Afriqiyah Airbus 330 Crash
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Age: 54
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel
Obviously it should have plenty of contingency fuel. I interpreted that quote to mean another causes rather than flight duration e.g. erroneous fuel loading on departure and failed cross checks or unexpected/undetected fuel loss.
Consider that a "long flight" might require greater contingency fueling than a short flight which makes the absence of significant fuel burning even the more remarkable.
Consider that a "long flight" might require greater contingency fueling than a short flight which makes the absence of significant fuel burning even the more remarkable.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PJ2
The tailfin's leading edge is definitely oriented to the West, but it looks like having rotated during the crash.
Note: the tail cone is on the right close to picture's border, and most of the wreckage is closer to the runaway.
The tailfin's leading edge is definitely oriented to the West, but it looks like having rotated during the crash.
Note: the tail cone is on the right close to picture's border, and most of the wreckage is closer to the runaway.
Last edited by takata; 13th May 2010 at 21:26.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Turkey
Age: 77
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Afriqiyah Airbus 330 Crash
World Tourism and Aviation News
Ünal Başusta
The Airbus A330 belonging to the state-owned Afriqiyah Airways was on a regular flight from South Africa when it came down on a plot of barren land just short of a runway at Tripoli airport, some 25km south of the city centre.
The aircraft was on its way from Johannesburg to London when it crashed while attempting to land for a stopover in the Libyan capital.
Theories about the disaster focused on a possible technical malfunction or pilot error, or both, just before the A330-200 Airbus was due to touch down. The Afriqiyah Airlines aircraft came down short of the Tripoli runway after a dawn approach in visibility of 2 Km. Mist had been reported.
Pilots who know the Tripoli approach have speculated that the airport’s old-fashioned landing aids may have played a role. It lacks an instrument landing system. Crews have to rely on a VOR radio beacon and Tripoli’s is subject to false readings, pilots said.
A navigational notice advises caution: the VOR is suffering “interference” from building work at the airport. Pilots make visual checks to ensure that they are lining up correctly. There was speculation that the rising sun would have been directly in the crew’s eyes, reducing visibility.
Airbus did not touchdown level but appeared to have slammed into the ground and broken up. The accident happened around sunrise with reported visibility of dust/haze coupled with strong sun rays behind it most likely blurring the vision of the pilots, causing temporary blindness at the last moment during the landing. Sunlit dust can produce whiteout conditions like snow and even though reported ground visibility may have been around 2000m, the sunlit part of the approach would have been flown virtually blind and at that time these conditions would have persisted almost until touchdown. If runway 09 was indeed in use, the approach would have been made straight towards the rising sun. There was no meaningful terrain on either end of the runway, with perfectly flat country within 5-10m of runway elevation in both directions for at least twice the runway length.
Nav aids at Tripoli airport were reported to be unsufficient and not in good operating order.
Afriqiyah Airways is not included on the European Union's list of banned airlines. The list has nearly 300 carriers deemed by the EU not to meet international safety standards.
The main runway at Tripoli Airport is 3,600 yards long. According to international airport guides, the airport does not have a precision approach system ILS that guides airplanes down to the runway's threshold, but has two other less sophisticated systems that are in wide use throughout the world. It is even possible to intercept a false localizer signal and is easy to get in trouble if one is not careful .
Since the airport does not have reliable nav aids most modern avionics has no help for the landing aircraft. Only manual flight and visual aproach is reliable.
Photos of the wreckage show it is is completely fragmented, indicating a high energy impact rather than the slow speed-low angle crash one would expect on an approach/go around accident. Accident photos indicate that the impact was at an unusual attitude involving high speed.
The Dutch Travel and Transport Association ANWB said at least 61 Dutch nationals died. Other reports listed Libyans as well as British and South African nationals among the victims.
The French Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis for Civil Aviation Safety (BEA) said two of its investigators and five Airbus specialists were on their way to Tripoli to join the investigation.
It was not immediately clear what caused the crash, but Libyan Transport Minister Mohammed Zidane ruled out a terrorist attack.
"We definitely exclude the theory that the crash would be the result of a terrorist act," he told a news conference, adding that a committee had been set up to investigate.
A witness reportedly saw flames coming out of an engine before the plane hit the ground. Officials declined to confirm reports that a technical fault was discovered shortly before the crash.
Plane-maker Airbus said it would provide full technical assistance to the authorities responsible for the investigation into the accident.
An airline representative in Johannesburg said the Airbus was a new plane that had been purchased in the summer of last year and had been properly checked before it left South Africa on Tuesday evening.
It was the first accident involving one of the airline's planes since it was founded in 2001.
The European Airline Safety Agency EASA said Afriqiyah Airways enjoyed a good safety record and had passed all inspections at European airports.The sole survivor of the crash, a 10-year-old Dutch boy, was described to be in good condition on Wednesday after the crash took the lives of 103 passengers and crew.
