sporting reasons (maximise training and recovery time at base in a crowded fixture list).

Though UK Premier League clubs don't often play opponents who are a 4+ hour flight away.

saffi

7th Dec 2016, 07:06

The engines have feeder tanks allowing them to run some time after tanks are dry. Doesn't the APU have a feeder tank? Wouldn't that have given them a couple of minutes at least? Does the APU auto start when all engines die? I can imagine it must have been very dark all of a sudden (well, they could have expected it..)

Blondie2005

7th Dec 2016, 07:08

Though UK Premier League clubs don't often play opponents who are a 4+ hour flight away.

Some Champs/Europa League games are.

deefer dog

7th Dec 2016, 07:43

@marie paire,

Please stop throwing red herrings into the equation!

Are you a new mod on the thread?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PashaF View Post
I was thinking about contributory factors and it seems to me that football team are not average passengers. They travel with a lot of baggage, and journalist equipment was also on board. What if the plane was heavier than usual? Within legal regulation but enough to eat that10 minutes they was hoping for.

PashaF was writing about contributory factors, and quite reasonably IMO. The extra load would have required more fuel.

jess15

7th Dec 2016, 07:52

Pardon me for a really dumb question from a non pilot, but how did this outfit get insurance? With two planes in hock for nonpayment of maintenance, an outstanding arrest warrant, and a very low balance sheet this would look like a commercial operation that would be extremely high risk. I assume that you cannot take off with passengers for hire without current insurance, even in Bolivia or am I missing something?

I imagine that is to do with Vargas's son -Gustavo Steven Vargas Villegas-having been Director of the DGAC.
( He was suspended on the same day as Celia Monasterio from Aasana.)

Whilst Vargas Senior has been arrested on Tuesday, he is claiming he resigned due to pesonal reasons, three days prior to the crash. ( He has a notarised letter that has been published in the media.)

I expect Rocha (third LaMia owner-pilot) will be arrested next. The South American journalists have unearthed a photo which shows he co-piloted the Argentine national team in November, the controversial flight that's also been discussed in all the press.¿Imprudencia extrema? El vuelo de Lamia de la selección habría llegado con lo justo | Mundo D (http://mundod.lavoz.com.ar/futbol/imprudencia-extrema-el-vuelo-de-lamia-de-la-seleccion-habria-llegado-con-lo-justo)

As for insurance, it's been mooted in the press, that in reality they never had valid insurance for international operation. This link details the financial irregularities that journalists have found in the last couple of days.
LaMia operaba con un patrimonio de Bs 114.953 | Noticias de Bolivia y el Mundo - EL DEBER (http://www.eldeber.com.bo/bolivia/lamia-operaba-patrimonio-bs-114.html)

Meanwhile "flight technician" Erwin Tumiri still can't accept the crash was due to lack of fuel and believes it to be faulty APU.
Tumiri hace nuevas revelaciones y funcionaria busca asilo: LaMia | Diario Correo del Sur: Noticias de Sucre, Bolivia y el Mundo (http://correodelsur.com/seguridad/20161206_tumiri-hace-nuevas-revelaciones-y-funcionaria-busca-asilo-lamia.html)

Note well, there was an additional flight engineer on board, Angel Lugo, (técnico venezolano) as well as the Paraguayan pilot Gustavo Encina. ( Posters asked after the crash, why the crew totalled 9.........)