Turkish airliner crashes at Schiphol
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sussex
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Baffled
I cannot for the life of me understand why the stbd engine is forward of the cockpit AND in a similar flight path to the fuselage. Unless it had become detached just prior to impact.
Can anyone offer an alternative explanation ?
Can anyone offer an alternative explanation ?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very good point - particulary as the crash was in the middle of a field, that appears to be muddy.
A four-wheel-drive fire truck might just be able to reach the wreck but would have serious trouble getting away after standing still for more than half an hour. A regular ambulance has no chance at all. Schiphol has something like nine "E-one"s (8-wheelers) which should work in these kinds of fields.
The pictures of body bags being loaded onto a flatbed trailer towed by a tractor may have been ghastly, but it was probably the only way of getting them out of the field, short of carrying them by hand for a few hundred meters to the nearest road.
The tracked vehicle you see in the pictures is a Haglund. It is especially suitable for traversing all the ditches that lie around the airport. But from a book on Schiphol I have here, it seems that Schiphol owns only one.
Last edited by BackPacker; 25th Feb 2009 at 17:12.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: 100 Group Country
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Supprised that there is no evidence of foam around the wings.
Even if the integrity of the tanks was maintained (and I would consider this doubtfull in this instance), I would have thought there would have been some fuel spill which the fire crews would have had to deal with.
(737 LAE).
Even if the integrity of the tanks was maintained (and I would consider this doubtfull in this instance), I would have thought there would have been some fuel spill which the fire crews would have had to deal with.
(737 LAE).
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southampton
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Turkish Airlines plane did not crash in Amsterdam on Wednesday, but instead landed short of the runway, aviation experts said.
"When we look at the wreckage, it is seen that the plane was struck on the right engine. That means a part of the plane hit the ground during landing. I think this plane did not crash. It is likely that it landed short of the runway," Ugur Cebeci, aviation expert of Hurriyet daily said.
"When we look at the wreckage, it is seen that the plane was struck on the right engine. That means a part of the plane hit the ground during landing. I think this plane did not crash. It is likely that it landed short of the runway," Ugur Cebeci, aviation expert of Hurriyet daily said.
An interesting choice of phrase there...
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: location, location!
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Facts And Speculation
FACTS:
Several eyewitnesses, including pax on the a/c, report a pitch-up followed by a sharp pitch down.
Surprising short tracks on the ground (approximately one a/c-length), indicating low forward velocity.
3 deceased FCMs remain in the cockpit on the authority of the Dutch Public Prosecutor.
SPECULATION (for the PPL'ers):
An eyewitness who was one of the first to assist survivors noticed oxygen masks were deployed in the cabin? Maybe rapid decompression at 200'?
Maybe some of the spark plugs were dirty and not all cylinders were firing, just I once had on my 172?
As there was a check captain on board and cloud base at 800', maybe they were practicing a precautionary with low level circuit and short and soft field landing? I had to do that once too...
Several eyewitnesses, including pax on the a/c, report a pitch-up followed by a sharp pitch down.
Surprising short tracks on the ground (approximately one a/c-length), indicating low forward velocity.
3 deceased FCMs remain in the cockpit on the authority of the Dutch Public Prosecutor.
SPECULATION (for the PPL'ers):
An eyewitness who was one of the first to assist survivors noticed oxygen masks were deployed in the cabin? Maybe rapid decompression at 200'?
Maybe some of the spark plugs were dirty and not all cylinders were firing, just I once had on my 172?
As there was a check captain on board and cloud base at 800', maybe they were practicing a precautionary with low level circuit and short and soft field landing? I had to do that once too...
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cambridge (the original one)
Age: 75
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, that is interesting. My guess (only a guess) is that it's consistent with a very steep descent in a nose-up attitude. The tail impacts first, the resulting acceleration force breaks the engine pylon fuse and releases the engine, and what forward momentum there is lets the free engine slide along the ground ahead.
This would also be consistent with the flight crew being killed by the high G-force as the fuselage, rotating down around the stabiliser lateral axis, hit the ground.
But now that I think of, the mechanics is all wrong - my 2nd para. contradicts the first (which assumes the fuselage does not rotate down).
Wait for the FDR readout!
This would also be consistent with the flight crew being killed by the high G-force as the fuselage, rotating down around the stabiliser lateral axis, hit the ground.
But now that I think of, the mechanics is all wrong - my 2nd para. contradicts the first (which assumes the fuselage does not rotate down).
Wait for the FDR readout!
