Accident in LIN involving an SAS aircraft... continued
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: err, *******, we have a problem
Age: 58
Posts: 1,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Accident in LIN involving an SAS aircraft... continued
The original thread on this topic, which can be found here was closed when it reached the 100-post limit.
Please use this thread to continue any further debate.
Thank you,
Please use this thread to continue any further debate.
Thank you,
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: asia
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Milan airport runway closed
from the BBC (see the last few paras)
Italian authorities have ordered the closure of a connecting runway at Linate airport in Milan, where a collision on Monday led to the death of 118 people in Italy's worst aviation disaster.
The order from Milan's state attorney was issued after Italy's flight safety agency said that signals on some lanes feeding the main runway fell short of international standards.
The crash happened when a jet belonging to the Scandinavian airline, SAS, which was taking off, hit a smaller aircraft, ploughed into a hangar and exploded.
The smaller aircraft, a Cessna, was crossing the main runway at the time.
Preliminary investigations have indicated that the causes of the disaster appear to have been misunderstandings between Italian flight controllers and the Cessna's German pilots, poor signals on the connecting runway, and thick fog.
Some reports suggest that the Cessna's pilots may have believed they were on a different taxiway which did not cross the runway.
There has also been a heated debate about the busy airport's lack of a functioning ground radar system.
"The signalling on certain connecting runways at Milan-Linate airport did not meet international standards set down by the International Civil Aviation Organization," said spokesman Adalberto Pellegrino of the flight safety agency.
He said this fact had been discovered during a technical investigation and that the civil aviation authority had been immediately alerted.
The connecting runway was closed on Wednesday, the day the airport re-opened.
At least three investigations have been opened into the disaster.
Two "black boxes" from the SAS plane were recovered: the flight data recorder and an optional system that records equipment maintenance information.
All those killed were travelling on the SAS aircraft, except the four occupants of the Cessna, and four hangar workers, who were pinned under the plane.
Italy's Transport Minister, Pietro Lunardi, said a new ground radar system should be working "by the end of this year".
Norway's Aftenposten newspaper says a Norwegian team has arrived in Milan to install part of the new system, and that work should begin within a week.
It adds that the system has been in storage in Milan since 1995, alleging that Italian weapons industries disliked the fact that the contract was signed with a foreign manufacturer.
There have been reports that motion detectors at the end of the access taxiway were deactivated because traffic controllers could make little sense of them without a radar system.
from the BBC (see the last few paras)
Italian authorities have ordered the closure of a connecting runway at Linate airport in Milan, where a collision on Monday led to the death of 118 people in Italy's worst aviation disaster.
The order from Milan's state attorney was issued after Italy's flight safety agency said that signals on some lanes feeding the main runway fell short of international standards.
The crash happened when a jet belonging to the Scandinavian airline, SAS, which was taking off, hit a smaller aircraft, ploughed into a hangar and exploded.
The smaller aircraft, a Cessna, was crossing the main runway at the time.
Preliminary investigations have indicated that the causes of the disaster appear to have been misunderstandings between Italian flight controllers and the Cessna's German pilots, poor signals on the connecting runway, and thick fog.
Some reports suggest that the Cessna's pilots may have believed they were on a different taxiway which did not cross the runway.
There has also been a heated debate about the busy airport's lack of a functioning ground radar system.
"The signalling on certain connecting runways at Milan-Linate airport did not meet international standards set down by the International Civil Aviation Organization," said spokesman Adalberto Pellegrino of the flight safety agency.
He said this fact had been discovered during a technical investigation and that the civil aviation authority had been immediately alerted.
The connecting runway was closed on Wednesday, the day the airport re-opened.
At least three investigations have been opened into the disaster.
Two "black boxes" from the SAS plane were recovered: the flight data recorder and an optional system that records equipment maintenance information.
All those killed were travelling on the SAS aircraft, except the four occupants of the Cessna, and four hangar workers, who were pinned under the plane.
Italy's Transport Minister, Pietro Lunardi, said a new ground radar system should be working "by the end of this year".
Norway's Aftenposten newspaper says a Norwegian team has arrived in Milan to install part of the new system, and that work should begin within a week.
It adds that the system has been in storage in Milan since 1995, alleging that Italian weapons industries disliked the fact that the contract was signed with a foreign manufacturer.
There have been reports that motion detectors at the end of the access taxiway were deactivated because traffic controllers could make little sense of them without a radar system.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Germany
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
German print media showed an airport diagram of the runway, the parallel taxiway and the entrances/highspeed exits (for landing from south) to/from the runway. It showed the german pilot taking the first entrance, coming from the nord. I do not know and do not remember the exact distance from that entrance to the northern end of runway, but it looked like, if not having collided with the SAS a/c, the Cessna couldnīt make a take off from that position (to the north) before the end of the runway.
