PDA

View Full Version : Angara Airlines An-24 landing accident at Nizhneangarsk


Nothrills
27th Jun 2019, 11:12
So far nothing here on today's accident at Nizhneangarsk, Russia:
https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20190627-0

Live video from inside:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtJcgdU5MUk

SquintyMagoo
27th Jun 2019, 14:34
https://www.rt.com/news/462775-russia-nizhneangarsk-crash-landing/

Longtimer
27th Jun 2019, 16:51
Russia plane crash kills two, injures dozens in Siberia Plane skids off runway in Russia's Buryatia region before slamming into a building and catching fire. 2 hours ago




https://theairlinewebsite.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2019/6/27/5d2031ff714840629930350c294c963a_18.jpg&key=9428e0402c1e258c7309779578da813dacd7733bfdd473384405294e 43936754 (https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2019/6/27/5d2031ff714840629930350c294c963a_18.jpg)Officials say all the passengers were safely evacuated from the plane before it was destroyed by fire [Ministry of Emergency Situations for the Republic of Buryatia press service via AP]A small passenger plane has skidded off a runway in eastern Siberia, killing two crew members and injuring dozens of passengers.

The An-24 plane carrying 48 people, including five crew members, experienced an engine failure and crash-landed in the town of Nizhneangarsk on Thursday morning, Russia (https://www.aljazeera.com/topics/country/russia.html)'s top investigation body, the Investigative Committee, said in a statement.

The jet overshot the runway, slammed into a building and caught fire in the town on the northern shore of Lake Baikal. Footage from the scene showed the plane lying on its belly with the nose broken off.

Officials said that a pilot with 34 years of experience and a flight mechanic died while the other crew members survived.

The Buryatia governor had previously said both pilots had died.

The aircraft had taken off from the regional capital of Ulan-Ude and flew to Nizhneangarsk, where it was forced to make an emergency landing when one of its engines failed, regional officials said.

"All 43 passengers were promptly evacuated. There were no victims among the passengers," Angara Airlines said in a statement. The airline appeared only to be referring to deaths.

More than 30 people have been injured, and nine were taken to hospitals with severe burns and other injuries, said Alexei Fishev, spokesman for the local governor.

Investigators say they have launched a probe into what caused the crash of the An-24 which is a mainstay of Russian aviation

The Antonov An-24 is a 44-seat twin turboprop transport/passenger aircraft designed in 1957 in the Soviet Union by the Antonov Design Bureau and manufactured by Kiev, Irkutsk and Ulan-Ude Aviation Factories. Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-24) Top speed (https://www.google.com/search?rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&q=antonov+an-24+top+speed&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgE-LUz9U3MLa0yDLQUs1OttJPLMtMLMnMz9NPzCxKLkpMK4nPzU9JzbEqyS9QKC 5ITU1ZxCqemFeSn5dfppCYp2tkogCXAQBtqPANTgAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEufvxjorjAhUHjVQKHZfKCw4Q6BMoADAdegQIDRAG): 500 km/hRange (https://www.google.com/search?rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&q=antonov+an-24+range&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgE-LUz9U3MLa0yDLQUsxOttJPLMtMLMnMz9NPzCxKLkpMK4nPzU9JzbEqSsxLT1 3EKpyYV5Kfl1-mkJina2SiABYFAGn-2GhGAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEufvxjorjAhUHjVQKHZfKCw4Q6BMoADAeegQIDRAJ): 2,761 kmCruise speed (https://www.google.com/search?rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&q=antonov+an-24+cruise+speed&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgE-LUz9U3MLa0yDLQ0shOttJPLMtMLMnMz9NPzCxKLkpMK4nPzU9JzbFKLirNLE 5VKC5ITU1ZxCqVmFeSn5dfppCYp2tkooAsCQCJfyVOVAAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEufvxjorjAhUHjVQKHZfKCw4Q6BMoADAfegQIDRAM): 500 km/hLength (https://www.google.com/search?rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&q=antonov+an-24+length&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgE-LUz9U3MLa0yDLQUspOttJPLMtMLMnMz9NPzCxKLkpMK4nPzU9JzbHKSc1LL8 lYxCqSmFeSn5dfppCYp2tkogARBgAGB5VfSAAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEufvxjorjAhUHjVQKHZfKCw4Q6BMoADAgegQIDRAP): 24 mEngine type (https://www.google.com/search?rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&q=antonov+an-24+engine+type&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgE-LUz9U3MLa0yDLQUs9OttJPLMtMLMnMz9NPzCxKLkpMK4nPzU9JzbFKzUvPzE tVKKksSF3EKpmYV5Kfl1-mkJina2SigCQHANkQBWFSAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEufvxjorjAhUHjVQKHZfKCw4Q6BMoADAhegQIDRAS): Ivchenko AI-24First flight (https://www.google.com/search?rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&q=antonov+an-24+first+flight&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgE-LUz9U3MLa0yDLQ0shOttJPLMtMLMnMz9NPzCxKLkpMK4nPzU9JzbFKyywqLl FIy8lMzyhZxCqVmFeSn5dfppCYp2tkooAsCQAKrgSlVAAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEufvxjorjAhUHjVQKHZfKCw4Q6BMoADAiegQIDRAV): October 29, 1959

PastTense
27th Jun 2019, 20:27
Is this aircraft designed so that it can still fly adequately with just one engine operating?