"The child is in good condition and is in hospital undergoing checks," Libyan Transport Minister Mohammed Ali Zaidan said. His injuries were not life-threatening, he added.
Libyan security official, speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity, said the plane had "exploded on landing and totally disintegrated."
Afriqiyah Airways operates an all-Airbus fleet. It was founded in April 2001 and is fully owned by the Libyan government.
The company's website says that the airline only flies modern Airbus 320–200, A319-111 & A330-200 planes. According to international conventions, Libya must lead the investigation, which should also involve the a representation of the aircraft’s country of manufacture, namely France, where the Airbus plane was built. The crashed plane is believed to have been constructed only last year. The A330-200 plane had been in service for eight months, according to Reuters and "had been inspected three times in Paris by France’s DGAC aviation agency."
There were two very serious incidents in the past might shed light to why this accident happened.
In the October 7 incident, on Qantas flight QF72 from Singapore to Perth, passengers were hurled around the cabin after the Airbus A330 aircraft dropped with two plunges of 20 and 16 seconds 200 and 650 metres in a matter of seconds while flying over the Indian Ocean. The pilot was forced to make an emergency landing at Learmonth, 1200 kilometres north of Perth on the Western Australian coast, and 44 passengers required hospital treatment.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said it believed a faulty component, called the air data inertial reference unit (ADIRU), caused the problem by feeding "erroneous and spike values'' about the angle at which the plane was flying to a flight control computer.
"This led to several consequences, including false stall and over speed warnings,'' and later generated very high and incorrect values for the aircraft's angle of attack. This led to the flight control computers commanding the aircraft to pitch down.
On this flight the plane acted of its own accord even after the pilot had taken manual control of the aircraft but minutes later, the plane made two downward plunges.
This was a situation which nobody had seen before.
During the incident the flight crew should get a message from ECAM (Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor) signalling to the pilots which system is faulty and what to do to fix it.
The thing to remember about Airbus is the flight control computer is always flying the plane whether autopilot is on or not; even in manual mode all the controlling is done through the flight control computer. After the initial problem that led to the autopilot disconnecting, they were hand-flying the plane and then the aircraft pitched down by itself. While they were trying to correct the situation it happened again, pitching down a second time.
After the incident they found one of the three Air Data Inertial Reference Units (ADIRU) was defective and it was sent to the US base of its manufacturer, Northrop Grumman, to find out what led to the fault and reduce the chance of it happening in the future.
As far as it is known, this appears to be a unique event and Airbus has admited that it is not aware of any similar events over the many years of operation of these type of airplanes.
Qantas’s initial review of the aircraft's maintenance history found no problems. A Qantas spokeswoman said 21 of the company's 217 aircraft were equipped with the component in question."This is now clearly a manufacturer's issue and we will comply with the manufacturer's advice," she said.
Airbus issued a bulletin to all operators of its planes containing the component, with advice on how to reduce the risk of a crash in the event of such a malfunction. The aim of the bulletin is to: update operators on the factors identified to date that led to the accident involving QF72, provide operational recommendations to mitigate risk in the event of a reoccurrence of the situation which occurred on QF72. In order to "minimize risk in the unlikely event of a similar occurrence" … an Operational Engineering Bulletin is on its way … Is it simply to emphasize the already published procedure or is it something new the QF72 crew could not have known before ?
The importance of reading the ECAM messages and manipulating the appropriate switches is shown once again in this incident. The A330 and A340 have identical systems, in the world there are 182 A-340 and 210 A-330 airplanes flying. During the second incident, Cathay Pacific flight 780 suffered a dual engine failure leading to a highspeed landing at Hong Kong on 13th April 2010.
The Accident Investigation Division of Hong Kong Civil Aviation Authority has released its preliminary report. The aircraft, reg B-HLL, an Airbus A330-300 powered by two Rolls Royce Trent 700 engines, had been built in 1998. The aircraft declared a Mayday when approaching Hong Kong Airport ( ICAO : VHHH ), on a flight from Surabaya, with a control problem on both engines. The aircraft landed on runway 07L at a groundspeed of 230 knots, with No. 1 engine stuck at about 70% N1 and No. 2 engine stuck at about 17 % N1. The five main tyres had been deflated when the aircraft came to a complete stop on the runway. All the passengers and crew were evacuated while one passenger suffered serious injuries. The Captain had 7756 flight hours experience of which 2601 were on the type.
At a press briefing Dennis Hui, Manager Maintenance Support at the airline’s Engineering Department, emphasised that after further investigation of the flight data from CX780 and having interviewed the crew, updated information had shown a clear picture of this aspect of the incident.
He said it had been determined that the number 2 (RH) engine was at idle power throughout the approach and landing at HKIA, and the Number 1(LH) engine was operating at 70 per cent of its maximum power, and was frozen at that level.
Mr. Hui said: “This is a higher power setting than is required for a normal approach with a single operating engine. Consequently, this higher than normal power setting led to a higher than normal approach speed and incorrect flap configuration.