Last edited by Gegenbeispiel; 1st Mar 2009 at 01:03. Reason: typo
Top Dog
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Close to FACT
Age: 55
Posts: 2,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It takes time to read and moderate these threads.... this is also not the place for 14 year olds (or any other year olds) to post condolences and such. 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tragedy in EHAM / AMS
I'm responding to one post talking specifically about fuel starvation.
It is highly unlikely, although not impossible, that fuel starvation is an issue. If fuel was starved because of a fuel leak, then it would be noticed and rectified either by diversion or x-feed shut-off or engine (1 of) shutdown or other remedial action. You don't notice you've no fuel left once on finals, although it has happened (B747 arrives at LHR and engines shut down during taxi - airline name with-held). We will have to wait for the CVR and FDR to give further indication there.
As for fuel used, a typical B737-800 (I've used CFM56 fitted engines here) on a sector LTBA - EHAM using todays weather for an 0530Z departure would require trip fuel for 3 hrs 12 mins and dependent on TK fuel policy, would have around 4 hrs of fuel on board to include diversion (assuming EHRD) and contingency / reserves (I used 5% in calculation). That equates to approximately 10,700kgs of fuel - pilots will know but others may not - jet aircraft are not generally fuelled in litres, but by weight - either LBS or KGS - as fuel volume differs from its' weight due to temperature, altitude of airport ASL, etc. I did not include destination mvr fuel, but did include 30 minutes of hold at 1167 kgs. As aircraft did not divert, reserves are still assumed aboard on landing.
If you want facts - there they are. BBC and SKY news should be in possession of facts like that before they start any conjecture. Maybe they are but it helps everyone to know the starting point and work on from there.
Before we can speculate on any starvation issue, we need to get more facts like fuel remaining during the dsc, which may be obtained from the FDR.
All FD Crew lost - sad, very sad. My condolences to THY Flight Dispatch and Crew personnel and their families, and whatever the cause, I'm sure the professionalism of the crew dealing with the emergency contributed to the fact that out of 135 souls falling vertically, they saved 126.
It is highly unlikely, although not impossible, that fuel starvation is an issue. If fuel was starved because of a fuel leak, then it would be noticed and rectified either by diversion or x-feed shut-off or engine (1 of) shutdown or other remedial action. You don't notice you've no fuel left once on finals, although it has happened (B747 arrives at LHR and engines shut down during taxi - airline name with-held). We will have to wait for the CVR and FDR to give further indication there.
As for fuel used, a typical B737-800 (I've used CFM56 fitted engines here) on a sector LTBA - EHAM using todays weather for an 0530Z departure would require trip fuel for 3 hrs 12 mins and dependent on TK fuel policy, would have around 4 hrs of fuel on board to include diversion (assuming EHRD) and contingency / reserves (I used 5% in calculation). That equates to approximately 10,700kgs of fuel - pilots will know but others may not - jet aircraft are not generally fuelled in litres, but by weight - either LBS or KGS - as fuel volume differs from its' weight due to temperature, altitude of airport ASL, etc. I did not include destination mvr fuel, but did include 30 minutes of hold at 1167 kgs. As aircraft did not divert, reserves are still assumed aboard on landing.
If you want facts - there they are. BBC and SKY news should be in possession of facts like that before they start any conjecture. Maybe they are but it helps everyone to know the starting point and work on from there.
Before we can speculate on any starvation issue, we need to get more facts like fuel remaining during the dsc, which may be obtained from the FDR.
All FD Crew lost - sad, very sad. My condolences to THY Flight Dispatch and Crew personnel and their families, and whatever the cause, I'm sure the professionalism of the crew dealing with the emergency contributed to the fact that out of 135 souls falling vertically, they saved 126.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where are the helicopters?
Long haul,
When I saw the damage, the only thing that made me give any credence to the denials of any deaths, was the lack of helicopters. At a major airport in the US, lifeflight helicopters would have been all over it. Not just some tracked vehicle. I still assume that the television cameras just arrived too late for the helicopters. Was that tracked vehicle really all they had?
The Rescue vehicles with the tracked, tank-like wheels you see in the photos were ordered after the Saab 340 crash about ten years ago, when they had trouble navigating through the thick mud prevalent in the fields around the airport. Whoever decided to make that investment may have saved someone's life today.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That would be Malaysian then. Banned by the UK CAA for several weeks, some years ago.
The cockpit is severely damaged, and crushed from the front/bottom, pushing all the equipment towards the occupants. In many of the 737's I fly, they are not fitted with head restraints either, so I am conscious that my neck would probably be broken in such a incident. As for the observers seat, well it is more like a bench than a seat.