UltraFan
27th Jun 2019, 20:57
Is this aircraft designed so that it can still fly adequately with just one engine operating?

Yep. It's an unbelievably reliable plane. It's basically a regional bush-plane. It's got tons of fail-safe automation, including automatic prop feathering, and guaranteed landing gear lowering in case of hydraulics failure, etc. It is very popular with small regional airlines in Siberia where paved runways are few and far in-between. It's very old and very few young pilots want to fly it, so most An-24 pilots are, for the lack of a better word, old and with tons of flight hours. Which can be both good and bad.

The information above may be incorrect. According to what I'm reading, it didn't overshoot the runway but rather veered off after landing. It may (or may not) indicate that the pilots simply forgot they have one engine inop and pulled both reverse levers. But that's nothing more than speculation until we have the IAC's report.

Sunamer
27th Jun 2019, 21:11
The jet overshot the runway, slammed into a building and caught fire in the town on the northern shore of Lake Baikal


the jet? Good thing they upgraded that an 24 with those jet engines

Hotel Tango
27th Jun 2019, 21:29
Is this aircraft designed so that it can still fly adequately with just one engine operating?

Evidently yes since it flew back and landed at the airport. The problem started after landing when it began to veer off the runway.

DaveReidUK
27th Jun 2019, 22:54
the jet? Good thing they upgraded that an 24 with those jet engines

Yes, the moral being that if you cut-and-paste from an external source (AP in this case), you should credit it, otherwise you'll get the blame for any of their howlers. :O

Though, to be fair, the OP did.

capngrog
27th Jun 2019, 23:12
The information above may be incorrect. According to what I'm reading, it didn't overshoot the runway but rather veered off after landing. It may (or may not) indicate that the pilots simply forgot they have one engine inop and pulled both reverse levers. But that's nothing more than speculation until we have the IAC's report.

I also considered that to be a possibility, but from carefully listening to the audio portion of the video, the sound of the engines doesn't seem to change until after the airplane departed the runway. Only after the airplane was well off of the runway does the sound change to the "flat pitch'" sound characteristic of the older single shaft turbo-prop engines. The video is showing the right engine of the airplane, but with the stroboscopic effect of modern digital cameras, it's tough to tell if the engine is producing power; however, I think that it is fairly safe to assume that the failed engine (No.1) had already been shut down and feathered.

Whatever the cause, it's a shame that the pilot and mechanic lost their lives. R.I.P.

Grog

Sunamer
27th Jun 2019, 23:51
The jet overshot the runway, slammed into a building and caught fire in the town on the northern shore of Lake Baikal


the jet? Good thing they upgraded that an 24 with those jet engines

CaptCFI
28th Jun 2019, 00:44
I cannot connect the dots from watching the video. If the left engine (No 1) had failed why did it pull to the side of the good engine! Also the aircraft never seemed to decelerate and the engine sound remained almost constant. The video appears to also show that the pitch on the blade didn't flatten or vary after touchdown.

tolip1
28th Jun 2019, 07:50
I cannot connect the dots from watching the video. If the left engine (No 1) had failed why did it pull to the side of the good engine! Also the aircraft never seemed to decelerate and the engine sound remained almost constant. The video appears to also show that the pitch on the blade didn't flatten or vary after touchdown.
Reverse thrust will pull it to side of good engine?

Tu.114
28th Jun 2019, 10:12
On this video, there is a remarkable trail of white smoke behind the right main landing gear, starting nearly immediately after touchdown. This video briefly shows the right wheels in a rather shredded state (at about 0:50), albeit already after the runway excursion started.

Those two points might well be connected to subsequent lateral control issues on the ground: if the wheels on one side have failed and soft(ish) ground is entered, there may well be a big imbalance turning the aircraft to the right, as has obviously happened.

Unfortunately, technical drawings of the An-24 are hard to come by - but maybe there is somebody around here familiar with the landing gear and brake installation on the An-24? Does the failure of engine #1 affect the operation of the hydraulic system and, consequently, the brakes? Is there a connection between an engine failure and a subsequent tire failure upon landing?

Auxtank
28th Jun 2019, 11:35
That approach looks howlingly fast in the first video.
Over-compensating for Vmca?

UltraFan
28th Jun 2019, 12:49
That approach looks howlingly fast in the first video.
Over-compensating for Vmca?

I don't see much flaps. Maybe some of us with better eyes will correct me, but I think it's landing with no flaps at all.

The white smoke is, imho, the locked tires trying to stop the plane. The cabin video showed shredded tires on the right.

