Air France A340 Crashed!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air France A340 Crashed!
An Air France passenger jet skidded off the end of the runway and burst into flames after landing in a thunder storm at Toronto's Pearson International Airport today, media reports said.
Air France says that according to latest information, no one died in the Toronto plane crash.
A Canadian official also said no one was killed.
The Canadian airport authority said 14 people suffered minor injuries in the crash.
The airline said 297 passengers and 12 crew were aboard the plane.
Witnesses said the plane was cut in two and at least two fireballs were seen coming from the debris after the crash.
The long haul A340 jet, which can carry up to 250 people, overshot the runway and crashed into trees and bushes in a gully that separates the airport perimeter from a busy highway.
Thick flames and black smoke billowed from the jet and fire crews were at the scene.
The incident occurred when there were heavy thunder storms across the region. The airport had suspended departures and arrivals for a while because of the storm.
Passengers who survived the crash said the A-340 jet was probably hit by lightning.
"I saw lightning," passenger Roel Bramar told CNN television. "Maybe the plane had already been hit by lightning," he said.
"The reason I'm mentioning that is because just as we landed, the lights turned off. And that's unusual. So I'm sure that the bad weather was responsible," said Bramar.
A witness, Corey Marks, told CNN he saw the jet land and get into trouble at about 4.00pm (0600 AEST).
"It was getting really dark and all of a sudden lightning was happening, there was a lot of rain coming down," he said.
"And this plane - I didn't see the size of the plane but it was an Air France plane - came in on the runway. Everything looked and sounded good. It hit the runway nice and all of a sudden, we heard his engines backing up."
Marks said the jet "went straight into the valley and cracked in half.
Whatever you're seeing now, you're probably seeing the back end of the plane because it's way down in there.
"Two of us that were standing here, we were about to run over and try to help, but it went up in such flames." Marks said he saw two fireballs come from the plane.
A Toronto radio station said some passengers were seen climbing from the plane, and that most of the others had been safely evacuated.
AM 680, an all-news station, reported live from the scene that there were two explosions on the plane. The station quoted a police official on the nearby freeway as saying two groups of passengers had been evacuated from the jet.
A portion of the plane's wing could be seen jutting from the trees as smoke and flames poured from the middle of its broken fuselage. At one point, another huge plume of smoke emerged from the wreckage, but it wasn't clear whether it was from an explosion.
CNN reported the flight was Air France Flight 358, which was due to arrive in Toronto about 4pm from Charles de Gaulle International Airport near Paris.
"They made an approach in weather that was worse than what they anticipated," John Wiley, a retired Airbus pilot in Toronto, told CNN.
Leah Walker, a radio reporter in Toronto, said she saw a third of the plane fall and that the rest became a fireball. "This plane attempted to land in some very fierce weather we had today," she said.
AFP
Its great no one was killed! a miracle really, but i just love the reporting, and witness comments! "it must have been hit by lightning!"
engines backing up ?
Air France says that according to latest information, no one died in the Toronto plane crash.
A Canadian official also said no one was killed.
The Canadian airport authority said 14 people suffered minor injuries in the crash.
The airline said 297 passengers and 12 crew were aboard the plane.
Witnesses said the plane was cut in two and at least two fireballs were seen coming from the debris after the crash.
The long haul A340 jet, which can carry up to 250 people, overshot the runway and crashed into trees and bushes in a gully that separates the airport perimeter from a busy highway.
Thick flames and black smoke billowed from the jet and fire crews were at the scene.
The incident occurred when there were heavy thunder storms across the region. The airport had suspended departures and arrivals for a while because of the storm.
Passengers who survived the crash said the A-340 jet was probably hit by lightning.
"I saw lightning," passenger Roel Bramar told CNN television. "Maybe the plane had already been hit by lightning," he said.
"The reason I'm mentioning that is because just as we landed, the lights turned off. And that's unusual. So I'm sure that the bad weather was responsible," said Bramar.
A witness, Corey Marks, told CNN he saw the jet land and get into trouble at about 4.00pm (0600 AEST).
"It was getting really dark and all of a sudden lightning was happening, there was a lot of rain coming down," he said.
"And this plane - I didn't see the size of the plane but it was an Air France plane - came in on the runway. Everything looked and sounded good. It hit the runway nice and all of a sudden, we heard his engines backing up."
Marks said the jet "went straight into the valley and cracked in half.
Whatever you're seeing now, you're probably seeing the back end of the plane because it's way down in there.
