Afriqiyah Airbus 330 Crash
BOAC;
Yes...
I don't know; the tracks in the video are not clear enough to determine; Schubinho's post #383 shows a comparison between the length of the nearby vehicle and the two furrows. With flattening of perspective, they could either be tracks from the engines or the gear or even just mounds of 'disturbed sand' from a last-second application of TOGA thrust as some have suggested, until the aircraft's tail struck the slightly-rising ground. The MK B747 accident at Halifax exhibited this pattern - loss of the tail structure by striking a burm followed by severe nose-down contact, etc.
Yes, the recorders will tell us soon enough. PJ
but where are the gear touchdown marks?
I don't know; the tracks in the video are not clear enough to determine; Schubinho's post #383 shows a comparison between the length of the nearby vehicle and the two furrows. With flattening of perspective, they could either be tracks from the engines or the gear or even just mounds of 'disturbed sand' from a last-second application of TOGA thrust as some have suggested, until the aircraft's tail struck the slightly-rising ground. The MK B747 accident at Halifax exhibited this pattern - loss of the tail structure by striking a burm followed by severe nose-down contact, etc.
Yes, the recorders will tell us soon enough. PJ
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sun in your eyes
I drive east to work, and return home to the west.
Living in the west of Scotland, this is most days quite comfortable.
But when the sun shines, I'm going in the wrong direction both morning and
evening - very difficult to see what you are about to hit.
Would pilots ever consider landing 'out of the sun'?
Living in the west of Scotland, this is most days quite comfortable.
But when the sun shines, I'm going in the wrong direction both morning and
evening - very difficult to see what you are about to hit.
Would pilots ever consider landing 'out of the sun'?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: EUROPE
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot error - Dutch news report
'Piloot veroorzaakte crash' - Buitenland - Telegraaf.nl [24 uur actueel, ook mobiel] [buitenland]
(translation babelfish)
Sat May 15
' Pilot caused crash' by Ronald Veerman AMSTERDAM - from several analyses by pilots and air-traffic controllers (pprune?) it seems more and more that the crash in Tripoli have been caused by the pilot, who incorrectly assessed his position to the runway. When he wanted to correct this at the last moment touched a wing the ground and made the plane somersault whereupon it disintegrated. That can be made up from new declarations from Libya. Although experts continue emphasise that it can last still long for the fact of the matter clear is and also an attack cannot be still excluded, the possibility of a technical defect becomes already smaller. That also becomes clear from the declaration of the Libyan research commission. " The pilot has communicated absolutely no problem. Up to at the last moment the things were normal between the pilot and the tower" , according to investigation head Dhaou. According to Rob Hoogvliet, flight instructor and 747-pilot,the landing shortly before sunrise may have contributed to the crash. Although the visibility was well, it was landed after a long night flight. " due to the rising sun and haze the position can be incorrectly judged and the speed of the aircraft being too high as a result" , according Hoogvliet
+++++++
za 15 mei 2010, 05:30 'Piloot veroorzaakte crash'
door Ronald Veerman
AMSTERDAM - Uit diverse analyses van piloten en luchtverkeersleiders lijkt het er steeds meer op dat de crash in Tripoli is veroorzaakt door de piloot, die de positie tot de landingsbaan verkeerd inschatte.
Toen hij dit op het laatste moment wilde corrigeren raakte een vleugel de grond en maakte het vliegtuig een koprol waarna het uiteenspatte. Dat kan worden opgemaakt uit nieuwe verklaringen uit Libië. Hoewel experts blijven benadrukken dat het nog lang kan duren voor de ware toedracht duidelijk is en ook een aanslag nog altijd niet mag worden uitgesloten, wordt de mogelijkheid van een technisch mankement al kleiner. Dat blijkt ook uit de verklaring van de Libische onderzoekscommissie. "De piloot heeft geen enkel probleem gemeld. Tot op het laatste moment waren de dingen normaal tussen de piloot en de verkeerstoren", aldus hoofdonderzoeker Dhaou.
