Turkish airliner crashes at Schiphol
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well I'm not sure if I get deleted but I try it nonetheless...
Nick, a transponder signal is never accurate as to read out a real speed of an aircraft. If you had the chance to watch some modern TCAS/ACAS systems, you can easily see how inaccurate they are. Transponders are not there to determine the speed of an aircraft but it's position (with a relative wide error).
This is especially noteworthy in case of an aircraft that decelerates or even stops. If your exampel aircraft would stop, and you would measure the speed 10 seconds before crash landing, which speed would it be? Most probably the average of the last 10 seconds.
Only the readout of the flight data recorder will give us reliable evidence on how the aircraft crash landed.
FSLF, teh picture shows a landing gear, but not the evidence if it was extended...
Ah, and DC-ATE, my favorite enemy, is also here! FBW aircraft are not stallable. And stick pusher close to ground is very very deadly. An Airbus can be flown at the lowest allowed speed with full controls without risking a stall, while on conventional aircraft you always have to build in a safety margin. Remember Habsheim.
Dani
Nick, a transponder signal is never accurate as to read out a real speed of an aircraft. If you had the chance to watch some modern TCAS/ACAS systems, you can easily see how inaccurate they are. Transponders are not there to determine the speed of an aircraft but it's position (with a relative wide error).
This is especially noteworthy in case of an aircraft that decelerates or even stops. If your exampel aircraft would stop, and you would measure the speed 10 seconds before crash landing, which speed would it be? Most probably the average of the last 10 seconds.
Only the readout of the flight data recorder will give us reliable evidence on how the aircraft crash landed.
FSLF, teh picture shows a landing gear, but not the evidence if it was extended...
Ah, and DC-ATE, my favorite enemy, is also here! FBW aircraft are not stallable. And stick pusher close to ground is very very deadly. An Airbus can be flown at the lowest allowed speed with full controls without risking a stall, while on conventional aircraft you always have to build in a safety margin. Remember Habsheim.
Dani
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: lincs
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roof Panel
AP
If it helps, I saw some TV coverage showing rescue crew hacking at the roof above the cockpit while the commentator stated that there were bodies there to be recovered.
Ergo, I guess any panel was still in place.
OB96
If it helps, I saw some TV coverage showing rescue crew hacking at the roof above the cockpit while the commentator stated that there were bodies there to be recovered.
Ergo, I guess any panel was still in place.
OB96
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 80
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When we did our ditching training in the SVC10, we were afterwards shown a film of a 10 foot SVC10 model, specially built to simulate a ditching. Every time it was catapulted into the tank, the model`s nose area underwent violent pitching. The boffins calculated that those G forces would have killed the cockpit crew in the event of a real ditching. The injury would have been the tearing of the arteries from the heart. So Turkish hitting tail first, then violently pitching down, then the sudden stop, may well have done just that.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 85
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Afraid I am only a GA pilot so forgive the questions.
I would have assumed that when a heavy aircraft is in landing configuration at a 'final' stage then there would have been a 'gear not down' warning.
I understand that there seems to have been no communication of a problem to ATC, which seems to indicate that everything happened very quickly and very late indicating that the crew were unaware of the emerging situation. However, if you have a 'power out' on a heavy aircraft will this kill the comms?
I would have assumed that when a heavy aircraft is in landing configuration at a 'final' stage then there would have been a 'gear not down' warning.
I understand that there seems to have been no communication of a problem to ATC, which seems to indicate that everything happened very quickly and very late indicating that the crew were unaware of the emerging situation. However, if you have a 'power out' on a heavy aircraft will this kill the comms?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In my seat
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Belgique,
In my previous post (page 13 or something) I mention a similar thing, namely the backtrim during an dual-channel ILS, which can take people by surprise when forced to Go-around manually. This together with a very low speed regime is indeed a trap one would not want to set a foot in.
In my previous post (page 13 or something) I mention a similar thing, namely the backtrim during an dual-channel ILS, which can take people by surprise when forced to Go-around manually. This together with a very low speed regime is indeed a trap one would not want to set a foot in.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do indeed get a gear not down warning, as notified by your GPWS.
More details can be seen at Ground proximity warning system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The voice is very loud in the cockpit, so no chance of missing it. You can of course turn it off, as required by some check-lists in non-normal situations.
More details can be seen at Ground proximity warning system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The voice is very loud in the cockpit, so no chance of missing it. You can of course turn it off, as required by some check-lists in non-normal situations.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Belgique & dani, 737 is not fitted with stick pusher (no t-tail no deep-stall) merely stick shaker x2.
