Turkish MD-83 Crash

[Machaca]

Path to Türbetepe?

In the first few days following the accident, rumors were rampant the pilots short-cut before CARDAK.

Next we heard that they were cleared direct IPT.

Now we are told flight 4203 flew YAA KFK EKSEN1C IPT.




Hmmmm. 18 minute racetrack, lawsuit filed, empty CVR, incomplete FDR data. Any chance the logbook with any MEL's will apppear?


-=MachacA=-

[PBL]

Machaca,

thanks for all the info.

There are a lot of things wrong with the images used to illustrate the supposed track. For example, they look as though they come from some sort of official publication, but the runway is oriented at about 40° to "upright" and the inbound course at about 60°. Whereas the runway is designated 05, which means it is oriented somewhere nearer 50° magnetic and the inbound course is 043° magnetic. The magnetic variance is 3.2°E, so the difference between magnetic and true does not account for this discrepancy.

Interestingly, the outbound course of the aircraft is shown on these images as more or less aligned with the Rwy. Which it wasn't, if the track data are to be believed.

If he wasn't on radar, I wonder how someone managed to reconstruct the track? And if he was on radar, how come nobody said anything to him as he proceeded outbound 30° off track into mountainous country? And if this is from the FDR, I guess all that "unusable" data somehow became usable.

The track doesn't cohere with md80Forum's observation that he reported overhead VOR at 23.18Z and inbound at 23.36Z (post of [email protected]), according to MaxBlow's transcription of the Hurriyet report on 30.11@10:54PPRuNe. (Emphasised also by clearedtocross on 07.12q12:39PPRuNe. Note: I give PPRuNe time, because, despite claims, PPRuNe does not time posts at UTC. Neither does it maintain a constant offset to UTC: PPRuNe posting times changed by an hour when European daylight savings ended.) It would mean he took 18 minutes to traverse what looks to be about 24 nm, which does not compute given there was only a light wind.

Lomapaseo asked what critical data one expected to get answered only from the black box. I would have thought that the box's recorded heading, altitude and airspeed would be crucial info, whether it corresponds to real heading and altitude or not (nav equipment failure, for example, as suggested by clearedtocross on [email protected]). Or is there some reason to expect these not to have been recorded?

Speaking of the boxes, MaxBlow was reporting on the day of the crash that they were said to have been recovered. I wonder why it took almost two weeks to figure out if the data were usable? Flightglobal (David Kaminski-Morrow) was reporting on 05.12 that the German BFU was expected to analyse the data (link from cwatters [email protected]); it has still taken a week since then.

hetfield and Cyclone733 asked about radar and have not been answered. I don't know for sure yet. Given that the airport has virtually no facilities (no fuel, for example, and no jet starting unit) I would be surprised if it had radar. I doubt that en-route radar would be much help at approach elevations some 1000 ft above terrain: the procedure turn on the approach is at 7000 ft and there is 6000+ ft terrain some 5 nm left of the approach path and also at about double that distance right.

I don't see what relevance the list of nav problems apparently associated with decommissioning of ONS might have to this crash yet (listed by MachacA just now). This was a simple VOR-DME procedure, and they were supposed to have been following a VOR radial outbound at 223°. It is hard to see how one could be 30° off that unless one completely misread the chart (a mistake which has little to do with what kit is on board).

During the discussion about CFIT versus stall-in, there were various "if" scenarios involving hitting with one wing first, on rising terrain, and so on. Do we now agree from the pictures that the aircraft hit flat on the roughly flat top of a hill; that there appear to be gear traces in the impact point; and that the impact trace is unusually short for incidence parameters of (say) 140 kt at 3 degrees-ish?

I also noticed that a lot of posts have disappeared, expecially all those by BoeingMEL. I wonder if that is embarrassment or censure?

PBL

[maxrpm]

PBL: "This was a simple VOR-DME procedure, and they were supposed to have been following a VOR radial outbound at 223°. It is hard to see how one could be 30° off that unless one completely misread the chart (a mistake which has little to do with what kit is on board)."


I seems that they were cleared direct to the VOR from the north to start the VOR/DME from there. If that is the case they were not supposed to fly 223° outbound as they had to enter the racetrack yet.

