Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Spanair accident at Madrid

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Spanair accident at Madrid

Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:08
  #981 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
One mainly just uses one's common, Nigel. The space between two parallel runways, I am sure you would agree, is not a good place to put a big building for your plane to crash into. No more so a bloody great hole in the ground for it to fall into.

Equally, don't put things in potential overrun areas that don't need to be there, e.g. sunken roads, ditches, berms, concrete lighting bases etc. which were only put there because it didn't occur to them a plane could hit them. The Canadian TSB recommended 300M clear flat areas around runways after Toronto, roughly in line with the NTSB's rec of 1000ft. Good enough for me, since you asked. That could well have saved this lot.
They didn't "put" a "bloody great hole" there... it was already there

So what "clear flat area" do you think MAD has established? My quick measurements show ~250m in the area this aircraft left... and for much of the MAD 36L/R construction, somewhat more (and some less). What do you measure it as to that fence? If it is ~250m, and you wanted 300m, given those tyre tracks I reckon the result would have been the same?

LHR fails to meet the 300m in quite a few areas? As I am sure do may others...

NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:14
  #982 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Moscow
Age: 42
Posts: 43
Nigel, problem is not even with the ravine, or river, whatever.
Problem is: an area exists within an airport perimeter (airport property) which fire truck has difficulty accessing. Some sort of a common sense says that I want fire cover in the airport, and now comes a nasty surprise that although the equipment is damn close, they cannot reach me (in time).
AlexGG is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:17
  #983 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: spain
Posts: 33
Flat Terrain around LEMD R36L is...

...4500 by 300 m as posted by myself in post #563.

See Spanish AIP AD2-LEMD
blackboard is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:17
  #984 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 103

Is it possible that you can clarify the literal translation re the tail assembly please ? I ask as the translation engines in Google and the like tend to lose
the nuances of the original.

I ask as the initial impact marks and the tracks in the field adjacent to the runway are not consistent with the suggestion that the tail section was separated from the airframe.

Much obliged for your help.

Eagle402 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:18
  #985 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,043
New Article -
The tail hit the ground first out of the landing strip, breaking/detaching itself.
I don't think they mean the tail plane/fin detached itself. The item marked is the cone for the tail escape slide - I think. To my mind that's the bit 'they' refer to as the tail. Or is this obvious?

forget is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:22
  #986 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: spain
Posts: 33

The detachable tailcone is what the comission refers to as having detached upon first contact with the ground.

They also refer to this as the first airframe part to contact the ground after T/O.
blackboard is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:25
  #987 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 103

I suspect that, as ever, you are spot on and the report does indeed refer to the cone, as per your kind graphic.

Eagle402 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:33
  #988 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canary Islands, Spain
Posts: 240
Yeah, as usual, different newspaper reporters say ever so slightly different things like if it was all the same.

The all say the tail hit the ground first.

Some say the tail broke/detached itself from the rest of the plane.

Some say the back part of the tail broke/detached itself from the rest.

I think it's safe to assume it was the tail cone, but then again, the whole tail is one of the larger pieces found "intact" and slightly away from the rest of the plane, but this could've happened later.

A second survivor was discharged (the female doctor). 16 remain hospitalised. 1 has gotten worse. 1 is not believed to be able to recover from the coma. 1 remains very serious condition.

Last edited by justme69; 26th Aug 2008 at 18:58.
justme69 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 18:44
  #989 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: VA, USA
Posts: 34

With the tremendous drag from the mains, I don't think that would be the case.
Well, if that's the case then you wouldn't be getting airborne again, would you? Combined with such a drag force, a stall would make your nosewheel come down closer to the ground leaving a deeper mark and possibly a gear collapse...

I am just trying to visualize the force diagram at the moment the plane touched the ground... Maybe I am getting old but what I see from those marks is what would be left off on the runway if you would be applying the "crab technique".
LuckyStrike is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 19:10
  #990 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canary Islands, Spain
Posts: 240
I just saw "first hand" parts of the secretary for the accident commission press conference on TV.

-By their regulations, they are required to present a preliminary, factual report (no conclusions or probable causes, just the facts stated), in aprox. 1 month. Actual investigation thought to last several months.

-It's confirmed that the voice recordings and the fly data have been extracted in the UK facility it was sent. They are now being enhanced (voice clarity, etc), recovered & verified.

-He hasn't witness the airport video footage of the accident, but it is part of the investigation and others have seen it.

-Based on marks on the ground, it seems that the airplane first hit the ground outside of the landing strip, on the service route just adjacent to it, touching the ground first with the tail, tail cone coming off.

-Plane kept tumbling ahead for 1200m, bouncing 3 times (matching unlevel terrain marks).

Last edited by justme69; 26th Aug 2008 at 19:43.
justme69 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 19:12
  #991 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: north
Posts: 319

I support the theory that:
- acf is in a severe slip to the right when it hits the grass
- tail hit's first (small trail closest to rwy), cone falls off
- left main gear hits ground.
- raight main hits.
- Nose gear hits
- acf straightens its path.
- ...

If there had been a burning engine falling off at this point,
why did the dry grass not catch fire here as it did further down the track? And why didn't it stop in this area like the cone did?

There has been significant LATERAL forces in play here judging
by the rwy exit angle. Rudder use or asymetric thrust.

XPMorten is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 19:19
  #992 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 16
Given the latest reports about the plane "bouncing" doesn't anyone else question how the perfect skid marks in the images recently posted could tally with such a deduction? Or did the bouncing happen after the dip into the ravine. (all this assumes the images are genuine of course).
PassengerDan is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 19:29
  #993 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 65
Posts: 1,265

to me it seems there is some burnt area right at the start of the "third major trail", possibly caused by some fuel leak at engine break off,

The engine is not visible in this picture so if i m right it continued it s track past the ditch next to the road

As Madrid is hot and dry, depending how hard the ground is, there would have been only minimal deceleration when the plane touched down on the grass, so if the drops are several towards the gully, it is not surprising the planed "hopped" several times untill speed had been lost sufficiently for no more lift to occur.

To the pilots based in Spain: Thank you for keeping us updated!
vanHorck is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 19:29
  #994 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: spain
Posts: 33
FDR data quality

Let me just add to Justme's posting that the comission's secretary also stated that the FDR data quality was better in some channels than others, implying (my own deduction) that data integrity could be compromised in some channels.

I hope this partial lack of integrity does not hamper the investigation significantly.
blackboard is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 19:40
  #995 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: spain
Posts: 33
Investigation Board Report

For Spanish speakers, the full 73-minute Investigation Board report in today's press conference can be found here:

rtve.es/noticias - Vídeos - Rueda de prensa Comisión de Investigación del accidente de Barajas
blackboard is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 19:51
  #996 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 242
Thanks, but unfortunately the RTVE videos don't load. Anyone else having the same problem outside of Spain?
snowfalcon2 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 20:00
  #997 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Subterranea
Age: 67
Posts: 187
Same here, the RTVE videos do not load.
Green-dot is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 20:13
  #998 (permalink)  
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 64
Posts: 1,099
For those that didn't find this

A much earlier post regarding the marks in the grass

west lakes is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 20:15
  #999 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: spain
Posts: 33
Board Video

I am viewing it now and will report anything significant in English in about one hour.
blackboard is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2008, 20:15
  #1000 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: spain
Posts: 1
I'm seeing the RTVE video without problems...
yeagerx1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.