Afriqiyah Airbus 330 Crash

[A4]

If the tail seperates then the pitch down will be almost instantaneous and massively violent. The tail is providing the "downward lift" to pitch the aircraft up. Think of it like a childs see-saw - put 50kgs on one end and then put 150kgs on the other (elevator force during go-around) and it will pitch "up". Now quickly remove the 150Kgs...... the other end will pitch "down" rapidly and hit the ground. This could well explain the eyewitness report from the threshold which said they saw the aircraft hit the ground with a steep nose down attitude perhaps just aftert he tail was lost.

Looks like a case of sneaking below, realising fractionally too late, initiating a go-around, hitting the aft of the aircraft sheering the tail......... rest is inevitable.

A4

[PT6A]

NAVAIDS

I have not flown into TIP for a week as I am on leave...

However can anyone confirm which navaids were working on the day?

The VOR has been NOTAM'd for a few months now that it should be used with caution due to the building works.... I can say for sure it should not be used as it is going all over the place!

On one of my last flights into TIP before leave we were cleared for a locator app to 09 only to find none of the NDB stations working not a single one... TWR was informed.... roger was the response.

We were able to fly the APP via the FMGS however... If that has not been available or the weather was not good (as it was in our case) I wonder what the result would of been...

If this A330 did some kind of botch APP it went wrong and then looked for raw data help...

If they went to the VOR it could explain why the aircraft was to the right.. as the "needle was swinging slowly from where it should be out right the right" <--- I saw that on all of my flights into TIP over the last few months.

So if they were to follow the VOR raw data they would of ended up somewhere other than the runway.

As for being so low seems like a case of sneaking under.

TIP's winds also often change in the latter stages of approach by 180 degrees.. so tower often gives a runway which is less than optimal.

If anything other than very very very basic English is used they have no clue what you are talking about and a long Standby is issued!

Just to underline the point once again... many times NAVAIDs are not working at TIP - they are reported as not working by aircrew... but no notam is ever issued or a mention on the ATIS.

PT6A

[DutchSpotter]

In this article in Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad it says the plane hit the roof of a house. Seven people in the house where unhurt, another miracle. It also says powerlines where struck by the plane

translated article
Google Bericht

original article

nrc.nl - Binnenland - Nóg zeven wonderen in Tripoli

[condorbaaz]

just a 332 driver.

This must be one of the few places a NPA is carried out.

Mostly on ILS, I have heard Pilots brief " Go Around will be with AP ON"

Very nice for ILS but not suited for NPA.

If I recall correctly, AP disconnects at MDA +_ some ht, maybe 50 feet.

Ergo, If on approach, if TOGA is delayed by 2-5 seconds at MDA,
say "MDA- Field not in Sight" Go Around Flaps"

You have TOGA and no AP and a downward vector

[A4]

PT6A, if what you say is true then Libya should be banned from ICAO until they get their act together. Knowing that Navaids are unservicable/unreliable and just issuing a "cautionary" NOTAM is totally unacceptable. As for the airport clearing you for the NDB when they are both off is ..... well words fail me.

I think the Aviaition authorities in Libya and the airport management are due a huge proportion of the blame (yes I used the B word) for this accident.

You said you flew and approach to 09 using the FMGS. Is this a GNSS approach or an RNAV overlay? If it's the latter how can you monitor raw data whilst the box works it's magic?

An issue that I find disturbing has been mentioned a few times. Talk of manual go-arounds being challenging - i.e. "you must pitch up", " "the sidestick must be pulled with one hand" Come on!

If anyone sitting in either seat of any airliner is not capable of pushing the thrust levers forward and pulling back on a sidestick or control column then I respectfully suggest that they seek another career for the safety of the travelling public. IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!! It's a basic manouver for heavens sake. Brief it. Agree the MA Altitude. Confirm the PF & PNF actions prior to the approach - it should be second nature - you're very close to the ground no time for prevarication or error.

Additionally at Minimums there is NO DELAY in initiating the go-around. PF should be looking out prior to the Minimums call. At minimums the call is (typically) "Go-around Flaps" or "Continue/Landing" - it is NOT ".........hmm, nope, nothing seen, go-around flaps".

For your LPC the LATEST that a missed approach can be initiated is MDA/DA/DH. If you have not pushed the levers by then it's a FAIL. It's MINIMUMS for a reason! On an NPA this is even more critical due to the potential for lateral/vertical displacement which the ILS avoids.

This is potentially two CFIT accidents on NPA's in poor WX in the last two months with the similar results........... why? We know rules - just apply them.