Another sad day for aviation, condolences to all who lost beloved ones.
Another sad day for aviation, condolences to all who lost beloved ones.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a quickie to say ta to Nick for his response to my post, down to being thoughtful enough to explain things like V1 (already know this stuff but appreciated nonetheless). I'm not the type to need reassuring but a few months browsing this board has left this passenger (and future wannabe) to have a great deal more respect for the guys up the front with the best view.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gofer,
The reason it takes 10-15 seconds to transmit, is that the ACARS MU has to have a reception level from the ground station above a certain threshold for 10 secs, and it does not accuire the station, unles specially requested, on ground. I am SO impressed with your calculations, my humble experience with ACARS is only as a lowly engineer, and I KNOW that it takes 10-15 secs from the time you get the "message sent" cue on the cdu until the message apears on the reciver computer.
Anyway, itīs scary to reminiss about. It means that they had quite some time to think, 10 seconds is a long time to sit in a cockpit going 140 kts with no control.
God speed guys - RIP.
Brgds
Doc
The reason it takes 10-15 seconds to transmit, is that the ACARS MU has to have a reception level from the ground station above a certain threshold for 10 secs, and it does not accuire the station, unles specially requested, on ground. I am SO impressed with your calculations, my humble experience with ACARS is only as a lowly engineer, and I KNOW that it takes 10-15 secs from the time you get the "message sent" cue on the cdu until the message apears on the reciver computer.
Anyway, itīs scary to reminiss about. It means that they had quite some time to think, 10 seconds is a long time to sit in a cockpit going 140 kts with no control.
God speed guys - RIP.
Brgds
Doc
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: England
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.iasa-intl.com/dreadle.html
Linate runway layout would require max seven DREADLE treadles. Would have been a cheap solution. Cross an armed Dreadle-treadle and everyone gets an immediate VHF audio alert that "something" has illegally entered an "armed" runway. Better than finding out two seconds prior to a collision.
Linate runway layout would require max seven DREADLE treadles. Would have been a cheap solution. Cross an armed Dreadle-treadle and everyone gets an immediate VHF audio alert that "something" has illegally entered an "armed" runway. Better than finding out two seconds prior to a collision.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies if this point has already been made and I know one shouldnt speculate
. I operate regularly from Linate, including today, and it was as bad as ever for non use
of English. Wouldnt be surprised if this also had some bearing on the accident. Just what is it going to take to make English
mandatory.
of English. Wouldnt be surprised if this also had some bearing on the accident. Just what is it going to take to make English
mandatory.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: 22.5 parallel
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overtalk,
Interesting reading, and yes I agree with you and Algy's earlier posting that efficient and cheaper surface surveillance systems are possible than the very expensive ones now being promoted.
This especially for airports with a simple runway layout, like Linate and airports which could not easely afford the expenditure for the high end ground movement monitoring radar systems.
Sometimes the KISS solution is (deliberately)overlooked.
Best regards
AV
Interesting reading, and yes I agree with you and Algy's earlier posting that efficient and cheaper surface surveillance systems are possible than the very expensive ones now being promoted.
This especially for airports with a simple runway layout, like Linate and airports which could not easely afford the expenditure for the high end ground movement monitoring radar systems.
Sometimes the KISS solution is (deliberately)overlooked.
Best regards
AV
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wheat really beats me is that it seems like there are no responsible persons for anything at LIN. (And the whole italian CAA?)
The Ground radar was delivered in 1996, and it hasn't been mounted and nobody knows why!
Some of the taxiway marking signs on "R6" were reportedly run down during lawn mowing two years ago and nobody have taken the responsibility to put them back up!
Who is responsible for these things at LIN? Where is the quallity system that is supposed to detect and correct errors like these?
At what other Italian airports do we have the same kind of problems? I am shocked by the fact that taxiway marking signs have been down for two years, without anyone doing anything about it.
I'm not asking these questions to place the blame. The case is just that if no one is responsible, then things like these will happen. And it just shouldn't.
Nick.
The Ground radar was delivered in 1996, and it hasn't been mounted and nobody knows why!
Some of the taxiway marking signs on "R6" were reportedly run down during lawn mowing two years ago and nobody have taken the responsibility to put them back up!
Who is responsible for these things at LIN? Where is the quallity system that is supposed to detect and correct errors like these?
At what other Italian airports do we have the same kind of problems? I am shocked by the fact that taxiway marking signs have been down for two years, without anyone doing anything about it.
I'm not asking these questions to place the blame. The case is just that if no one is responsible, then things like these will happen. And it just shouldn't.