"Two of us that were standing here, we were about to run over and try to help, but it went up in such flames." Marks said he saw two fireballs come from the plane.
A Toronto radio station said some passengers were seen climbing from the plane, and that most of the others had been safely evacuated.
AM 680, an all-news station, reported live from the scene that there were two explosions on the plane. The station quoted a police official on the nearby freeway as saying two groups of passengers had been evacuated from the jet.
A portion of the plane's wing could be seen jutting from the trees as smoke and flames poured from the middle of its broken fuselage. At one point, another huge plume of smoke emerged from the wreckage, but it wasn't clear whether it was from an explosion.
CNN reported the flight was Air France Flight 358, which was due to arrive in Toronto about 4pm from Charles de Gaulle International Airport near Paris.
"They made an approach in weather that was worse than what they anticipated," John Wiley, a retired Airbus pilot in Toronto, told CNN.
Leah Walker, a radio reporter in Toronto, said she saw a third of the plane fall and that the rest became a fireball. "This plane attempted to land in some very fierce weather we had today," she said.
AFP
Its great no one was killed! a miracle really, but i just love the reporting, and witness comments! "it must have been hit by lightning!"
engines backing up ?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the TV film footage I saw, ownership of the A340 passed from Air France to their insurers around touch down.
No amount of money would ever restore what's left to anything remotely resembling a serviceable aircraft!! It appears to be broken in two for starters.
297 passengers, 12 crew, no fatalities, 14 injured - amazing! A superb effort by the crew!!
No amount of money would ever restore what's left to anything remotely resembling a serviceable aircraft!! It appears to be broken in two for starters.
297 passengers, 12 crew, no fatalities, 14 injured - amazing! A superb effort by the crew!!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Woomera that it was a good job done in getting all the occupants out with just a few injuries
Whilst watching the news this morning, there seemed to me to be an over emphasis on the fact the aircraft may have been struck by lightning.
Whilst watching the news this morning, there seemed to me to be an over emphasis on the fact the aircraft may have been struck by lightning.
will sell more papers than just not being able to stop on a wet runway
What a great effort by all crew members to evacuate the aircraft with no loss of life.
Not wanting to start speculation but I recall reading years ago when Airbus was developing the A320's Fly-by-Wire and associated electrical system, it was sent to the French military's nuclear research establishment for testing of the systems shielding for Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) hardening and resistance to lightning strikes etc. The "official" Airbus description of the test results was that it was the "hardest" system that the military had ever tested.
Removing the Airbus hype, can any PPRuNer with the necessary technical knowledge advise whether the Airbus systems are so well shielded that a severe lightning strike would not not caused the Flight Crew to lose authority over the flight controls.
Not wanting to start speculation but I recall reading years ago when Airbus was developing the A320's Fly-by-Wire and associated electrical system, it was sent to the French military's nuclear research establishment for testing of the systems shielding for Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) hardening and resistance to lightning strikes etc. The "official" Airbus description of the test results was that it was the "hardest" system that the military had ever tested.
Removing the Airbus hype, can any PPRuNer with the necessary technical knowledge advise whether the Airbus systems are so well shielded that a severe lightning strike would not not caused the Flight Crew to lose authority over the flight controls.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 50
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going Boeing
The main R&N thread maintains A340 has hydraulic backup but no antiskid. See Tom Sawyer's answer on Page 6.
Might be advisable to switch viewing to that thread to get the most up-to-date info.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=184428
The main R&N thread maintains A340 has hydraulic backup but no antiskid. See Tom Sawyer's answer on Page 6.
Might be advisable to switch viewing to that thread to get the most up-to-date info.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=184428
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: WX at our destination is 32 deg with some bkn cld, but we'll try to have them fixed before we arrive
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reports indicate that rescue services were on location in 40 to 50 seconds.
That is amazing and would surely have played a part in saving lives. Well done to all involved.
That is amazing and would surely have played a part in saving lives. Well done to all involved.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Next door to Hell
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What concerns me is that there have been a few run offs lately in heavy rain and I wonder whether some blame can be put on Airport authorities maintaining runway surfaces to a sufficient standard to reduce chances of aquaplanning.
I understand there are always many contributing factors, like runway length, windshear,pilots trying to grease her on,etc, but if a nice layer of rubber has built up over the years around the touchdown zone, well, that's the straw that breaks the Airbus back.
Is this ever a consideration in Crash investigations?
I understand there are always many contributing factors, like runway length, windshear,pilots trying to grease her on,etc, but if a nice layer of rubber has built up over the years around the touchdown zone, well, that's the straw that breaks the Airbus back.
