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

Spanair accident at Madrid

Wikiposts
Search
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

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21st Aug 2008, 08:56
  #301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"best" seats

I raised this point yesterday, and saw it was questioned again in #255. Its a SLF view on things and I think the answer is the one I have always believed in: there are no "best" seats in the case of crashes. Its all about luck (none in this crash), and if lucky then its about following proper evacuation protocols (e.g. BA38).

The facts emerging are that the survivors (who mostly seem to be in desperate conditions) were seated in rows 14-17 - as per El Mundo who have no doubt checked this against the manifest.

Info on the graphic sequence here:
Gráficos | elmundo.es
(click "comenzar", ignore graphics themselves which are clearly suppositions, the one with the survivor seats is at the end)
jotape is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 08:59
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: france
Age: 75
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
“The organised chaos in which the company exists can’t continue,” said the Spanish pilots’ union Sepla.

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 of 23 July 1992 on licensing of air carriers
in order to ensure dependable and adequate service it is necessary to ensure that an air carrier is at all times operating at sound economic levels;
SPA83 is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:02
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airborne or Not?

Think this could easily be find out as (most probably) ATC has a legal recording of their SMR (Surface Movement Radar) and ASR (Airborne Survailance Radar) including altitudes and G/S.
tin pusher is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:04
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zanzi's Bar
Age: 59
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Focus

The only confirmed facts so far:
1. A/c became airborne before crashing.
2. Witnesses reported engine fire on the runway.
3. Full pax load but well below MTOW on this sector.
4. CAVOK wx conditions.
5. Gate return due tech problem.

Based on this very few "established" facts so far it looks like loss of control due failure.
An engine fire even though dramatic can be a less contributing factor for control loss (compared to engine fail/severe damage) as the engine does not loose thrust instantly in a normal fire scenario. A turbine/compressor disc separation is another but very, very unlikely case even though to an outsider it might look as a fire. On a tail eng mount the yaw is even less pronounced than on a wing mount.
I personally have not flown this type but I presume a thrust reduction t/o must have been performed in this combination of wx/TOW conditions. Which further reduces the impact of yaw on directional control in any eng fail situation.
I would not speculate on the gate return until Spanair or the authorities release the techlog data. For sure it must have increased workload/stress for the flight crew.
So IMHO unless it has been a catastrophic compound failure e. g. an eng turbine/compressor disc separation resulting in flight controls major damage this accident should have been quite manageable.
But we would only know for sure when the FDR, CVR and trajectory data are published with the final report from the competent authorities.
swish266 is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:04
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Europe
Age: 56
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's amazing how so many are going on about how "current procedures are safe" and "we are happy to take it with this snag or that" but did I miss something or didn't an aircraft following those procedures just crash and kill 153 people?
Vortex what...ouch! is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:13
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 46
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes Vortex, but how many aircraft 'following those procedures' are departing and getting back to terra firma without any serious issues?? We're human and not everything is perfect... think about it
NOLAND3 is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:15
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vortex what...ouch! - the only thing missing is the facts. Maybe they followed procedures, and on the other hand, maybe they didn't. In fact it would not be the first time that following procedures caused an accident. Time will tell. Be patient.
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:24
  #308 (permalink)  

I Have Control
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Silly comment Vortex. (Not the only one on this thread though)

Flight crew following Standard Operating Procedures enhances safety; it does not guarantee absolute safety. Catastrophic turbine failure rupturing fuel/hydraulic lines, as an example, can cause immediate loss of control. No amount of slavish adherence to SOP's can avoid that.

I wish non-pro pilots would keep off this site. Their comments are almost always unhelpful. The internet is vast; there must be other sites they can go to and speculate at will. As for education of these individuals, again there are many good websites to visit. It is abundantly clear that some posters here have not a clue about handling big jets, MEL's, test flights, SOP's, Engineers' responsibilities, weather, runway surfaces, or aviation in general.

Engineers and pro-pilots only please.

Last edited by RoyHudd; 21st Aug 2008 at 15:30.
RoyHudd is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:25
  #309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 58
Posts: 1,906
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Vortex

It's amazing how so many are going on about how "current procedures are safe" and "we are happy to take it with this snag or that" but did I miss something or didn't an aircraft following those procedures just crash and kill 153 people?
How on earth do you know if procedures where followed in this case ? Every human loss is obviously tragic but the only way to avert them is to act rationally and cold minded. Please stop your rubbish - it doesn't help a bit !