The cabin video also clearly shows that reverse thrust wasn't applied at all. On An-24 when props are reversed the change in sound is very distinctive. The outside video shows smoke only coming from the right tire. Maybe that's what pulled it to the right. And pilots either didn't know the left brake was inop or simply had no choice but to keep pushing.

Hotel Tango
28th Jun 2019, 14:40
I thought it looked a tad fast too, but I'd be the first to admit that it's very difficult to judge accurately. If indeed fast, did it burst that starboard tyre on landing?

pattern_is_full
28th Jun 2019, 14:49
Larger version of the post-crash still picture above:

https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/russia-plane-crash.jpg

It does show the outer-right tire is missing, and I did note what could be flailing rubber in the video, although that brief section is so jumpy that I considered it unreliable evidence on its own.

Approach speed - I'd want to hear from someone with An24 experience. The wide-angle lenses on phonecams can distort or exaggerate ground speed. But it did look fast to me.

Touchdown is just past the second = runway marks - is that significantly long?

Nevertheless, the excursion to the right is probably the key event.

Sunamer
28th Jun 2019, 16:53
Larger version of the post-crash still picture above:

https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/russia-plane-crash.jpg

It does show the outer-right tire is missing, and I did note what could be flailing rubber in the video, although that brief section is so jumpy that I considered it unreliable evidence on its own.

Approach speed - I'd want to hear from someone with An24 experience. The wide-angle lenses on phonecams can distort or exaggerate ground speed. But it did look fast to me.

Touchdown is just past the second = runway marks - is that significantly long?

Nevertheless, the excursion to the right is probably the key event.

it also looked like pitch was slightly negative. It seems there is a training problem in regards to russian pilots making approaches at well above the correct speeds, which occasionally leads to landings like this one.
in fact, by looking at the landings of old russian birds you almost always see how they balloon and have almost 0 pitch right before touching down.

Old Dogs
28th Jun 2019, 19:57
It seems there is a training problem in regards to russian pilots making approaches at well above the correct speeds, which occasionally leads to landings like this one.


Really? ����

Tu.114
29th Jun 2019, 09:17
Of course, there are many western aircraft types that are known for their negative pitch during approach as well. Consider the CRJ-200, the DH8 in certain flap settings and other models (typically) without slats. Given the prevalence of such pitch values on these types, Occams Razor would rather seem to point to systemic or procedural reasons for them than to training issues affecting the entire world fleets.

Here is a video of an apparently normal An-24 landing that also displays a rather negative pitch during approach...

UltraFan
29th Jun 2019, 21:51
Unfortunately, technical drawings of the An-24 are hard to come by
If you read Russian, I can give you the link to An-24 technical description on airdocs. LMK

Tu.114
30th Jun 2019, 08:04
@Ultrafan, that would be appreciated.

aerolearner
30th Jun 2019, 11:37
@Ultrafan, that would be appreciated.
http://aviadocs.com/RLE/An-24/StartDisc_An-24.pdf

For other aircraft types:
aviadocs.com - /RLE/ (http://aviadocs.com/RLE/)

UltraFan
30th Jun 2019, 18:01
@Ultrafan, that would be appreciated.

The link above is what I wanted to post. Which is great because, as it turns out, I cannot post links until I have 10 posts. Well, you have it now. Enjoy. It's a wonderful flight manual. It even explains why it's worse when the right engine is inop. :)

paulross
26th Aug 2019, 14:43
Some analysis of these videos is over here: https://github.com/paulross/pprune-calc/tree/master/AN-24_Nizhneangarsk

Summary:

The aircraft approaches at a ground speed that varies between 161 and 180 knots.
It crosses the threshold at 1724 knots.
Touch down is at 1644 knots, 54914 m down the 1653m runway (about 1/3 the way down). Acceleration is -1.1 m/s^2 .
At t=36.0 the aircraft starts drifting to the right, possibly due to a burst tyre. The aircraft is 73116 m down the runway travelling at 1594 knots.
The aircraft departs the runway at t=46.1 s, 146341 m down the runway at 1146 knots. Acceleration is -3.9 m/s^2 .
At t=56.1 the aircraft hits the boundary fence 200m beyond the end of the runway at around 37 knots. This collapses the starboard undercarriage (and probably the port one as well).
The aircraft would have slid to a stop roughly 45m later unfortunately there was a building 36m beyond the boundary fence which it hit at somewhat less than 18 knots.

oleczek
26th Aug 2019, 20:36
Pretty accurate as far as distances go ;)

Actual figures - page 46 of Preliminary Investigation (in Russian) https://mak-iac.org/upload/iblock/b52/report_ra-47366_pr.pdf

paulross
27th Aug 2019, 18:53
oleczek

Thanks for that, I didn't realise that anything had been published yet. And the speeds roughly correspond, from the radar plot on page 15 the ground speed was around 96 m/s / 187 knots over the last 30 seconds of the approach (I compute around 90 m/s / 175 knots). It also seems that they had a tailwind of 4 m/s / 8 knots which obviously did not help.