Challenger missing in Mexico
Thread Starter
Challenger missing in Mexico
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/224783
https://www.tellerreport.com/news/--...yv_5my0s4.html
https://www.rt.com/newsline/458512-p...-crash-mexico/
https://www.tellerreport.com/news/--...yv_5my0s4.html
https://www.rt.com/newsline/458512-p...-crash-mexico/
Last edited by Old Boeing Driver; 6th May 2019 at 17:58. Reason: Wreckage Found
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
info on bizjets101 on instagram 
That’s a lot of people and potentially a lot of luggage.
What appears to be the pickup flight with presumably the same load two days before was flown at FL300 according to FlightAware and the return flight at FL370 then 390 and a brief climb when in the vicinity of a late afternoon thunderstorm.
High altitude upset of an airplane that may or may not have been outside of its envelope to begin with.
https://www.globalair.com/aircraft-f...ons?specid=112
What appears to be the pickup flight with presumably the same load two days before was flown at FL300 according to FlightAware and the return flight at FL370 then 390 and a brief climb when in the vicinity of a late afternoon thunderstorm.
High altitude upset of an airplane that may or may not have been outside of its envelope to begin with.
https://www.globalair.com/aircraft-f...ons?specid=112
Thread Starter
Think you are correct
That’s a lot of people and potentially a lot of luggage.
What appears to be the pickup flight with presumably the same load two days before was flown at FL300 according to FlightAware and the return flight at FL370 then 390 and a brief climb when in the vicinity of a late afternoon thunderstorm.
High altitude upset of an airplane that may or may not have been outside of its envelope to begin with.
What appears to be the pickup flight with presumably the same load two days before was flown at FL300 according to FlightAware and the return flight at FL370 then 390 and a brief climb when in the vicinity of a late afternoon thunderstorm.
High altitude upset of an airplane that may or may not have been outside of its envelope to begin with.
Not sure how close they were to the weather, but it looked like they had none to the south.
On the other hand, they would have had a lot of altitude to recover.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: California
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good info about the previous flights. I looked at the last flight track and noted they had just reached FL430 and then started descending. I would think that even at light weights it would be a struggle to be at FL430 in that airplane. The least amount of turbulence might cause an upset.
Not sure how close they were to the weather, but it looked like they had none to the south.
On the other hand, they would have had a lot of altitude to recover.
Not sure how close they were to the weather, but it looked like they had none to the south.
On the other hand, they would have had a lot of altitude to recover.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Age: 69
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good info about the previous flights. I looked at the last flight track and noted they had just reached FL430 and then started descending. I would think that even at light weights it would be a struggle to be at FL430 in that airplane. The least amount of turbulence might cause an upset.
Not sure how close they were to the weather, but it looked like they had none to the south.
On the other hand, they would have had a lot of altitude to recover.
Not sure how close they were to the weather, but it looked like they had none to the south.
On the other hand, they would have had a lot of altitude to recover.
The tight wreckage pattern is consistent with a belly-flop or stall. All 4 corners are present, so no breakup in flight.
Of course, it remains an open question whether they stalled high and just rode it down (AF447) or stalled down low in a pull-out attempt.
And just a side note that certified ceiling is often based on pressurization differential, not just aerodynamics.
Of course, it remains an open question whether they stalled high and just rode it down (AF447) or stalled down low in a pull-out attempt.
And just a side note that certified ceiling is often based on pressurization differential, not just aerodynamics.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RAWLAW;10465431...
Remember the CJ, Pinnacle Airlines I believe, that was being ferried and the crew decided to see how high they could push it. It also came straight down.
That aircraft did not "come straight down". The crew recovered control but were unable to restart either engine, and came down in houses some distance short of the airport they were trying to glide to. A rather different set of circumstances to what the images so far seem to suggest here.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: NV USA
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume you mean "CRJ" there.
That aircraft did not "come straight down". The crew recovered control but were unable to restart either engine, and came down in houses some distance short of the airport they were trying to glide to. A rather different set of circumstances to what the images so far seem to suggest here.
That aircraft did not "come straight down". The crew recovered control but were unable to restart either engine, and came down in houses some distance short of the airport they were trying to glide to. A rather different set of circumstances to what the images so far seem to suggest here.
Thread Starter
Correction
I misread the ADS-B data. They never made it to FL430. Sorry
Here are the last 5 ADS-B plots.
time: 2019-05-05 23:36:53 altitude: 40025
time: 2019-05-05 23:36:54 altitude: 40075
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:27 altitude: 42325
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:42 altitude: 39975
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:43 altitude: 40250
Here are the last 5 ADS-B plots.
time: 2019-05-05 23:36:53 altitude: 40025
time: 2019-05-05 23:36:54 altitude: 40075
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:27 altitude: 42325
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:42 altitude: 39975
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:43 altitude: 40250
Last edited by Old Boeing Driver; 7th May 2019 at 15:49.
Thread Starter
Follow up
Look at these last 2 ADS-B plots.
callsign: N601VH
sqk: 7315
registration: N601VH
altitude: 39975
speed: 132
lat: 28.366379
long: -103.29631
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:42
llsign: N601VH
sqk: 7315
registration: N601VH
altitude: 40250
speed: 170
lat: 28.367352
long: -103.29696
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:43
callsign: N601VH
sqk: 7315
registration: N601VH
altitude: 39975
speed: 132
lat: 28.366379
long: -103.29631
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:42
llsign: N601VH
sqk: 7315
registration: N601VH
altitude: 40250
speed: 170
lat: 28.367352
long: -103.29696
time: 2019-05-05 23:37:43
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Age: 69
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume you mean "CRJ" there.
That aircraft did not "come straight down". The crew recovered control but were unable to restart either engine, and came down in houses some distance short of the airport they were trying to glide to. A rather different set of circumstances to what the images so far seem to suggest here.
That aircraft did not "come straight down". The crew recovered control but were unable to restart either engine, and came down in houses some distance short of the airport they were trying to glide to. A rather different set of circumstances to what the images so far seem to suggest here.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: New York
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I do mean CRJ. Yes the circumstances are both dissimilar and similar. Either way the aircraft was out of the envelope. The outcome was the same weather they glided, almost restarted an engine or could not restart. The CRJ may have been able to get the AOA back to a flying angle, the 601 looks like they didn't. Neither had a mid-air, loss of pressurization (initially and root cause) or in-flight fire. Both had if you will "controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) which technically means there was nothing "wrong" with the aircraft. Your point is valid but really the cause and effect are the same at this very early view.
I found a definition of CFIT as “In-flight collision with terrain, water, or obstacle without indication of loss of control.”
A flat spin is not CFIT either.
With a CFIT event somebody is ‘at the wheel’ and loss of situational awareness leads to impact with terrain.
The Sukoi Superjet in Indonesia was a CFIT event.
With a CFIT event somebody is ‘at the wheel’ and loss of situational awareness leads to impact with terrain.
The Sukoi Superjet in Indonesia was a CFIT event.
Last edited by B2N2; 8th May 2019 at 16:17.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Age: 69
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand what you are trying to say, but the Pinnacle CRJ accident was not CFIT. Due to crew error, neither engine was operating, thus it did not constitute controlled flight. Given the apparent flat attitude of this Challenger accident, I doubt it was CFIT, either. More likely Loss of Control Inflight.
I found a definition of CFIT as “In-flight collision with terrain, water, or obstacle without indication of loss of control.”
Its a tragedy and in our profession we especially do not tolerate self-made tragedies thru ignorance or non-compliance with the rules. It should have never happened.