A4

[henra]

The question is when now the tail hits and the stabilizer separates: Will the now tailless wing's negative pitching moment overpower the nose-up pitching moment of the engine thrust? If so, the result would be a quick nosedive into the ground, consistent with the destruction we see. If not, we would get a stall and then a nosedive somewhat later. Which one happened here?

In a normal flight attitude as A4 pointed out the Nose-Down would be massive and immediate.
In a very Nose- Up attitude, the Nose- Down pitching could be somewhat delayed and reduced at the beginning (due to shift of Center of Thrust + momentum vs. Center of Drag/Lift), then increasing while the Nose is lowering

[A4]

I agree henra...... however I suspect that this aircraft would not have reached a high nose attitude due to the tailstrike. Of course they could have been incredibly unlucky and hit the tail just as pitch hit GA attitude - about 18 degrees (?). Of course if you go-around AT MINIMA you won't hit the tail - not be pompous or smug just factual.

A4

[C-SAR]

A4

Would the wire rapped around the end cone corroborate the kind of AOA you are suggesting?

[takata]

Crash Site Visits

Hello there,

Nobody commented C-SAR's last days postings.
This forum is having someone on the site (in Tripoli), and C-SAR could visit the impact zone and look around much better than any press reports, films and picture did so far.

Here is again what he found which is enlightning:

Originally Posted by C-SAR

As I have been saying to Takata, this afternoon I managed to go to the site.

Took some pictures, not as many as I wanted because of security. Could not go past the first impact point, but my interest was in the 400 or so meters before. I entered the area on foot 550 meters from the mosque (my zero reference point) and walked towards the tail.

Until the first impact point some 270 meters from the mosque there are no marks whatsoever. Lots of rubbish and car prints etc. but nothing related. There are 4 electricity poles, the wooden type, that have been downed before impact. The Impact point is the almost perfect print of the end of the tail cone. From there onwards the debris starts. Lots of honeycomb pieces etc. I say again, I could not go past this point. On the composite photo made from the overfly Dutch film, the white mark is just lime powder or something like that mixed with sand. The Sand is very soft, desert like. I took pictures of the surrounding trees on the road edge which are not cut. Also some low cactus at the impact point are cut straight and level (most probably by the horizontal stabilizer. I will make a scale map with the photos at the appropriate points. I will also try to calculate the distance from the first pole standing to the impact point, so that some techies can calculate the glide angle. The two parallel marks that can be seen on the video were past my no go point, so I have nothing to say on those.

Originally Posted by C-SAR

For those looking at the Google map, the terrain is a little different. The big rectangular green area to the west of the mosque perpendicular to the road is in fact all sand. The building to the west of the mosque is all flattened down minus a small shack

Originally Posted by C-SAR

In one of the pictures from the Dutch media the tail cone appears to be wrapped in a wire. That wire looks like the ones I saw yesterday around the power line poles down before the impact point. 4 poles are down from 250 meters from impact.

Originally Posted by C-SAR

Based on all the contributions so far and on my visit to the site yesterday, my opinion is that the tail cone hit the power line some 250 meters before impact, dragging 4 poles down, possibly with relative high AOA. At impact point a clear impression of the tail cone is the first visible mark. Left and right of this mark there are two lines of cactus perpendicular to the flight path which are cut parallel to the terrain by the horizontal stabilizers. From there on the field of debris begins. The tail section separated and summersaulted, as has been suggested before.

Thank you very much Giorgio, those are very good infos not seen in the press so far. I'm waiting to see your schematics and pictures.
:-)

S~
Olivier

[HundredPercentPlease]

Originally Posted by condorbaaz

just a 332 driver.

This must be one of the few places a NPA is carried out.

Mostly on ILS, I have heard Pilots brief " Go Around will be with AP ON"

Very nice for ILS but not suited for NPA.

If I recall correctly, AP disconnects at MDA +_ some ht, maybe 50 feet.

Ergo, If on approach, if TOGA is delayed by 2-5 seconds at MDA,
say "MDA- Field not in Sight" Go Around Flaps"

You have TOGA and no AP and a downward vector

You should decide at MDA + 50'
The autopilot disconnects at MDA - 50'

100' in hand. Or 8 seconds of reckless, crash-inducing rule breaking (on a 3° approach) if you want to put it that way.

Use of the autopilot for approach and GA on an NPA to minimums is an excellent strategy. Most GA errors are when the PF decides to hand fly.

Aside:

A320 has an OEB about disconnecting APP mode just before minimums on an NPA. Does the 330?

[henra]

Of course they could have been incredibly unlucky and hit the tail just as pitch hit GA attitude - about 18 degrees (?).

Looking at the debris trail, the location of tail cone and tail therein and the almost non existing ground scars at the beginning of the trail they may just exactly have been unlucky.