“The aircraft therefore touched down at approx 230 knots, as against a normal 135 knots at this aircraft’s operating weight.
“ However, the aircraft touched down on the correct position on the runway, but due to its high speed had to brake hard and use reverse thrust from the operating engine to bring the aircraft to a halt.
“The high speed and high energy braking led to very hot brakes, tyre deflation and the report from the FSD outside the aircraft that it had observed flames and smoke on the landing gear,” he added.
Mr. Hui said details of what happened and what caused the engine malfunction are now the subject of CAD investigations. Cathay Pacific was co-operating closely with the investigation, along with Airbus and Rolls Royce, the engine supplier.
At the same briefing, Quince Chong Director Corporate Affairs emphasized that no decision could be taken before touchdown on evacuation, until the aircraft safely landed and the commander was in the best position to assess the situation.
Once the pilots were told by the Fire Services Department that they had seen flames and smoke in the undercarriage, they decided to deplane the passengers and immediately alerted the cabin crew to begin the evacuation procedure.
The investigation is being conducted by an investigation team consisting of investigators from the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department, the Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA) of France and the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) of the United Kingdom. The National Transportation Safety Committee (NTSC) of Indonesia and the National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) of the United States of America also provide assistance in the investigation. Experts from Airbus, Rolls Royce and CPA also assist in the investigation.
The accident investigation team has conducted interviews with the commander, the co-pilot, the cabin crew, and some of the passengers on CPA 780. The information of the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR), Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), Quick Access Recorder (QAR) have been successfully downloaded for analysis. The aircraft flight documents, maintenance records, weather information, ATC radio and radar recordings, fuel samples from the subject aircraft and the departure airport have also been collected for investigation purposes. The engines, their control systems and the fuel system are under detailed examinations to determine the possible causes of the abnormal engines behaviours. Engine fuel components and the fuel samples collected have been sent to the United Kingdom and the United States of America for test and analysis.
Based on past experience, the investigation is expected to take more than one year to complete. However, during the course of the investigation, should any safety recommendation be necessary, it will be promulgated immediately.
Ünal Başusta
The Airbus A330 belonging to the state-owned Afriqiyah Airways was on a regular flight from South Africa when it came down on a plot of barren land just short of a runway at Tripoli airport, some 25km south of the city centre.
The aircraft was on its way from Johannesburg to London when it crashed while attempting to land for a stopover in the Libyan capital.
Theories about the disaster focused on a possible technical malfunction or pilot error, or both, just before the A330-200 Airbus was due to touch down. The Afriqiyah Airlines aircraft came down short of the Tripoli runway after a dawn approach in visibility of 2 Km. Mist had been reported.
Pilots who know the Tripoli approach have speculated that the airport’s old-fashioned landing aids may have played a role. It lacks an instrument landing system. Crews have to rely on a VOR radio beacon and Tripoli’s is subject to false readings, pilots said.
A navigational notice advises caution: the VOR is suffering “interference” from building work at the airport. Pilots make visual checks to ensure that they are lining up correctly. There was speculation that the rising sun would have been directly in the crew’s eyes, reducing visibility.
Airbus did not touchdown level but appeared to have slammed into the ground and broken up. The accident happened around sunrise with reported visibility of dust/haze coupled with strong sun rays behind it most likely blurring the vision of the pilots, causing temporary blindness at the last moment during the landing. Sunlit dust can produce whiteout conditions like snow and even though reported ground visibility may have been around 2000m, the sunlit part of the approach would have been flown virtually blind and at that time these conditions would have persisted almost until touchdown. If runway 09 was indeed in use, the approach would have been made straight towards the rising sun. There was no meaningful terrain on either end of the runway, with perfectly flat country within 5-10m of runway elevation in both directions for at least twice the runway length.
Nav aids at Tripoli airport were reported to be unsufficient and not in good operating order.
Afriqiyah Airways is not included on the European Union's list of banned airlines. The list has nearly 300 carriers deemed by the EU not to meet international safety standards.
The main runway at Tripoli Airport is 3,600 yards long. According to international airport guides, the airport does not have a precision approach system ILS that guides airplanes down to the runway's threshold, but has two other less sophisticated systems that are in wide use throughout the world. It is even possible to intercept a false localizer signal and is easy to get in trouble if one is not careful .
Since the airport does not have reliable nav aids most modern avionics has no help for the landing aircraft. Only manual flight and visual aproach is reliable.
Photos of the wreckage show it is is completely fragmented, indicating a high energy impact rather than the slow speed-low angle crash one would expect on an approach/go around accident. Accident photos indicate that the impact was at an unusual attitude involving high speed.
The Dutch Travel and Transport Association ANWB said at least 61 Dutch nationals died. Other reports listed Libyans as well as British and South African nationals among the victims.
The French Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis for Civil Aviation Safety (BEA) said two of its investigators and five Airbus specialists were on their way to Tripoli to join the investigation.