Inbound from the north - a parallel or a teardrop entry would have been the appropriate choice.

A teardrop entry would have called for 193° heading (30° to the left from 223°) follwed by a right turn to 43° to establish on the 223 Radial inbound.

I do not know if the information about their actual heading of 253° outbound can be confirmed but if this can be confirmed it looks like an error in the direction of the turn.

Instead of 30° to the left in order to enter the racetrack they turned 30° to the right giving them 253° heading.

The rest of the picture would fit. In 12DME they turn right in order to establish inbound on the 223Radial. But from their actual position this is impossible.
223 Radial is not coming in so they extend their turn to the north still waiting to get established on radial 223.


If this hypotheses has some ground than they must have realeased after a few minutes that something was wrong. Seeing the airport lights 10 miles to their right they might well have decided to stop the confusion and just turn in visually on that clear but dark night.

They never reported established inbound on the VOR/DME appr. instead they reported field in sight. Not an uncommon or suspecious call but fitting the picture.

Still there is no explanation for the 18min timegap.

[Earl]

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/a...?enewsid=91065
ISTANBUL - Associated Press

An initial investigation shows that pilot error caused the plane crash that killed all 57 people on board last month, local media reported yesterday.

Authorities say they believe the pilot became disoriented while preparing to land at Isparta in southwest Turkey, but further investigation was needed, CNN Türk television and the daily Zaman newspaper reported.

"The primary data suggests the pilot lost spatial consciousness," Zaman quoted an unidentified civil aviation official as saying.

The office of Ali Ariduru, head of Turkey's Civil Aviation Authority, said he was not immediately available to comment on the reports. Atlasjet, the operator of the flight, declined to comment.

The Atlasjet MD-83 was flying from Istanbul to Isparta when it crashed early on the morning of Nov. 30, killing 50 passengers and seven crew members. Authorities have said the plane was off its flight path when it crashed. The wreckage was found 11 kilometers from the airport, on a mountain around 1,500 meters high.

Zaman and another newspaper, Yeni Şafak, said investigations showed the cockpit voice recorder was not recording before the crash, and the flight data recorder produced little usable data. However, CNN Türk said the recorders were working properly.

Officials had said there was no indication of sabotage in the disaster, which occurred in good weather minutes before the plane was scheduled to land.

Atlasjet, a private airline established in 2001, operates regular flights inside Turkey and chartered flights to Europe and other foreign destinations.

[Earl]

Conflicting reports from the media, CNN Turk is quoted as saying the recorders were working properly.

[PBL]

maxrpm,

I won't disagree with anything you're saying, but I would like to point out two possibly conflicting pieces of information.

1. I acknowledge the intervention from SeattlePilot who reported his good friend working the flight, and then finding out that Ankara gave them direct IPT, which would have them coming in from the north.

But then MachacA just suggested "we were told" he was on the EKSEN 1C arrival, but printed a map showing a path from CARDAK (CRD), which is the PELIL 1C arrival. These are reciprocals of each other: EKSIN comes in to IPT on the 078° radial, on a heading of 258° from EKSEN, and PELIL comes in on the IPT 260° radial, on a heading of 080° from CRD. So on PELIL he would be making a direct entry.

2. You say

Originally Posted by maxrpm

They never reported established inbound on the VOR/DME appr. instead they reported field in sight

Looking at the ATC transcript from Hurriyet, reported by MaxBlow on 30.11.2007@10:54PP, he was asked to report inbound by ATC and reported "established inbound" at 23:36Z. We don't know yet which approach he was on, the VOR DME, or the VOR/NDB (the difference I see is whether you measure the turn inbound by DME or by time).

PBL

[Machaca]

Teardrop 30 degree Error

maxrpm,

I believe you nailed it. Tired crew makes simple error. Comports with Ockham's razor.


-=MachacA=-

[Machaca]

Truthiness and Flight Paths

I've more trust in SeattlePilot's hearsay re direct IPT than the "officials" at some press conference aired by CNN Turk yesterday:

http://www.cnnturk.com/VIDEO/index.asp?vid=2679

What a circus! Those diagrams!!! What black boxes are those -- I thought they were in a lab in Germany?!


