given that what the manufacturer stated vs the news account, I would not believe much about the 5 or 6 rolls that were alleged.

the official report will provide the ac data. (and perhaps they did leave the pins in the RAT)

With one engine still running, the RAT would not have deployed.

Thanks

Given the alleged circumstances I hardly see them going through check lists... Unless this was after recovery into stable flight?

Yes the engine was shut down after the "event" according to the Bombardier Advisory Wire.

I quote...

"Shortly after the event, the crew shut down one engine due to a high ITT (Inter Turbine Temperature) indication; the other engine remained operational."

Very good point, I missed it.

I'm very much looking for the BFU report on this one...

Latest !!!!
 

Well it just made the Daily Mail today !
Most of the "info" seems to be from Pprune !!:)

A380 wake turbulence
 

I just saw this on Avherald and didn't notice a thread here. The two aircraft crossed with 1000 feet verticle separation and within a short time the Canadair Challenger suffered severe wake turbulence, lost control and descended 10,000 feet before recovery, then made an emergency landing in Muscat, Oman. Nine people hurt in the Challenger, one seriously. The aircraft was totaled from the damages.

German business jet ?flipped three times by Emirates A380? | News | DW.COM | 19.03.2017

Private Jet Flipped Over in Wake Turbulence From Airbus A380: Reports - NBC News


This post was moved to here so that the poster may participate in the discussion already in progress(/mod mode)

Challenger 604 wake turb/jet upset
 

BAS has put out an advisor wire. There are also pics out there and they are scary...

Can you give a link to the pictures?

Looks like you need a Bombardier customer account to view AWs.

Bombardier - Login

Yes, Bombardier issued an advisory wire on March 17th, with some notable details. There are some scary pictures out there as well....

Heres one picture:

Inside the cabin ? before and after the wake turbulence encounter ? International Ops 2017

The left one ( before ) is a different aircraft, but the right one fits with the interior of the damaged machine.

https://www.flyvictor.com/en-us/airc...-604-d-amsc/#/

skadi

Here is the picture from that article above...

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b7...ps75y6kv2j.png

In the post/link by skadi above, the article says at one point:
That's a rather sweeping statement and not one with much logical basis. The actual facts of an incident under investigation are not suitable or permitted for dissemination - the Bombardier advisory wire makes that clear. So neither the agencies nor the OEM nor the operator nor anyone else with access to the facts is going to get into issuing specific denials of specific aspects of speculative news stories. The act of doing so would in effect be confirming the parts you don't deny. Since at least some of the original "facts" have been stated to be untrue by people who should know, I would tend to assume that anything from the same source or sources be considered equally dubious

I believe the CIA has a similar "neither confirm nor deny" policy. :)

I think you'll find that the CIA and large corporations operate on fairly different principles. There is plenty of precedent for companies disclosing the basic facts of a situation to quell speculation which may reflect badly on them and/or their product. The Bombardier statement follows this logic, although I was interested to note that there not an outright denial that the engines both flamed out during the aircraft's gyrations, merely the disclosure of a later in flight shutdown. I wonder...:cool:

Written off? Surely you could find a buyer in Nigeria or similar?!

Interim report from the BFU is out...
https://www.bfu-web.de/EN/Publicatio...ublicationFile
Somehow scary to read....

Perhaps if they would have used the SLOP this encounter would not have happened.

That will be the SLOP that the report states is not authorised on the route they were on?
Also SLOP is specifically aimed at trailing aircraft above, there is no mention in any procedure about opposite direction traffic. This accident maybe suggests there should be.

...did anyone here have a look at the FDR read-outs, especially of the flight control positions? Not pre-empting the LBU final report - but as a UPRT instructor I am fairly convinced that the full-scale and opposite rudder deflections (yes, pluralis) - immediately followed by full-scale and opposite aileron deflection, and the large sideslip angles they created, did not really help the crew here...