It was not immediately clear what caused the crash, but Libyan Transport Minister Mohammed Zidane ruled out a terrorist attack.
"We definitely exclude the theory that the crash would be the result of a terrorist act," he told a news conference, adding that a committee had been set up to investigate.
A witness reportedly saw flames coming out of an engine before the plane hit the ground. Officials declined to confirm reports that a technical fault was discovered shortly before the crash.
Plane-maker Airbus said it would provide full technical assistance to the authorities responsible for the investigation into the accident.
An airline representative in Johannesburg said the Airbus was a new plane that had been purchased in the summer of last year and had been properly checked before it left South Africa on Tuesday evening.
It was the first accident involving one of the airline's planes since it was founded in 2001.
The European Airline Safety Agency EASA said Afriqiyah Airways enjoyed a good safety record and had passed all inspections at European airports.The sole survivor of the crash, a 10-year-old Dutch boy, was described to be in good condition on Wednesday after the crash took the lives of 103 passengers and crew.
"The child is in good condition and is in hospital undergoing checks," Libyan Transport Minister Mohammed Ali Zaidan said. His injuries were not life-threatening, he added.
Libyan security official, speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity, said the plane had "exploded on landing and totally disintegrated."
Afriqiyah Airways operates an all-Airbus fleet. It was founded in April 2001 and is fully owned by the Libyan government.
The company's website says that the airline only flies modern Airbus 320–200, A319-111 & A330-200 planes. According to international conventions, Libya must lead the investigation, which should also involve the a representation of the aircraft’s country of manufacture, namely France, where the Airbus plane was built. The crashed plane is believed to have been constructed only last year. The A330-200 plane had been in service for eight months, according to Reuters and "had been inspected three times in Paris by France’s DGAC aviation agency."
There were two very serious incidents in the past might shed light to why this accident happened.
In the October 7 incident, on Qantas flight QF72 from Singapore to Perth, passengers were hurled around the cabin after the Airbus A330 aircraft dropped with two plunges of 20 and 16 seconds 200 and 650 metres in a matter of seconds while flying over the Indian Ocean. The pilot was forced to make an emergency landing at Learmonth, 1200 kilometres north of Perth on the Western Australian coast, and 44 passengers required hospital treatment.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said it believed a faulty component, called the air data inertial reference unit (ADIRU), caused the problem by feeding "erroneous and spike values'' about the angle at which the plane was flying to a flight control computer.
"This led to several consequences, including false stall and over speed warnings,'' and later generated very high and incorrect values for the aircraft's angle of attack. This led to the flight control computers commanding the aircraft to pitch down.
On this flight the plane acted of its own accord even after the pilot had taken manual control of the aircraft but minutes later, the plane made two downward plunges.
This was a situation which nobody had seen before.
During the incident the flight crew should get a message from ECAM (Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor) signalling to the pilots which system is faulty and what to do to fix it.
The thing to remember about Airbus is the flight control computer is always flying the plane whether autopilot is on or not; even in manual mode all the controlling is done through the flight control computer. After the initial problem that led to the autopilot disconnecting, they were hand-flying the plane and then the aircraft pitched down by itself. While they were trying to correct the situation it happened again, pitching down a second time.
After the incident they found one of the three Air Data Inertial Reference Units (ADIRU) was defective and it was sent to the US base of its manufacturer, Northrop Grumman, to find out what led to the fault and reduce the chance of it happening in the future.
As far as it is known, this appears to be a unique event and Airbus has admited that it is not aware of any similar events over the many years of operation of these type of airplanes.
Qantas’s initial review of the aircraft's maintenance history found no problems. A Qantas spokeswoman said 21 of the company's 217 aircraft were equipped with the component in question."This is now clearly a manufacturer's issue and we will comply with the manufacturer's advice," she said.
Airbus issued a bulletin to all operators of its planes containing the component, with advice on how to reduce the risk of a crash in the event of such a malfunction. The aim of the bulletin is to: update operators on the factors identified to date that led to the accident involving QF72, provide operational recommendations to mitigate risk in the event of a reoccurrence of the situation which occurred on QF72. In order to "minimize risk in the unlikely event of a similar occurrence" … an Operational Engineering Bulletin is on its way … Is it simply to emphasize the already published procedure or is it something new the QF72 crew could not have known before ?
The importance of reading the ECAM messages and manipulating the appropriate switches is shown once again in this incident. The A330 and A340 have identical systems, in the world there are 182 A-340 and 210 A-330 airplanes flying. During the second incident, Cathay Pacific flight 780 suffered a dual engine failure leading to a highspeed landing at Hong Kong on 13th April 2010.