Volgens Rob Hoogvliet, vlieginstructeur en 747-piloot, heeft de landing kort voor zonsopgang mogelijk bijgedragen aan de crash. Hoewel het zicht goed was, werd geland na een zware nachtvlucht. "Door de opkomende zon en heiigheid kan de positie verkeerd ingeschat zijn en de snelheid van het toestel nog te hoog zijn geweest", aldus Hoogvliet
'Piloot veroorzaakte crash' - Buitenland - Telegraaf.nl [24 uur actueel, ook mobiel] [buitenland]
(translation babelfish)
Sat May 15
' Pilot caused crash' by Ronald Veerman AMSTERDAM - from several analyses by pilots and air-traffic controllers (pprune?) it seems more and more that the crash in Tripoli have been caused by the pilot, who incorrectly assessed his position to the runway. When he wanted to correct this at the last moment touched a wing the ground and made the plane somersault whereupon it disintegrated. That can be made up from new declarations from Libya. Although experts continue emphasise that it can last still long for the fact of the matter clear is and also an attack cannot be still excluded, the possibility of a technical defect becomes already smaller. That also becomes clear from the declaration of the Libyan research commission. " The pilot has communicated absolutely no problem. Up to at the last moment the things were normal between the pilot and the tower" , according to investigation head Dhaou. According to Rob Hoogvliet, flight instructor and 747-pilot,the landing shortly before sunrise may have contributed to the crash. Although the visibility was well, it was landed after a long night flight. " due to the rising sun and haze the position can be incorrectly judged and the speed of the aircraft being too high as a result" , according Hoogvliet
+++++++
za 15 mei 2010, 05:30 'Piloot veroorzaakte crash'
door Ronald Veerman
AMSTERDAM - Uit diverse analyses van piloten en luchtverkeersleiders lijkt het er steeds meer op dat de crash in Tripoli is veroorzaakt door de piloot, die de positie tot de landingsbaan verkeerd inschatte.
Toen hij dit op het laatste moment wilde corrigeren raakte een vleugel de grond en maakte het vliegtuig een koprol waarna het uiteenspatte. Dat kan worden opgemaakt uit nieuwe verklaringen uit Libië. Hoewel experts blijven benadrukken dat het nog lang kan duren voor de ware toedracht duidelijk is en ook een aanslag nog altijd niet mag worden uitgesloten, wordt de mogelijkheid van een technisch mankement al kleiner. Dat blijkt ook uit de verklaring van de Libische onderzoekscommissie. "De piloot heeft geen enkel probleem gemeld. Tot op het laatste moment waren de dingen normaal tussen de piloot en de verkeerstoren", aldus hoofdonderzoeker Dhaou.
Volgens Rob Hoogvliet, vlieginstructeur en 747-piloot, heeft de landing kort voor zonsopgang mogelijk bijgedragen aan de crash. Hoewel het zicht goed was, werd geland na een zware nachtvlucht. "Door de opkomende zon en heiigheid kan de positie verkeerd ingeschat zijn en de snelheid van het toestel nog te hoog zijn geweest", aldus Hoogvliet
Last edited by STC-8; 15th May 2010 at 19:21. Reason: correction
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: True North strong and free!
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would pilots ever consider landing 'out of the sun'?
Here are my two cents of the event (not the cause!)
Aircraft is configured for landing hence no GPWS warnings.
Crew lose situational awareness, at least temporarily.
No attempt is made to go around until:
The wheels touch the ground perhaps at a slight nose up attitude as would be expected during that phase of flight (I don't think any other section of the aircraft touched down at that stage. The parallel marks on the ground as depicted earlier against the length of the car seem pretty much like tire marks to me, while the portion in between is level and with no debris, which leads me to believe no fuselage contact was made. Also damage to the tires and landing gear seem to support a wheels first touch down)
At the point of touchdown, the crew reacts with Go-Around power.
The aircraft seems unable to climb as the gear starts running into little trees and bushes.
The nose is raised significantly and the aircraft perhaps lifts off the ground entirely but stalls in a high nose up attitude and is brought back down, this time the tail hitting first and separating, as well as perhaps doing a few cartwheels.
