Air Astana Birdstrike
Thread Starter
Air Astana Birdstrike
An Air Astana 757 taking off from Atyrau, Kazakhstan had a birdstrike (unconfirmed so far) in one of it's engines today and had to land back at Atyrau. Safe landing, only casualties were 200+ pairs of ex-pat's underwear.
As there is no other way out today profits in the local bars are forecast to increase.
Anybody got any more details?
As there is no other way out today profits in the local bars are forecast to increase.
Anybody got any more details?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep an eye out here:
http://www.khabar.kz/index.php3?pare...39556&lang=eng
The Kazakh equivalent to the tabloids for these type of events!
http://www.khabar.kz/index.php3?pare...39556&lang=eng
The Kazakh equivalent to the tabloids for these type of events!
Thread Starter
Apparently Atyrau Airport staff have confirmed that they saw the 757 hit the bird(s) so there's no question of a coverup as has been suggested in certain areas. In fairness to Air Astana they brought the newly acquired "spare" 757 in and got all the passengers to Amsterdam.
I've been assured that there will be no interruptions to the schedule and my pint of Murphy's in Schipol airport on Wednesday morning is guaranteed.
Behind_t_s_m all the training captains I've seen were either Dutch or South African?
Edited to add:
BBC monitored news report:
ALERT-KAZAKH-AIRCRAFT
International airliner makes emergency landing in Kazakh west
Text of report by Kazakh Khabar TV on 1 October
Passengers of an Atyrau-Amsterdam flight experienced two desperate hours this morning. One hundred and fifty eight passengers and 11 crew members were on board a Boeing 757.
While taking off from the airport in Atyrau [the administrative centre of western Atyrau Region] at 0714 local time [0514 gmt], the aircraft flew into a flock of seagulls. Several seagulls hit the right engine. The crew decided to return to the airport in line with the rules. However, it had to fly around Atyrau for over two hours to use up excess fuel to reduce the fire risk.
Rescue, fire-fighting and first-aid services were put on alert on land. The aircraft made a safe landing at 0950 [0450 gmt].
Mukhit Kubayev, the executive director of Atyrau international airport, said that the passengers were provided with another aircraft. A special commission was set up today to investigate the case.
Atyrau airport is located in an area exposed to seagulls and other birds. Several emergency situations have been registered there since the beginning of 2004. However, this was the first incident involving birds over the past two years.
[Video shows aircraft, birds]
Source: Khabar Television, Almaty, in Russian 1400 gmt 1 Oct 04
BBC Mon Alert CAU 011004 cb/nb
I've been assured that there will be no interruptions to the schedule and my pint of Murphy's in Schipol airport on Wednesday morning is guaranteed.
Behind_t_s_m all the training captains I've seen were either Dutch or South African?
Edited to add:
BBC monitored news report:
ALERT-KAZAKH-AIRCRAFT
International airliner makes emergency landing in Kazakh west
Text of report by Kazakh Khabar TV on 1 October
Passengers of an Atyrau-Amsterdam flight experienced two desperate hours this morning. One hundred and fifty eight passengers and 11 crew members were on board a Boeing 757.
While taking off from the airport in Atyrau [the administrative centre of western Atyrau Region] at 0714 local time [0514 gmt], the aircraft flew into a flock of seagulls. Several seagulls hit the right engine. The crew decided to return to the airport in line with the rules. However, it had to fly around Atyrau for over two hours to use up excess fuel to reduce the fire risk.
Rescue, fire-fighting and first-aid services were put on alert on land. The aircraft made a safe landing at 0950 [0450 gmt].
Mukhit Kubayev, the executive director of Atyrau international airport, said that the passengers were provided with another aircraft. A special commission was set up today to investigate the case.
Atyrau airport is located in an area exposed to seagulls and other birds. Several emergency situations have been registered there since the beginning of 2004. However, this was the first incident involving birds over the past two years.
[Video shows aircraft, birds]
Source: Khabar Television, Almaty, in Russian 1400 gmt 1 Oct 04
BBC Mon Alert CAU 011004 cb/nb
Last edited by LowNSlow; 2nd Oct 2004 at 05:54.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, ALL 757 sim and line training completed by BA. There were other nationalities out in ALA to cover the flying programme when AA were short of pilots. on both 757 and F50.
Well done to the boys in this case, guess all my ranting and raving got through eventually!!