The Accident Investigation Division of Hong Kong Civil Aviation Authority has released its preliminary report. The aircraft, reg B-HLL, an Airbus A330-300 powered by two Rolls Royce Trent 700 engines, had been built in 1998. The aircraft declared a Mayday when approaching Hong Kong Airport ( ICAO : VHHH ), on a flight from Surabaya, with a control problem on both engines. The aircraft landed on runway 07L at a groundspeed of 230 knots, with No. 1 engine stuck at about 70% N1 and No. 2 engine stuck at about 17 % N1. The five main tyres had been deflated when the aircraft came to a complete stop on the runway. All the passengers and crew were evacuated while one passenger suffered serious injuries. The Captain had 7756 flight hours experience of which 2601 were on the type.
At a press briefing Dennis Hui, Manager Maintenance Support at the airline’s Engineering Department, emphasised that after further investigation of the flight data from CX780 and having interviewed the crew, updated information had shown a clear picture of this aspect of the incident.
He said it had been determined that the number 2 (RH) engine was at idle power throughout the approach and landing at HKIA, and the Number 1(LH) engine was operating at 70 per cent of its maximum power, and was frozen at that level.
Mr. Hui said: “This is a higher power setting than is required for a normal approach with a single operating engine. Consequently, this higher than normal power setting led to a higher than normal approach speed and incorrect flap configuration.
“The aircraft therefore touched down at approx 230 knots, as against a normal 135 knots at this aircraft’s operating weight.
“ However, the aircraft touched down on the correct position on the runway, but due to its high speed had to brake hard and use reverse thrust from the operating engine to bring the aircraft to a halt.
“The high speed and high energy braking led to very hot brakes, tyre deflation and the report from the FSD outside the aircraft that it had observed flames and smoke on the landing gear,” he added.
Mr. Hui said details of what happened and what caused the engine malfunction are now the subject of CAD investigations. Cathay Pacific was co-operating closely with the investigation, along with Airbus and Rolls Royce, the engine supplier.
At the same briefing, Quince Chong Director Corporate Affairs emphasized that no decision could be taken before touchdown on evacuation, until the aircraft safely landed and the commander was in the best position to assess the situation.
Once the pilots were told by the Fire Services Department that they had seen flames and smoke in the undercarriage, they decided to deplane the passengers and immediately alerted the cabin crew to begin the evacuation procedure.
The investigation is being conducted by an investigation team consisting of investigators from the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department, the Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA) of France and the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) of the United Kingdom. The National Transportation Safety Committee (NTSC) of Indonesia and the National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) of the United States of America also provide assistance in the investigation. Experts from Airbus, Rolls Royce and CPA also assist in the investigation.
The accident investigation team has conducted interviews with the commander, the co-pilot, the cabin crew, and some of the passengers on CPA 780. The information of the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR), Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), Quick Access Recorder (QAR) have been successfully downloaded for analysis. The aircraft flight documents, maintenance records, weather information, ATC radio and radar recordings, fuel samples from the subject aircraft and the departure airport have also been collected for investigation purposes. The engines, their control systems and the fuel system are under detailed examinations to determine the possible causes of the abnormal engines behaviours. Engine fuel components and the fuel samples collected have been sent to the United Kingdom and the United States of America for test and analysis.
Based on past experience, the investigation is expected to take more than one year to complete. However, during the course of the investigation, should any safety recommendation be necessary, it will be promulgated immediately.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intersting bit of info in this article (in Dutch)
translation:
according to Afriqiyah employee who wishes to remain anonymous, Tripoli ATC always lets aircraft land on rwy 09 in the morning even if there is no wind. The reason for this is that aircraft landing on rwy 27 approach from the East, which obliges ATC to look into the sun, which they find unpleasant. [..]
Amongst Afriqiyah staff there has been discontent about this state of affairs for some time already. Not because it's now the pilots having to look into the sun, but since rwy 09 is fitted with the much older NDB (as opposed to ILS-equipped rwy 27). "rwy 09 is terrible, even compared to the rest of Africa", the Afriqiyah employee says.
[..] landing at 09 was made harder by low-hanging clouds. A pilot who landed on the same rwy a few minutes earlier was said to have warned his colleague on the ill-fated plane about this. Allegedly he even recommended him to request rwy 27 instead. The tower then merely answered "stand by". "They always do that. It means that you have to wait an eternity".
A KL pilot then is quoted as saying that he actually considers TIP ATC reliable and never had problems "well you can't fly a precision approach, but that in itself doesn't mean it is unsafe".
[...]
The captain of the plane, Yousif Al Ssady (1953), had an excellent reputation. "Everybody wanted to fly with him", an employee says. He had his training at the British Oxford Aviation Academy, who issued a press release yesterday in which it confirmed to have "a training relationship" with Afriqiyah.
translation:
according to Afriqiyah employee who wishes to remain anonymous, Tripoli ATC always lets aircraft land on rwy 09 in the morning even if there is no wind. The reason for this is that aircraft landing on rwy 27 approach from the East, which obliges ATC to look into the sun, which they find unpleasant. [..]