Is this ever a consideration in Crash investigations?
Even if they could repair this one (0.000000001% of that happening) what about the Concord crash a few years ago, that would have been a Hull Loss, so their record isn't 'perfect' anyway.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
from what i understand the concorde was a result of numerous factors, overloaded, Shim missing from UC assembly allowing it to shimmy and create a brakeing force, causing the aircraft to pull to the left, which resulted in the capt rotating below safe speed, and the FE shutting down an engine at the same time..
The fuel leak, i am to belive is not uncommon after a tyre burst, and once the fuel has drained the fire extinguishes. so it was possible to continue to fly and safely return . i am under the impression the metal strip did not cause the tragedy on its own.
The fuel leak, i am to belive is not uncommon after a tyre burst, and once the fuel has drained the fire extinguishes. so it was possible to continue to fly and safely return . i am under the impression the metal strip did not cause the tragedy on its own.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Hope you don't mind a post from the 'old' country...
Ref runway state:
Can't speak for Canada, but in the UK, it's certainly on page one of the AAIB's list. Reports into recent over-runs at UK airports have included their views on the state of the runway at the time.
One of our first actions, after we've rescued all the pax & crew and secured the scene, would be to carry out a full-length friction measurement; in fact we wouldn't be allowed to re-open the runway, even with re-declared distances, until we are satisfied it's up to standard. Ideally we would want to carry out the inspection in the same conditions as for the accident, so ASAP.
Cheers,
The Odd One
Ref runway state:
Is this ever a consideration in Crash investigations?
One of our first actions, after we've rescued all the pax & crew and secured the scene, would be to carry out a full-length friction measurement; in fact we wouldn't be allowed to re-open the runway, even with re-declared distances, until we are satisfied it's up to standard. Ideally we would want to carry out the inspection in the same conditions as for the accident, so ASAP.
Cheers,
The Odd One
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just saw images on the local news, thrust reversers were deployed.. i just hope the gearboxes didnt fail when the pilot jammed the engines in reverse!
witness reports it landed in bad storm with lots of wind, but it lost control when it was hit by lightening!...
my guess is it was hit by a microburst or downdraft resulting in excessive tailwind during the landing sequence..
witness reports it landed in bad storm with lots of wind, but it lost control when it was hit by lightening!...
my guess is it was hit by a microburst or downdraft resulting in excessive tailwind during the landing sequence..
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nasaltown
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's see now......extra speed, windshear, touch down a little bit late with a lot of power on (because of the w/s), and a wet runway.
And the final ingredients, a Captain who is too macho (probably one of the supervisory boys) to go around, and an F/O who is too ****-scared to say "Go around".
Let's wait and see.
And the final ingredients, a Captain who is too macho (probably one of the supervisory boys) to go around, and an F/O who is too ****-scared to say "Go around".
Let's wait and see.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could imagine that, especially in a more classed society such as france, but then again us pilots are often over confidant with our own skill, after all, you would have to be to fly a piece of tin at the heights we do......maybe it was just a misjudgement on the crew behalf, and they landed to far down the runway?
Who knows, pax and crew are alright, there will be a investigation and in a few years maybe a Air Crash Investiagtion series that will be repeated on Foxtel 2 x a day for a few years.....
Who knows, pax and crew are alright, there will be a investigation and in a few years maybe a Air Crash Investiagtion series that will be repeated on Foxtel 2 x a day for a few years.....
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PH 298/7.4DME
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this day and age, with technology so far advanced and endless redundancy measures in place both on the ground and in the air, surely it must be something pretty darn complex to go wrong for something as complex as an A340 to go to pieces.
Either that or just the holes in the swiss cheese lining up again, maybe a few simple things. Investigation findings will be interesting.
In reference to the Concorde crash, wasn't the fire burning wings, ailerons and vitals like that, contributing to the loss of control?
That has GOT to ruin your day. Losing two on takeoff and the gear not retracting. I still feel sorry for those guys...
520.
Either that or just the holes in the swiss cheese lining up again, maybe a few simple things. Investigation findings will be interesting.
In reference to the Concorde crash, wasn't the fire burning wings, ailerons and vitals like that, contributing to the loss of control?
That has GOT to ruin your day. Losing two on takeoff and the gear not retracting. I still feel sorry for those guys...
520.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First A340 hull loss too. The good news is that all departed the stricken lady with only a few minor injuries. Well done indeed crew. Top marks.
Best all
EWL
Best all
EWL