Belgique ref your remarks about lack of attention to speed due over reliance/confidence in Autothrottle. I have never worked in a company (and I have flown the 737 in quite a few) where you wouldn't be severely barked at on any sim or line check if you didn't follow through with your mitts even on a A/T controlled approach. I doubt Turkish are any different in this respect. From 1000ft down what else is there to look at except the glideslope localiser & speed ( I have never got the hang of doing crosswords in the last 3 miles
) I think the syndrome you refer to is much more an Airbus thing, as of course there is ( very stupidly I feel ) no thrust lever movement when using autothrust to give you a much neede tactile clue of what is going on without recourse to eyes & ears.
Belgique ref your remarks about lack of attention to speed due over reliance/confidence in Autothrottle. I have never worked in a company (and I have flown the 737 in quite a few) where you wouldn't be severely barked at on any sim or line check if you didn't follow through with your mitts even on a A/T controlled approach. I doubt Turkish are any different in this respect. From 1000ft down what else is there to look at except the glideslope localiser & speed ( I have never got the hang of doing crosswords in the last 3 miles
) I think the syndrome you refer to is much more an Airbus thing, as of course there is ( very stupidly I feel ) no thrust lever movement when using autothrust to give you a much neede tactile clue of what is going on without recourse to eyes & ears.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the german Spiegel:
Flugzeugabsturz in Schiphol: Piloten von Instrumententafel erschlagen - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten - Panorama
...
The pilots in the cockpit were killed by an instrument panel, it were said.
The third pilot on board the machine, the 29 year old Olgay Özgür, received obviously a training for the type Boeing 737-800, even if he had already had a pilot license since 2004, said a speaker of the airline on Thursday in Istanbul.
...
Flugzeugabsturz in Schiphol: Piloten von Instrumententafel erschlagen - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten - Panorama
...
The pilots in the cockpit were killed by an instrument panel, it were said.
The third pilot on board the machine, the 29 year old Olgay Özgür, received obviously a training for the type Boeing 737-800, even if he had already had a pilot license since 2004, said a speaker of the airline on Thursday in Istanbul.
...
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
POB Vs SOB
Apologies for being irrelevant to this page's discussion but to clarify:
POB - Passengers on Board
SOB - Souls On Board
It is a clear and necessary distinction for Operations.
POB - Passengers on Board
SOB - Souls On Board
It is a clear and necessary distinction for Operations.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: italy
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What happened then?
Guys,
from the metar/Taf there where no evidence of gusty winds/strong winds so we can exclude windshear.Probably they where in IMC Wx conditions before they crash but an EGPWS call "Pull up terrain" should have save them from crashing so we can exclude that as well. Bird strike with double flame out on final is so rare and anyway they should be reports of birds activity in the ariport area and they are not.
May be they had a fuel leak but the FMC should have alert them about insufficilent fuel and for sure they would have declare an emergency in Schipol area to be first in Approach. So what do you think guys?
from the metar/Taf there where no evidence of gusty winds/strong winds so we can exclude windshear.Probably they where in IMC Wx conditions before they crash but an EGPWS call "Pull up terrain" should have save them from crashing so we can exclude that as well. Bird strike with double flame out on final is so rare and anyway they should be reports of birds activity in the ariport area and they are not.
May be they had a fuel leak but the FMC should have alert them about insufficilent fuel and for sure they would have declare an emergency in Schipol area to be first in Approach. So what do you think guys?
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Dutch controllers are outstanding. The amount of traffic, parallel approaches, and general high levels of activity really do require them to be at the top of their game. Certain countries make you a little nervous, to say the least, but not the Dutch. Very professional bunch.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
skyclear1984, in a much earlier post it was stated that there was a bird alert in force, and another poster (if I remember correctly) stated that landing there on the same day there was a lot of bird activity.
As you are from Italy I am surprised you think bird-strike double flame out is SO rare. Never mind the Hudson (albeit on departure), have you already forgotten Ciampino ? I still wouldn't be surprised if this was number 3.
As you are from Italy I am surprised you think bird-strike double flame out is SO rare. Never mind the Hudson (albeit on departure), have you already forgotten Ciampino ? I still wouldn't be surprised if this was number 3.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Springfield
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for being irrelevant to this page's discussion but to clarify:
POB - Passengers on Board
SOB - Souls On Board
It is a clear and necessary distinction for Operations.