Nick.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: the past
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today I passed through LIN as pax,first time after the event and again was amazed by the fact that the ESSO filling station was still there.It is situated roughly 200 meters on the extended RWY CL,northern side.I am sure that if SAS didn't hit where it did it would have hit the station.I guess it is going to wait for another occasion(overun,possibly by the pilots being given inaccurate braking action or a plain brake failure).Anyone who knows the situation care to comment?Obi?
Need expanded memory?
[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: GEENY ]
[ 27 October 2001: Message edited by: GEENY ]
Need expanded memory?
[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: GEENY ]
[ 27 October 2001: Message edited by: GEENY ]
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Too Far North
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know about you, but I was a little unsure how everyone was sadly killed in this accident given that the forward fuselage was so intact (see pic 1).
but if you look at this you can see where the aircraft has hit the building side on (ie entered the picture from the right with the tail towards the camera), and the reason for the plane going sideways???
Poor blighters didn't stand a chance (in EITHER aircraft)
RIP
Flap40
[ 28 October 2001: Message edited by: Flap40 ]
but if you look at this you can see where the aircraft has hit the building side on (ie entered the picture from the right with the tail towards the camera), and the reason for the plane going sideways???
Poor blighters didn't stand a chance (in EITHER aircraft)
RIP
Flap40
[ 28 October 2001: Message edited by: Flap40 ]
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hounslow, Middlesex, UK
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone was telling me that a few years ago the very same thing nearly happened when an Alitalia MD80 just clipped an MU2 which was apparently entering the runway at R6. The wing tip of the MD80 reportedly struck the MU2 but it took off safely. No deaths or injuries and apparently little damage. Anyone got chapter and verse on this earlier event?
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rough translation of the above:
Researchers have put the blame for the worst crash in the history of SAS on the 2 ATCO’s in the tower at Linate, a report released on monday in Italy shows. In the oct 8th crash 118 people died.
SK686 was abou to take off when it hit a small cessna which by mistake crossed the SAS runway. The SAS ac the hit a luggage building 300 mtrs further on.
Initialy, the responsability for the tracig crash was put on the cessna pilots and the heavy fog and the bad sign-posting at the airport. After the accident it was obvious that the airport lacks sign-posting, there’s no electric sensors in the run & taxiways, the signal lights for both runways are totally identical, and the ground radar was not working.
But on monday the Italian paper “La Republicca” writes that “serious negligence” on the part of the ATCO’s contributed to the accident. This new info has come to light with a background in the taped conversations between the German cessna pilots and the tower, moments before the crash.
The ATCO’s should have realized that the cessna was on the wrong runway. This conclusion os drawn from the information the pilots gave the tower via radio.
On top of which the cessna pilots had an inkling that they were in the wrong place/lost and indicated as much to the tower. The tower did not react, writes La Republicca.
SAS waits for the Italian Authorities befor they will say anything about the guilt question.
Researchers have put the blame for the worst crash in the history of SAS on the 2 ATCO’s in the tower at Linate, a report released on monday in Italy shows. In the oct 8th crash 118 people died.
SK686 was abou to take off when it hit a small cessna which by mistake crossed the SAS runway. The SAS ac the hit a luggage building 300 mtrs further on.
Initialy, the responsability for the tracig crash was put on the cessna pilots and the heavy fog and the bad sign-posting at the airport. After the accident it was obvious that the airport lacks sign-posting, there’s no electric sensors in the run & taxiways, the signal lights for both runways are totally identical, and the ground radar was not working.
But on monday the Italian paper “La Republicca” writes that “serious negligence” on the part of the ATCO’s contributed to the accident. This new info has come to light with a background in the taped conversations between the German cessna pilots and the tower, moments before the crash.
The ATCO’s should have realized that the cessna was on the wrong runway. This conclusion os drawn from the information the pilots gave the tower via radio.
On top of which the cessna pilots had an inkling that they were in the wrong place/lost and indicated as much to the tower. The tower did not react, writes La Republicca.
SAS waits for the Italian Authorities befor they will say anything about the guilt question.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well known about in Italian press ref the
SAS accident is that ATC unaware of the crash cleared a Lufthansa to takeoff.....
Lufty then asked ATC to clarify that SAS was
airborne as it was not painting on TCAS!!!
No contact with SAS made and the rest you know.
Sharp or what....earned the money that day.
SAS accident is that ATC unaware of the crash cleared a Lufthansa to takeoff.....
Lufty then asked ATC to clarify that SAS was
airborne as it was not painting on TCAS!!!
No contact with SAS made and the rest you know.
Sharp or what....earned the money that day.