The cockpit is severely damaged, and crushed from the front/bottom, pushing all the equipment towards the occupants. In many of the 737's I fly, they are not fitted with head restraints either, so I am conscious that my neck would probably be broken in such a incident. As for the observers seat, well it is more like a bench than a seat.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TK pilot on airliners.net claims the plane took off with 12.2 tons of fuel on board, with trip fuel calculated at 8.1.
TK B738 Crash At Amsterdam - Part 3 — Civil Aviation Forum | Airliners.net
Post #72
TK B738 Crash At Amsterdam - Part 3 — Civil Aviation Forum | Airliners.net
Post #72
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland
Age: 65
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Published images and witness reports so far suggest this was a VERY abrupt high-G arrival with a large vertical decelleration component, to which the soft ground surface will have contributed adversly. I fear for the number and extent of survivor injuries here particulary spinal and major orthopedic injuries (Kegworth). Seat structure and orientation can only help so much in a high-G situation.
Minor point but I speculate that slide inflation-systems may have been damaged?
(500hr PPL/sailplanes, and medical doctor)
Minor point but I speculate that slide inflation-systems may have been damaged?
(500hr PPL/sailplanes, and medical doctor)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they leave the dead bodies of the flight crew in their seats? Ive never heard of this before. It was some what chilling to see some of the emergency services peering through the windows of the flight deck looking at the dead bodies.
Also 3 crew? Training? Line check? Where all 3 people in the flight deck crew or was the person on the jump seat someone else??
Also 3 crew? Training? Line check? Where all 3 people in the flight deck crew or was the person on the jump seat someone else??
Know what you mean RCopyC,
loss of differential at FL200 combined with carb icing, fuel starvation, your obvious oversight of the FMC 'Insuficcient Fuel' memo, failiure to put the girt bars into the floor restraints and thus arming your power-assisted doors, accepting a18R instead of 18C approach on short finals (FRA 25R/Lwas always better for that - if you're flyng the right flag
), and then the thoughtless discarding of your left engine over the Ringvaart (where incidentially my boat is parked) in your 172 can be the only acceptable explaination for this tragic incident.
I trust you'll be handing you licence back to the boys in 'Belgrano' soonest
Tsk Tsk
loss of differential at FL200 combined with carb icing, fuel starvation, your obvious oversight of the FMC 'Insuficcient Fuel' memo, failiure to put the girt bars into the floor restraints and thus arming your power-assisted doors, accepting a18R instead of 18C approach on short finals (FRA 25R/Lwas always better for that - if you're flyng the right flag
), and then the thoughtless discarding of your left engine over the Ringvaart (where incidentially my boat is parked) in your 172 can be the only acceptable explaination for this tragic incident.I trust you'll be handing you licence back to the boys in 'Belgrano' soonest
Tsk Tsk
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fuel discrapancy
Backpacker - Wow - that's a lot of fuel, but of course, I did a generalisation based on weather and best route. Without knowing the actual route flown, and therefore the wx en-route, and TOW, engine degradation etc., it is impossible to be completely accurate, but the point made there is that they had much more fuel than minimum needed for best sector. I used a max ZFW also, and a 738 with 138 SOB is not full, unless there was lots of cargo downstairs.
Like I said, point made -they had lots of fuel, so unless there was an undetected leak, and the crew were totally disregarding their flight plan, not logging Fuel Remaining figures or Fuel to Destination figures, then I think fuel starvation is very unlikely.
Whatever we think of them, pilots, are professionals after all.
Like I said, point made -they had lots of fuel, so unless there was an undetected leak, and the crew were totally disregarding their flight plan, not logging Fuel Remaining figures or Fuel to Destination figures, then I think fuel starvation is very unlikely.
Whatever we think of them, pilots, are professionals after all.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mexico
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More images of crash site
Some more pictures from Belgium news paper "Le soir"
portfolio - galeries photos - lesoir.be
portfolio - galeries photos - lesoir.be
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they leave the dead bodies of the flight crew in their seats?
But their position (who occupied which seat, who was holding which lever, which aircraft part impacted with which body part etc.) may be of tremendous value to the investigation. Also, removing them may mean breaking through structural items and accidentally hitting switches, buttons and such, whose position you might want to record first.
I can perfectly imagine that saving lives comes first in these situations, but once saving lives is no longer possible, preserving the scene of accident is the next priority.
Last edited by BackPacker; 25th Feb 2009 at 17:55.