POB - Passengers on Board
SOB - Souls On Board
It is a clear and necessary distinction for Operations.
EDIT: I've just checked the UK CAA definition of POB and it is "(Total) Persons on Board". I know this isn't that relevant to what caused this crash but it's come up several times in this thread so hopefully this answers the question.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B 737 ovhd pnl
For those who wonder how heavy it is belive me when I say that they are HEAVY. Difficult to say how much exatly but a good guess could be atleast 30 kg (65 lbs)
Its hinged in one end like on many other aircraft types.
If it would just fall down when sitting on gate it could probably easily know you out so imagine what it could do with some velocity
Wings 1011
Its hinged in one end like on many other aircraft types.
If it would just fall down when sitting on gate it could probably easily know you out so imagine what it could do with some velocity
Wings 1011
MahatmaKote is almost right with his analysis, apart from a centre-of-gravity matter. If the CoG is closer to the tail than nose, the acceleration of the nose after initial impact will be greater than 2*g.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More than anything I wish people would stop making posts in relation to possible human factors that this, that or the other is "inconceivable".
There are many, many "inconceivable" accidents filling the history books, and each one generally teaches us something new, or reinforces the importance of something else. How can any of us say with any degree of certainty at this point, that we are not all about to learn something brand new as a result of this incident?
I'm not suggesting in any way what the cause/causes of this accident may be, but stop fooling yourselves that humans are infallible and that training, procedures and automation are going to save your ass.
There are many, many "inconceivable" accidents filling the history books, and each one generally teaches us something new, or reinforces the importance of something else. How can any of us say with any degree of certainty at this point, that we are not all about to learn something brand new as a result of this incident?
I'm not suggesting in any way what the cause/causes of this accident may be, but stop fooling yourselves that humans are infallible and that training, procedures and automation are going to save your ass.
Guest
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the shadow of R101
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dani
I don't claim that the transponder transmissions tell us anything definitive, but I would expect that the aircraft's GPS receiver(s) would have an update rate of 10Hz for both position and speed, so a transponder transmission will contain the latest and very recent data.
I don't know how aviation GPS receivers calculate velocity, but I would expect it to be based on doppler frequency from the SV signals as extracted by the correlators. Pretty accurate in terms of ground speed, usually to 0.1 x displayed velocity units for a consumer GPS.
If anyone here knows the B738 avionics well enough to comment on whether I'm being realistic that would be useful.
The guy with the receiver near EHAM tracked TC-JGE over a period of 37 minutes (may not have been continuously, I don't know), and received 1042 Mode-S messages from this aircraft during that period. On average that's one message every 2.1 seconds.
With my own Mode-S receiver, if I have a single B738 in range I see between 3 and 7 messages received per second, so the update rates are pretty high for an ADS-B equipped aircraft, in a dense environment though a fair percentage of these will overlap in time with other aircraft so there is a larger chance of missing a given message.
When the FDR data becomes known we can see whether this report is anywhere near the truth.
I don't claim that the transponder transmissions tell us anything definitive, but I would expect that the aircraft's GPS receiver(s) would have an update rate of 10Hz for both position and speed, so a transponder transmission will contain the latest and very recent data.
I don't know how aviation GPS receivers calculate velocity, but I would expect it to be based on doppler frequency from the SV signals as extracted by the correlators. Pretty accurate in terms of ground speed, usually to 0.1 x displayed velocity units for a consumer GPS.
If anyone here knows the B738 avionics well enough to comment on whether I'm being realistic that would be useful.
The guy with the receiver near EHAM tracked TC-JGE over a period of 37 minutes (may not have been continuously, I don't know), and received 1042 Mode-S messages from this aircraft during that period. On average that's one message every 2.1 seconds.
With my own Mode-S receiver, if I have a single B738 in range I see between 3 and 7 messages received per second, so the update rates are pretty high for an ADS-B equipped aircraft, in a dense environment though a fair percentage of these will overlap in time with other aircraft so there is a larger chance of missing a given message.
When the FDR data becomes known we can see whether this report is anywhere near the truth.
Last edited by Feathers McGraw; 26th Feb 2009 at 12:41. Reason: Re-format, had javascript off before.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When we did our ditching training in the SVC10, we were afterwards shown a film of a 10 foot SVC10 model, specially built to simulate a ditching. Every time it was catapulted into the tank, the model`s nose area underwent violent pitching. The boffins calculated that those G forces would have killed the cockpit crew in the event of a real ditching.