Well done to the boys in this case, guess all my ranting and raving got through eventually!!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hogwarts, England
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Transavia Airlines of The Netherlands has 2 or 3 crews on loan with Air Astana right now doing the back and forth to Amsterdam.
It was most probably two cloggies flying that 757.
It was most probably two cloggies flying that 757.
Thread Starter
The crews I have flown behind recently have been Kazakh with a third, Dutch, overseer / training Captain. Whatever their nationalities the lads done good!
I heard, from a chap, who has seen the aircraft, that it was a large flock of seagulls that was hit. There were birds stuck in the undercarriage and red dents on the starboard wing leading edge / slat. Apparently there was a large wing drop and yaw before recovery which suggests, to me at least, that the engine lost a lot of power very quickly. Well done chaps to the crew.
It doesn't bear thinking about what the consequences would have been if they had hit a bigger flock and lost BOTH engines. At least it's very flat and unpopulated around Atyrau airport.........
I heard, from a chap, who has seen the aircraft, that it was a large flock of seagulls that was hit. There were birds stuck in the undercarriage and red dents on the starboard wing leading edge / slat. Apparently there was a large wing drop and yaw before recovery which suggests, to me at least, that the engine lost a lot of power very quickly. Well done chaps to the crew.
It doesn't bear thinking about what the consequences would have been if they had hit a bigger flock and lost BOTH engines. At least it's very flat and unpopulated around Atyrau airport.........
Thread Starter
Air Astana astounded everybody on board by a) having the replacement aircraft at Atyrau quickly and b) re-booking everybody's onward flights from Schipol. Well done to the people on the ground as well as well as the flight crew. For a fledgling airline they have learnt fast.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Israel, Kazakhstan, Spain
Posts: 306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am very surprised to read they got a replacement plane so fast, I was under the impression they were still strapped for A/C.
If they are getting much better, can they please do something about getting me a cup of coffee on those Fokker "Budgies".
Poka
If they are getting much better, can they please do something about getting me a cup of coffee on those Fokker "Budgies".
Poka
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on a sec...am I reading this correctly?
These "heroes" had a major bird strike on take-off followed by an engine failure.
They then "held" for TWO HOURS AND 40 MINUTES to burn fuel?????????????
Are they nuts????????????
In my book, losing an engine on a twin means LAND AT THE NEAREST SUITABLE AIRPORT................NOW
An overweight landing check on a 757 takes about 20 minutes..and there'll be plenty of time available while they change an engine.
I sincerely hope this is NOT a reflection of BA Training.
These "heroes" had a major bird strike on take-off followed by an engine failure.
They then "held" for TWO HOURS AND 40 MINUTES to burn fuel?????????????
Are they nuts????????????
In my book, losing an engine on a twin means LAND AT THE NEAREST SUITABLE AIRPORT................NOW
An overweight landing check on a 757 takes about 20 minutes..and there'll be plenty of time available while they change an engine.
I sincerely hope this is NOT a reflection of BA Training.
JMC-MAN
Why pray tell would you land immediately vs holding for weight reduction?
Granted you are on single engine performance regardless of what decision you make, but the airport isn't exactly moving away from you.
Why pray tell would you land immediately vs holding for weight reduction?
Granted you are on single engine performance regardless of what decision you make, but the airport isn't exactly moving away from you.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hold close to your Airport
What is wrong on that single engine holding? reduce weight and
avoid overweight if possible. I am shure if they would seen it as
a threat of saftey they would have landed immidiatly. Nothing
wrong in the judgement. Why do you allways look for a reason
to blame somebody? They had a failure and then they landed at
the NEXT SUITABLE AIRPORT. It does not say WHEN in any of
the Boeings QRH. If theire Chiefpilot - Fleetmanager was happy
and agreed, why not ? More diapers needed indeed.
Important is what is right and not who is right. If they all agree
what they did there. Innovative for a new outfit.
NG
avoid overweight if possible. I am shure if they would seen it as
a threat of saftey they would have landed immidiatly. Nothing
wrong in the judgement. Why do you allways look for a reason
to blame somebody? They had a failure and then they landed at
the NEXT SUITABLE AIRPORT. It does not say WHEN in any of
the Boeings QRH. If theire Chiefpilot - Fleetmanager was happy
and agreed, why not ? More diapers needed indeed.
Important is what is right and not who is right. If they all agree
what they did there. Innovative for a new outfit.