Amongst Afriqiyah staff there has been discontent about this state of affairs for some time already. Not because it's now the pilots having to look into the sun, but since rwy 09 is fitted with the much older NDB (as opposed to ILS-equipped rwy 27). "rwy 09 is terrible, even compared to the rest of Africa", the Afriqiyah employee says.
[..] landing at 09 was made harder by low-hanging clouds. A pilot who landed on the same rwy a few minutes earlier was said to have warned his colleague on the ill-fated plane about this. Allegedly he even recommended him to request rwy 27 instead. The tower then merely answered "stand by". "They always do that. It means that you have to wait an eternity".
A KL pilot then is quoted as saying that he actually considers TIP ATC reliable and never had problems "well you can't fly a precision approach, but that in itself doesn't mean it is unsafe".
[...]
The captain of the plane, Yousif Al Ssady (1953), had an excellent reputation. "Everybody wanted to fly with him", an employee says. He had his training at the British Oxford Aviation Academy, who issued a press release yesterday in which it confirmed to have "a training relationship" with Afriqiyah.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: noelbaba #268;
a generally well-informed article but this phrase is not entirely correct:
The analysis has identified the unit that emitted the erroneous AoA signals, but no defect that would explain its behavior has been found in that unit.
HN39
a generally well-informed article but this phrase is not entirely correct:
After the incident they found one of the three Air Data Inertial Reference Units (ADIRU) was defective
HN39
Last edited by HazelNuts39; 13th May 2010 at 22:47. Reason: clarification
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In the sky/under a jetway
Age: 55
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As SLF but also involved in aviation and Libya I am stunned by some of the posts on here that 'bash' Libya, African aviation and the general racism.
Afriqiyah has some of the newest fleets worldwide. Everything in Libya is being upgraded, including the new airport which unfortunately might be a contributing factor to this accident.
Reading through the lines & knowing the bits that I know, there will be more to this but one thing that hasn't been pointed out is that the crew were Libyan, they knew the NOTAM, they were on their way home. They were not a kamikaze crew that a few on this thread have made out they are!
What I am at a loss to understand is the debris. It's fairly spread over a compact area but in small pieces, no real sign of burnt debris. They were obviously near to the ground at impact ie. they didn't fall from an altitude but no real fuselage remains bar the tail assembly. So can an aircraft such as the A330 disintegrate like this in these circumstances???
It would be good to focus on the real events, rather than bashing African aviation or Libyans (who are wonderful people!)
Afriqiyah has some of the newest fleets worldwide. Everything in Libya is being upgraded, including the new airport which unfortunately might be a contributing factor to this accident.
Reading through the lines & knowing the bits that I know, there will be more to this but one thing that hasn't been pointed out is that the crew were Libyan, they knew the NOTAM, they were on their way home. They were not a kamikaze crew that a few on this thread have made out they are!
What I am at a loss to understand is the debris. It's fairly spread over a compact area but in small pieces, no real sign of burnt debris. They were obviously near to the ground at impact ie. they didn't fall from an altitude but no real fuselage remains bar the tail assembly. So can an aircraft such as the A330 disintegrate like this in these circumstances???
It would be good to focus on the real events, rather than bashing African aviation or Libyans (who are wonderful people!)
Arik
Wonderful people can be incompetent! Most of the posters here are world-wide airline pilots who are commenting on the realities and reputations of the African and Libyan aviation, not being racist. The accident/incident rates in Africa are horrendous and not improving much. Have you reviewed the thread "You know you are in Africa when...." on the Africa forum?
GF
Wonderful people can be incompetent! Most of the posters here are world-wide airline pilots who are commenting on the realities and reputations of the African and Libyan aviation, not being racist. The accident/incident rates in Africa are horrendous and not improving much. Have you reviewed the thread "You know you are in Africa when...." on the Africa forum?
GF
Arik, if you really are involved with aviation in Africa then I am stunned that you are stunned.
According to IATA in 2008 the accident rate in the African continent which is obviously huge and has some very good and some very bad operators (both based there and flying in and out) was 6 times the global average. Lots of factors, many of which have been alluded to in previous posts, unfortunately the place just seems to offer many opportunities for the holes to line up.
According to IATA in 2008 the accident rate in the African continent which is obviously huge and has some very good and some very bad operators (both based there and flying in and out) was 6 times the global average. Lots of factors, many of which have been alluded to in previous posts, unfortunately the place just seems to offer many opportunities for the holes to line up.
Again Thanks for posting some decent resolution pictures.
So now one can see the intensity of the ground fire surrounded by the body recovery folks in the one pic.
In yet another pic we see an engine with a shattered fan pointing at both high energy of the crash as well as high energy in the engine.
In yet another pic we begin to see a linear crash debris field. So now some areas of postulation are less viable while others still are of keen interest.
So now one can see the intensity of the ground fire surrounded by the body recovery folks in the one pic.