[C-SAR]

Takata

Thanks Olivier,

I cannot upload pictures from where I am now. I will try tonight from my accomodation. If I will be stil unable, I have no problems in emailing them to anybody willing to do the job of posting them.

Giorgio

[HundredPercentPlease]

C-SAR:

PM on it's way.

[White Knight]

Originally Posted by condorbaaz

just a 332 driver.

This must be one of the few places a NPA is carried out.

Mostly on ILS, I have heard Pilots brief " Go Around will be with AP ON"

Very nice for ILS but not suited for NPA.

If I recall correctly, AP disconnects at MDA +_ some ht, maybe 50 feet.

Ergo, If on approach, if TOGA is delayed by 2-5 seconds at MDA,
say "MDA- Field not in Sight" Go Around Flaps"

You have TOGA and no AP and a downward vector

Once the AP has disconnected below MDA you can still engage the AP in basic mode - this would be Track/FPA as the 'bird' would be on from the managed NPA. Then select TOGA and the FDs will pop up and you'll get SRS/GA TRK... Only take a moment..

In fact - my briefs include that if I'm handflying at any stage on the approach and need to go around then I'll put the AP in before selecting TOGA.. You'll also find that it helps to come back to THR CLB fairly quickly, especially if there's a low go around altitude.

[BOAC]

Originally Posted by PT6A

However can anyone confirm which navaids were working on the day?

- a very good question, and I suspect the answer will be 'very few'.

A4 - I take it you have not flown into TIP. It is not untypical of other airfields around that part of the world. See post #36 also.

[A4]

C-SAR said:

Would the wire rapped around the end cone corroborate the kind of AOA you are suggesting?

Impossible to say. From the pictures I think the hanging cable may be part of the aircraft structure.... I don't know. If they are power cables they may have been collected by the tumbling tail section. Are the power lines/poles before or after the initial tailcone impact points?

I can't see how power cables would snag and stay attached to the aircraft during the possible initial drag of the tail (if that happened at all).

A4

[zlocko2002]

Talked to a friend, 320 busdriver, he told me that his company policu: aircraft is flown eather by autopilot, or pilot. no handflying with autothrotle and similar mixed combinations.

[C-SAR]

A4 Said:

C-SAR said:


Quote:
Would the wire rapped around the end cone corroborate the kind of AOA you are suggesting?
Impossible to say. From the pictures I think the hanging cable may be part of the aircraft structure.... I don't know. If they are power cables they may have been collected by the tumbling tail section. Are the power lines/poles before or after the initial tailcone impact points?

I can't see how power cables would snag and stay attached to the aircraft during the possible initial drag of the tail (if that happened at all).

I saw the power line cut about 250 meters before impact. 4 poles are down. The cables on the ground look like the one around the cone. The initial impact point is a print very similar in shape to the end cone. Please refer to my previous podtings where I describe my yesterday visit to the crash site.

Another clue to the AOA could be the relative angle between the line of cut in the inferior part of the tail section and the main longitudinal axis

[snowfalcon2]

I found a website listing the tail strike angle of the A330-200 at 15.5 degrees with the main gear oleos extended.

If the airplane hit the ground tailcone first, as C-SAR's observation suggest, the angle of attack must have been even greater.

This would also be consistent with a natural pilot reaction to pull the stick fully back as Mother Earth comes too close in the go-around.

I'm a little skeptical whether it made any difference if the tailcone snagged a powerline. In my experience a power line hung from wooden poles is not of the strongest variety (although it may survive a tree falling on top). Also wooden poles tend to be fairly low, 5-7 metres or so. So I'd suggest the airplane was doomed anyway at that point. But I have obviously not seen this particular powerline up close.

[aguadalte]

A330 FCOM 4.05.70 Pag.25 specifically says:

MDA/MDH - Disconnect AP and fly visual or Go-Around

IMHO it is not a safe procedure to engage the AP at such a low altitude in order to go-around. Pilots are expected to be able to hand-fly the aircraft in every situation. I know that there are some airline companies that encourage their Pilots to keep AP ON and use it, as much as practicable, but the general final result is lack of proficiency and loss of self-confidence.
It is an error to engage the AP (if not previously engaged) to perform a low level go-around (even if briefed) or to continue an approach. One has to be prepared to take-over and do it manually. If you feel uncomfortable (for what ever reason) just level your wings and execute a go-around. Fly your aircraft to at least 1500' or MSA and only then (after reading your FMA and having the PNF switched the FCU to the figures you want to read on your FMA) AP may be coupled. If one feels uncomfortable with the way the approach is being hand-flown do not switch the AP ON, cause the mode or the drift out of that particular mode may surprise you at very low altitude. Remember: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.