NG
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lomapaseo, since the damage is 'assumed' to be limited to one engine, this cannot be 100% confirmed, as jmc says, an overweight landing check is no problem, and having had an engine fail on a 757, flying around on the other one for 2 hours is not something i would do, but thats me.
All due respect to the crew for a safe end.
All due respect to the crew for a safe end.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lomapaseo wrote: 'Why pray tell would you land immediately vs holding for weight reduction? Granted you are on single engine performance regardless of what decision you make, but the airport isn't exactly moving away from you. '
You're surely not advocating that a 'dead-stick' landing is acceptable, just because the airport is close by, are you ?
Imho one might hold to reduce landing weight for, say, an air-conditioning problem ( e.g. outlow valve stuck open, etc ) but with suspected engine damage to one or even both engines ?!
E.g. How were the crew to know that they hadn't ingested birds in to both engines and / or in what condition either engine might be in - it's not like you can get out and have a look at them, is it ?
In this instance the crew had reason to suspect they might have engine damage - indeed this was the reason behind them wanting to return to ATA - and so, would it not seem safer to want to get the aircraft on the ground ASAP ?!
As jmc-man says above, with suspected engine damage, why delay getting back on the deck for the sake of a check that takes 20'ish minutes ? Was safety or cost at the forefront of the thinking here, or was it just 'muddled thinking' ?
B737NG you seem to be advocating 'flying by commitee' - wherein, as a gentle reminder, the PIC is just that and, as such at the end of the day, the decission making rest on the PIC's shoulders ( regardless of what the Chief Pilot or Fleet Manager have to say - they will not be standing next to you in the dock, if / when you're called to account at any subsequent Board of Enquiry...... You: "but the chief pilot said it was ok" ..... Judge: "Send him down"
).
You're surely not advocating that a 'dead-stick' landing is acceptable, just because the airport is close by, are you ?
Imho one might hold to reduce landing weight for, say, an air-conditioning problem ( e.g. outlow valve stuck open, etc ) but with suspected engine damage to one or even both engines ?!
E.g. How were the crew to know that they hadn't ingested birds in to both engines and / or in what condition either engine might be in - it's not like you can get out and have a look at them, is it ?
In this instance the crew had reason to suspect they might have engine damage - indeed this was the reason behind them wanting to return to ATA - and so, would it not seem safer to want to get the aircraft on the ground ASAP ?!
As jmc-man says above, with suspected engine damage, why delay getting back on the deck for the sake of a check that takes 20'ish minutes ? Was safety or cost at the forefront of the thinking here, or was it just 'muddled thinking' ?
B737NG you seem to be advocating 'flying by commitee' - wherein, as a gentle reminder, the PIC is just that and, as such at the end of the day, the decission making rest on the PIC's shoulders ( regardless of what the Chief Pilot or Fleet Manager have to say - they will not be standing next to you in the dock, if / when you're called to account at any subsequent Board of Enquiry...... You: "but the chief pilot said it was ok" ..... Judge: "Send him down"
).
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Luckily the Airbus makes it an "easier" call... ECAM puts out a LAND ASAP message so no arguments about fa*ting around holding with an engine down.
That's the whole point behind the LANDING OVERWEIGHT checklist.
That's the whole point behind the LANDING OVERWEIGHT checklist.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA'a training does not advocate holding to reduce landing weight on one engine.
All single engine ops are "land at nearest suitable airport".
Always take the overwieght landing unless of course the runway is insufficient to take the weight (back of the QRH) in which case the airfiled is then "unsuitable" for that weight. You would then divert to a "suitable airfield" or reduce weight to one that the runway distance can accomodate.
NN
All single engine ops are "land at nearest suitable airport".
Always take the overwieght landing unless of course the runway is insufficient to take the weight (back of the QRH) in which case the airfiled is then "unsuitable" for that weight. You would then divert to a "suitable airfield" or reduce weight to one that the runway distance can accomodate.
NN
Thread Starter
As I understand it the 757 is cleared to land at MTOW so I assume the runaway at Atyrau was deemed unsuitable for a MTOW landing. The nearest alternative is Aktau which is slightly longer but no stronger and is around an hour's flying time away. The facilities for handling the landing are better at Atyrau I think and the logistics of getting 200 passengers sorted out afterwards in the absence of another aircraft are far better. Maybe Boeing should have fitted a fuel dump to the 757 after all.