In yet another pic we see an engine with a shattered fan pointing at both high energy of the crash as well as high energy in the engine.
In yet another pic we begin to see a linear crash debris field. So now some areas of postulation are less viable while others still are of keen interest.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Juba
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assessment
For obvious reasons you won't find professional pilots, safety specialists or accident investigators offering their thoughts on this thread. Not at the moment anyway.
Not that I have any problem with that. Some of your comments and thoughts are actually very good indeed. I would expect however that someone involved in Flight Safety does not automatically, or by "feeling", rule out cultural factors, cockpit gradient, training and other valid points brought up by a number of pilots that actually operate in Libya. (not talking about the KL pilot that flew there 12 times...).
Why is it that speculations on the hard factor are apparently allowed on this forum but information on the soft factor is considered finger pointing, politically incorrect or even racism...?
By the way, speculation (estimation part of assessment) is part of any normal accident investigation process. For all those here thinking that only the DFDR & CVR will provide the answers; Think outside the box (literally) and invest some time in, for instance, an SMS course or better, accident investigation (Tripod etc.)
As opposed to some complaints here I think that this forum is used for what the title says; "Rumours & News" no more, no less.
And sorry Heli-Mate, Libya is part of Maghreb.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: LSGG
Age: 58
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No matter if it was CFIT, Fuel or WX, this type of accident should be avoidable today with all decision models and CRM skills we get as crews. Of course it was a new A330, but Afriqiah has a few years experience on the A320, which is not that much different (beside energy management and a few system differences).
I believe it was more a personal attitude problem than a training or flying skill problem (as we say: non-tech skill problem)...
I believe it was more a personal attitude problem than a training or flying skill problem (as we say: non-tech skill problem)...
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lat..x Long..y
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brize the Speculator
Rather than speculate out of hard headedness why not follow the good example of XCITATION and not get too excited about specs but try and draw facts instead.Have you done any course on air accident investigation-do you know its rudiments even?If not...please don't attempt to act as one.If you wish to get carried away in speculating, better delve into the permutations of procedures in force and which could have been probably used by the crew in their posible desperate attempt-possibilities of fuel starvation after a long flight from SA as well asa long night flight, and perhaps several go around attempts and a low circling or attempts to straighten up...and we all know the illusive effects of haze in visbility terms all might have been the recipe for the disaster.Better we speculate on procedures rather than have a go at the crews behaviour...can you name even one of the crew members...let alone have records of their abilities, wont it make an ASS out of U and ME (to ASSUME they were all incompetent Libyans only to be discovered by the CVR that the PF might have ben Canadian or some other westerner with God given superior flying skills??Am sure the Human Factors group in the ensuing investigation re-quoted below from XCITATION shall elucidate some useful pointers.Meanwhile don't get too excited.I personally view this website with a pinch of salt...as there are things you can learn from seasoned aviators and there also...those who dress their salad up to sound as ones...i dare say- even PC pilots!
"I am assured that there will be a very thorough investigation, since (the French accident investigation authority) will be party to it and they are one of best accident investigators in the world," said William Voss, president of the U.S.-based Flight Safety Foundation.
He cautioned that "it's important to realize that early assumptions about an accident are often wrong."
Considering that the accident form was in the state depicted in the photos portrayed in various parts of this thread, it is a miracle that the mosque was spared in its etirerity...would it be useful if you wana speculate if this could have been an act of God?Then again we don't wish to turn this into a religious thread do we now...?
Patience...old boy...patience is the mark of a good investigator...so wait on for the facts...they may not all come forward mind you but at least you shall THEN have more concrete information to do your guess work
"I am assured that there will be a very thorough investigation, since (the French accident investigation authority) will be party to it and they are one of best accident investigators in the world," said William Voss, president of the U.S.-based Flight Safety Foundation.
He cautioned that "it's important to realize that early assumptions about an accident are often wrong."
Considering that the accident form was in the state depicted in the photos portrayed in various parts of this thread, it is a miracle that the mosque was spared in its etirerity...would it be useful if you wana speculate if this could have been an act of God?Then again we don't wish to turn this into a religious thread do we now...?
Patience...old boy...patience is the mark of a good investigator...so wait on for the facts...they may not all come forward mind you but at least you shall THEN have more concrete information to do your guess work
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amazing Bias
Guys ... after reading some pages .. just wondering is there not any Logic..
For those questioning competency of the pilot(s) ... and how the place there is a gong show ... wouldn't we be expecting regular crashes from there?
There are daily flights-local and international- and those pilots flew their planes safety for decades ... No one disagrees that Qaddafi is crazy; he himself would agree to that BUT lets try to talk about our colleagues as professionals .....
For those questioning competency of the pilot(s) ... and how the place there is a gong show ... wouldn't we be expecting regular crashes from there?
There are daily flights-local and international- and those pilots flew their planes safety for decades ... No one disagrees that Qaddafi is crazy; he himself would agree to that BUT lets try to talk about our colleagues as professionals .....