Last edited by atakacs; 21st Aug 2008 at 09:32. Reason: Typo
atakacs is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:25
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Riga
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vortex

You are aware of the Swiss Cheese theory? It is rarely a single component, error or failure that causes a catastophe like this. If you are professional aircrew you will know this and also understand the requriement of MEL and deferals in maintenance.

In an ideal world we could all fly 100% servicable AC at all times - But we live in the real world.

I await the official report and my thoughts and parayers are with all those involved.

RIX
Romeo India Xray is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:28
  #311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vortex - you need to separate the sciolists from the professionals (a bit hard to do at times I admit). But you do seem to be over reacting. Do you have a personal involvement?
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:28
  #312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To reply to Limp Leek, I'm told by a forensic pathologist friend that the systems in place for a major catastrophe are very much better in Madrid than anything we have in place in the UK, as shown by the response to the train bombings. She apparently asked a colleague there what he thought they could have had done differently afterwards, and the reply was "Nothing".
Honeytruck is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:29
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm not familiar with this aircraft but it is being reported that the EGT / TGT gauge was the reason why the aircraft returned to the gate. I know that this is a no-go item for the majority of aircraft and I find it hard to believe that it would be allowed for the MD82.

If this is true and the crew departed with the gauge in-op this would be a serious error of judgement. Madrid is alot hotter and higher than most airports in Europe. The monitoring of gas temperatures is critical at any airport but to a greater degree at Airfields such as Madrid. I hope this is not the case.
Hudson Bay is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:36
  #314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Spanair Press Conference Coming Up

The company's press conference will be starting shortly - probably it will be shown live on Sky and relayed on Radio Five Live.

Some contributors here may not have seen that Spain's Transport Minister Magdalena Alvarez said the plane had taken off, but plunged back to the ground.
sandbank is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:43
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would caution drawing any significant conclusions from many of the reports, since many are translations from one language to another or perhaps more. Much meaning can be lost in the process.

If the take-off was rejected, there would be assymetric thrust reverse on the operative side, which would create a tendancy for the aircraft to veer right if the left engine was inoperative.

How did the fire services respond, and were they able to reach the stricken aircraft? In the case of fire, seconds are vital to the survivability of any accident.

A great tragedy, much sympathy to those involved and their comrades.
Capt H Peacock is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:56
  #316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 34
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi,
I'm not sure if this has allready been mentioned before, but if you look at the first picture you seem to be looking at the leading edge section of the wing and it seems that the slats are retracted. I'm not sure about the certified takeoff configurations of a MD80, but this might be somehow a factor in the accident(could anybody provide more info if the MD80 is certified for a No Slats/Flaps only takeoff?). On the other hand it might ofcourse be possible that the Slat retracted after loss of hydraulic power after impact-so pure speculation, but does anybody know if the slats are held in position by hydraulic or just pushed to position by hydraulic and hydraulic power then removed on the MD80 series?
FloWa is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 09:57
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scottish FIR
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by swish266
So IMHO unless it has been a catastrophic compound failure e. g. an eng turbine/compressor disc separation resulting in flight controls major damage this accident should have been quite manageable.
But we would only know for sure when the FDR, CVR and trajectory data are published with the final report from the competent authorities.
I have only ever flown jets with under wing mounted engines. My question is, how significant is the adverse yaw on the MD82. I found it strange that the left engine failed, yet the A/C went off to the right of the runway. Is it possible to miss identify a failed engine and input the incorrect contol? (its been done before).
spinnaker is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 10:02
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Effin' Limbo
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In response to your question about the MD taking off without slats:

No can do -. as soon as as move the flap/slat lever into the first slot, the slats come out. The second slot selects slats/flaps 11, which would be the standard TO configuration.
Max Stryker is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 10:02
  #319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Thessaloniki, GRECE
Age: 41
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
hambleoldboy:

How would that (forgot to properly set flaps and slats) explain the reported fire on engine no.1 and (again, reported) explosion?
Christodoulidesd is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2008, 10:13
  #320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
engine separation

Too early to speculate on how/why aircraft veered to the right. No facts on what engine actually came on fire.
If ... still beeing speculation, one engine totally separated this would most likely change the center og gravity of the plane so far forward that it would be impossible to control in pitch .... so if airbourne the aircraft would be forced into descend/uncontrolled landing .
Know of a DC9 that suffered severe damage to eng attach points after hard landings, but no clues if this has happened to MD's at all.
facelac is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.