Without the tail the rest of the aircraft rapidly pitches down and impacts with a lot of energy.
The engines, as they are designed separate quickly and end up as they are, a few hundred meters East of the tail. So does the undercarriage.
The wings somehow travel the furthest distance and end up at the far eastern side of the crash site.
Just my theory, I am glad I wasn't there. RIP
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Over the Rainbow
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the pitch of full power would rapidly raise the nose,
Is this correct?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dubai
Age: 52
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, selection of TOGA will cause the flight directors to become active (even if flying raw data), and will command SRS (speed reference system), which is essentally go-around-attitude. Of course you will not get the force feed back on the side stick due to FBW and auto trim, but if you fly Airbus, this should be fairly instinctive.
Who knows - looks like CFIT, no matter whether still on finals or attempting a go around.
Who knows - looks like CFIT, no matter whether still on finals or attempting a go around.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Over the Rainbow
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK thanks for that Juliet Echo. If you did not follow the F/D commands, (flying manually), what would the result be?
I am trying to relate this to the aircraft that I fly. Not FBW, but selection of TOGA causes a pitch-up due to underwing mounted engines when hand flying the aircraft.
I am trying to relate this to the aircraft that I fly. Not FBW, but selection of TOGA causes a pitch-up due to underwing mounted engines when hand flying the aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: EUROPE
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest from Dutch news. STC-8 translation.
Sat May 15 17:58
'Aircraft not on fire before crash'
The plane that crashed Wednesday at the airport in Tripoli was not on fire prior to colliding with the ground. This was stated by Neji Dhaou, the the head of the Libyan commission investigating the accident.
According to Dhaou, this was the conclusion from examination of the wreckage and other evidence. Fire broke out 400 meters from the point of impact.
The investigation head also stated that the two 'black boxes' from the aircraft will be sent to France, Great Britain or the USA for examination.
His team has begun interviews with witnesses and is awaiting a statement from a pilot from Alitalia who was awaiting departure at the time of the crash.
++++++++++++++++++
'Vliegtuig niet in brand voor crash' | nu.nl/vliegramp tripoli | Het laatste nieuws het eerst op nu.nl
'Vliegtuig niet in brand voor crash'
Uitgegeven: 15 mei 2010 15:53 Laatst gewijzigd: 15 mei 2010 17:58
TRIPOLI - Het vliegtuig dat woensdag verongelukte op de luchthaven van Tripoli stond niet in brand voordat het de grond raakte. Dit heeft het hoofd van de Libische commissie die onderzoek doet naar de crash, Neji Dhaou, zaterdag gezegd.
Volgens Dhaou blijkt uit bestudering van de wrakstukken en ander bewijsmateriaal niet dat toestel voor de landing in brand stond. Het vuur brak pas 400 meter van de plaats van het ongeluk uit.
De onderzoeksleider zei verder dat de twee zwarte dozen van het toestel naar Frankrijk, Groot-Brittannië of de Verenigde Staten worden gestuurd voor bestudering.
Zijn team begint ook met het horen van getuigen en is in afwachting van een verslag van een piloot van Alitalia die op het punt stond met zijn vliegtuig te vertrekken op het moment van de crash.
Sat May 15 17:58
'Aircraft not on fire before crash'
The plane that crashed Wednesday at the airport in Tripoli was not on fire prior to colliding with the ground. This was stated by Neji Dhaou, the the head of the Libyan commission investigating the accident.
According to Dhaou, this was the conclusion from examination of the wreckage and other evidence. Fire broke out 400 meters from the point of impact.
The investigation head also stated that the two 'black boxes' from the aircraft will be sent to France, Great Britain or the USA for examination.
His team has begun interviews with witnesses and is awaiting a statement from a pilot from Alitalia who was awaiting departure at the time of the crash.
++++++++++++++++++
'Vliegtuig niet in brand voor crash' | nu.nl/vliegramp tripoli | Het laatste nieuws het eerst op nu.nl
'Vliegtuig niet in brand voor crash'
Uitgegeven: 15 mei 2010 15:53 Laatst gewijzigd: 15 mei 2010 17:58
TRIPOLI - Het vliegtuig dat woensdag verongelukte op de luchthaven van Tripoli stond niet in brand voordat het de grond raakte. Dit heeft het hoofd van de Libische commissie die onderzoek doet naar de crash, Neji Dhaou, zaterdag gezegd.