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I tried to find some footages from the buildings on the right of the Mosquee but without success. This picture is clearly showing that the impact was before the Mosquee but it seems that nobody could film the whole scene at the right of this place (or it is masked by the vertical stab).
The inverted position of the vertical stab is confirmed by the cuttings in the vegetation which are all oriented in direction of the Airport (which is also not filmed). So I wonder if those buildings are not some kind of military installations forbidden to be filmed. (see below in yellow). If the road was aimed in place of the runaway, it might be possible that wings/landing gear hit those buildings. There is also some kind of empenage piece visible at the right corner of the mosquée.
The arrows below are indicating the orientation of the crash in direction of the Airport. Note the tail cone in the first pict, clearly visible in large plan above.
I tried to find some footages from the buildings on the right of the Mosquee but without success. This picture is clearly showing that the impact was before the Mosquee but it seems that nobody could film the whole scene at the right of this place (or it is masked by the vertical stab).
The inverted position of the vertical stab is confirmed by the cuttings in the vegetation which are all oriented in direction of the Airport (which is also not filmed). So I wonder if those buildings are not some kind of military installations forbidden to be filmed. (see below in yellow). If the road was aimed in place of the runaway, it might be possible that wings/landing gear hit those buildings. There is also some kind of empenage piece visible at the right corner of the mosquée.
The arrows below are indicating the orientation of the crash in direction of the Airport. Note the tail cone in the first pict, clearly visible in large plan above.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ntsb In Libya
All,
See below from FlightGlobal:
By: John Croft
Date: 13/05/2010
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
The US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has sent a team of investigators to help the government of Libya determine what caused an Afriqiyah Airways Airbus A330-200 to crash on approach to the Tripoli airport early on the morning of 12 May. There was one survivor of the 104 passengers and crew on board.
The aircraft, equipped with General Electric CF6-8E1 engines, was arriving from Johannesburg, South Africa.
The US team, set to arrive in Tripoli Friday afternoon, will include a lead investigator as well an engines specialist and technical advisors from the US Federal Aviation Administration and General Electric.
Hopefully that might quash some of the coverup and conspiricy theorists - even thoughthey are arrioving late and after considerable contamination of evidence.
Also can anyone who is in the know confirm Takata's positional assumptions, Is the mosque where the empenage ended up definitely that structure highlighted - there seem to be too many anomolies in my interpretation of the picture, Lack of minaret, lack of road to RHS of mosque, vegetation differences...I'm just not sure and perhaps someone who knows the lie of the land there could confirm.
Thanks
Cy
See below from FlightGlobal:
By: John Croft
Date: 13/05/2010
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
The US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has sent a team of investigators to help the government of Libya determine what caused an Afriqiyah Airways Airbus A330-200 to crash on approach to the Tripoli airport early on the morning of 12 May. There was one survivor of the 104 passengers and crew on board.
The aircraft, equipped with General Electric CF6-8E1 engines, was arriving from Johannesburg, South Africa.
The US team, set to arrive in Tripoli Friday afternoon, will include a lead investigator as well an engines specialist and technical advisors from the US Federal Aviation Administration and General Electric.
Hopefully that might quash some of the coverup and conspiricy theorists - even thoughthey are arrioving late and after considerable contamination of evidence.
Also can anyone who is in the know confirm Takata's positional assumptions, Is the mosque where the empenage ended up definitely that structure highlighted - there seem to be too many anomolies in my interpretation of the picture, Lack of minaret, lack of road to RHS of mosque, vegetation differences...I'm just not sure and perhaps someone who knows the lie of the land there could confirm.
Thanks
Cy
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did he do a NDB approach into the sun and does Tripoli suffer from the usual sand haze that is very common in desert areas? Weather can be CAVOK but visibility can be very limited in a situation like that.
Not a good combination, even if you have a good aircraft.
Just speculating.
Not a good combination, even if you have a good aircraft.
Just speculating.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: When I am there, it is Thistleland
Age: 73
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Takata interpretation is correct.
The mosque is just south of the center line for 09.
To the west of the tail there is the cone end, a piece of APU and the vertical stabilizer piece missing at the top.
Mi guess is high angle of attack impact tail first during a tentative go around.
Debris field goes on just 10 or 15 degrees of to the south (right for the pilot) towards the airport fence, where there is a small building in the south-west corner, where a wheel was located. Also in line with this building there is a large piece of fuselage skin, and maybe an engine (immages are not too clear)
The mosque is just south of the center line for 09.
To the west of the tail there is the cone end, a piece of APU and the vertical stabilizer piece missing at the top.
Mi guess is high angle of attack impact tail first during a tentative go around.
Debris field goes on just 10 or 15 degrees of to the south (right for the pilot) towards the airport fence, where there is a small building in the south-west corner, where a wheel was located. Also in line with this building there is a large piece of fuselage skin, and maybe an engine (immages are not too clear)