-=MachacA=-

[lomapaseo]

I believe you nailed it. Tired crew makes simple error. Comports with Ockham's razor.


-=MachacA=-

If the "tired crew makes simple error" is simple and probably common, what is the backup barrier that should have caught this and prevented the rest of the combinations that resulted in this accident

I mean that we can expect more tired crews and more simple errors but we should not be accepting this as the only cause of the accident.

Where's the intervention to this?

[Machaca]

what is the backup barrier that should have caught this and prevented the rest of the combinations

All the standard answers apply. Training, CRM, equipment upgrades (EGPWS), double checking your sums, duty time/rest, communication...


-=MachacA=-

[lomapaseo]

All the standard answers apply. Training, CRM, equipment upgrades (EGPWS), double checking your sums, duty time/rest, communication...

I don't agree. Most of the above are precursors to the crew error not additional barriers to an accident following common crew errors.

[pls8xx]

Flight Path

While I am still struggling to pinpoint the crash site, there is one thing I am rather certain about ... the heading at time of impact was generally NE, parallel to the runway.

One of the photos made on the morning of Nov. 30 had the camera pointed parallel with the crash scene. In it one can see shadows near 90 degrees to the camera angle. The shadows are 2 to 2.5 times the height of objects.

Using the solar calculator at .... www.srrb.noaa.gov/highlights/sunrise/azel.html


By trial and error I adjust input to get a solar elevation that will yield shadows of the length seen in the photo. This occurs about 9:45 AM. The azimuth of the sun at that time was about 149 degrees.



Turning back to the photo, one can see a high point along the horizon in the upper left that is near alignment with the crash scene. Google shows a peak about 25 mi at around az 54 degrees from the general area of the crash.



From info on radio communications, gear down comments, an altitude less than 7000, and the flight path derived from the above analysis, I conclude that it's likely the crew thought they were on final approach.

[PBL]

Now that, pls8xx, is class! Very nice.

PBL

[Earl]

Quote:lomapaseo
Oh, and just what critical question did you expect to get answered only from the black box ?

Earl: CVR should have added quite a bit of information as to what happened.
Approach briefing to begin with, who was the PF,PNF, EGPWS warnings and what actions were taken, CRM, standard call outs, many things that would have helped this investigation, if true that they were disoriented this would be more than apparent on the recording.
This was an important piece of the investigation.
DFDR would have backed up much of this info.
Really surprising question here!
Care to expand on this comment?
Or just more Media!

[Green Guard]

Hmmmm. 18 minute racetrack, lawsuit filed, empty CVR, incomplete FDR data. Any chance the logbook with any MEL's will apppear?

You must be kidding !!
Just think why was CVR "empty" and FDR "incomplete"" !!

[Machaca]

Nice work pls8xx!

Using both on-site photos looking out and many photos of scenery in the surrounding locales, I used roads, terrain, vegetation, landmarks, reports, etc. to deduce Türbetepe's location and the point of impact to be:

LAT 37.873 -- LON 30.200



Here's a view looking West over IPT to Türbetepe:



Here's a view looking South to Türbetepe from above the town of Aydoğmuş:



Here's a flyover view of the area -- crash site area is obscured by the inboard canoe!



From atop Türbetepe you can easily look about in Google Earth and match up the views seen in many of the photos taken at the crash site.


-=MachacA=-

[PBL]

Originally Posted by Earl

Or just more Media!

No earl, he is not, as you could check for yourself.

Let me take this opportunity to say that I find these sorts of prejudiced comments unnecessary. Much of the information any of us have about this accident has been gleaned through the hard work of journalists. I prefer to appreciate this necessary work, not to demean it.

PBL

[MaxBlow]

more charts

www.airporthaber.com/hb/detay.php?id=22559

here're more pictures/charts showing the track flown by the aircraft.
Maybe someone can translate the text.

[hetfield]

@Max

What does the 2nd picture say about DFDR (red)?

[MaxBlow]

DFDR

I'm not 100% sure but understand the following:
'Once analysed the DFDR will explain why the aircraft was flying this track'