Volgens Dhaou blijkt uit bestudering van de wrakstukken en ander bewijsmateriaal niet dat toestel voor de landing in brand stond. Het vuur brak pas 400 meter van de plaats van het ongeluk uit.
De onderzoeksleider zei verder dat de twee zwarte dozen van het toestel naar Frankrijk, Groot-Brittannië of de Verenigde Staten worden gestuurd voor bestudering.
Zijn team begint ook met het horen van getuigen en is in afwachting van een verslag van een piloot van Alitalia die op het punt stond met zijn vliegtuig te vertrekken op het moment van de crash.
Last edited by STC-8; 15th May 2010 at 19:12. Reason: Attempt to normalize fonts
Sortie 3, you are correct. When hand flown if you apply TOGA then the aircraft just keeps going in the same direction. There is (almost) no pitch/power couple.
However, BOAC said:
J-E is correct - when the levers are moved all the way forward then the flight directors go up (in SRS mode) IF you have some flap out (worth remembering if you try to do a coupled go-around when clean).
However, BOAC said:
Originally Posted by BOAC
Once the tail separated (presumably survivor seated here and ejected?) the pitch of full power would rapidly raise the nose,
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dubai
Age: 52
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, those engines still give you around 70000lbs of thrust (each engine) with TOGA so naturally there will be definite nose-up pitch, but as I mentioned you will not have any "out of trim" state physically pushing back on your hands. I find it hard to believe that anyone could apply TOGA and maintain a constant negative pitch attitude. Easier to do on the Airbus, but would still require some kind of mental and physical force.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: KwaZulu Natal
Age: 65
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Juliet-Echo
How much sand, and other debris would be consumed by these engine in TOGA mode with the belly of the aircraft on or that close to the ground. I would have assumed either a single or possibly twin catastrophic failure.
Well, those engines still give you around 70000lbs of thrust (each engine) with TOGA so naturally there will be definite nose-up pitch
Originally Posted by JE
Well, those engines still give you around 70000lbs of thrust (each engine) with TOGA so naturally there will be definite nose-up pitch, but as I mentioned you will not have any "out of trim" state physically pushing back on your hands.
Is there any information concerning the kind of ground at the point of first ground-contact?
I think itīs very important wether its deep sand or just rock covered with an inch of sand. In the latter case there would be no tiremarks recognizable from distance, however the belly could get enough sand out of the way and to the side, thus looking like we see it now.
In my humble oppinion the whole area looks like solid rock, covered with smaller rock and a bit of sand, also further down in the crash-zone there are not enough recognizable marks on the ground.
What is the reason for assuming the gear to be down by analyyzing the damage to the wheels? There is nothing of the aircraft left undamaged, so i assume that the gear would not look better when it had been retracted before.
During a goaround situation, at what time is the gear retraction initiated and how long will it travel?
Is it known, what type of aircraft the captain flew before his time on the bus? If he flew a mainly manhandeld aircraft before, would it be understandable that he would continue to land the bus in manual mode (forgive me if i dont use the correct phrase here) thus doing an manual flown visual approach?
Reason for that asumption, the weather-report was not that bad, he was familiar with the field, he for sure knew the problems with the VOR, and he would naturally rely less on ATC knowing their deficiencies. So do the old thing, fly in visual and look for the field, it may even be quicker, not bad after a long flight.
When recognizing the degrading visibility he was not setup for an quick jump to an Instrument-Approach to the same runway, therefore deciding early for a goaround with intention to circle to the other runway? And then the goaround went wrong. Not prepared for it, no navaids set, therfore a visual goaround...
How is the acceleration in an A330 with nearly all fuel gone and only a limited pax load? At what speed would it be flown? How often would the crew have done a goaround before (except in the sim, i dont value that for real life expirience )? Let me edit my last sentence in brackets here: It is not my intention to disqualify simulator flying at all. But assuming a situation with spatial disorientation during TOGA could have happened like in the Gulf-Air Accident, a training situation like that will probably not happen in the simulator, or are they meanwhile as good as real live concerning movemeent and enviromental reality?
Dont kill me for asking to many questions, just trying to get some thinking going.
I cant believe that a qualified crew is that much of course and that much too low on an automated approach in basically fairly well weather at their homebase. There must be reasons, and the mentioned points concerning quality of local airmanship are thin ice.
franzl
I think itīs very important wether its deep sand or just rock covered with an inch of sand. In the latter case there would be no tiremarks recognizable from distance, however the belly could get enough sand out of the way and to the side, thus looking like we see it now.
In my humble oppinion the whole area looks like solid rock, covered with smaller rock and a bit of sand, also further down in the crash-zone there are not enough recognizable marks on the ground.
What is the reason for assuming the gear to be down by analyyzing the damage to the wheels? There is nothing of the aircraft left undamaged, so i assume that the gear would not look better when it had been retracted before.
During a goaround situation, at what time is the gear retraction initiated and how long will it travel?
Is it known, what type of aircraft the captain flew before his time on the bus? If he flew a mainly manhandeld aircraft before, would it be understandable that he would continue to land the bus in manual mode (forgive me if i dont use the correct phrase here) thus doing an manual flown visual approach?
Reason for that asumption, the weather-report was not that bad, he was familiar with the field, he for sure knew the problems with the VOR, and he would naturally rely less on ATC knowing their deficiencies. So do the old thing, fly in visual and look for the field, it may even be quicker, not bad after a long flight.
When recognizing the degrading visibility he was not setup for an quick jump to an Instrument-Approach to the same runway, therefore deciding early for a goaround with intention to circle to the other runway? And then the goaround went wrong. Not prepared for it, no navaids set, therfore a visual goaround...
How is the acceleration in an A330 with nearly all fuel gone and only a limited pax load? At what speed would it be flown? How often would the crew have done a goaround before (except in the sim, i dont value that for real life expirience )? Let me edit my last sentence in brackets here: It is not my intention to disqualify simulator flying at all. But assuming a situation with spatial disorientation during TOGA could have happened like in the Gulf-Air Accident, a training situation like that will probably not happen in the simulator, or are they meanwhile as good as real live concerning movemeent and enviromental reality?
Dont kill me for asking to many questions, just trying to get some thinking going.
I cant believe that a qualified crew is that much of course and that much too low on an automated approach in basically fairly well weather at their homebase. There must be reasons, and the mentioned points concerning quality of local airmanship are thin ice.
franzl
Last edited by RetiredF4; 16th May 2010 at 08:17.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: CarrotLand
Posts: 701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The tyre seems to be very "clean" with almost no dust on them
Do you believe that is any clue of the landing gear to be retracted or at least that had no contact with that dusty ground?
Do you believe that is any clue of the landing gear to be retracted or at least that had no contact with that dusty ground?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Nederland
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See clip from May, 14 at AD.nl:
AD Vliegramp Tripoli - 'Piloot meldde geen technische problemen' (483435)
In the last seconds you can see the lifting of parts of the wing.
AD Vliegramp Tripoli - 'Piloot meldde geen technische problemen' (483435)
In the last seconds you can see the lifting of parts of the wing.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: When I am there, it is Thistleland
Age: 73
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visit to Crash Site
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.
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.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ USA
Age: 66
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everytime I read this thread...
I keep coming back to the indications that the choice of runway was for the convenience of ATC so they wouldn't be looking into the sun???
If in fact that is the case and is proven to be a direct contributing factor in this then I hope a few folks are stood up against a wall. Why would a PIC accept that vs "requesting" the appropriate runway, what is the culture in Libya in that regard?
If in fact that is the case and is proven to be a direct contributing factor in this then I hope a few folks are stood up against a wall. Why would a PIC accept that vs "requesting" the appropriate runway, what is the culture in Libya in that regard?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: When I am there, it is Thistleland
Age: 73
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visit to Crash Site 2
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