Iran accident
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snctions or not, no outside entity forces Iran to operate whatever aircraft they have in whatever condition Iran chooses to fly it's aircraft. Iran has many Russian aircraft with plenty of Russian spare parts available, yet Iran crashes many Russian aircraft. Iran has access to some European built aircraft and spares as well. The U.S. over the past 30 years, in an effort to improve aviation safety of Iranian civil aviation has supplied/sold the Iranian regime with some spare parts for it's aircraft.
Reading all the comments re embargo and lack of spares etc, I can't help wondering about another aspect of all this. What about crew training, licensing, etc ? Are the Iranian crews still allowed to train at US and European training facilities and have the Internationally recognised licenses ?, who checks these guys out ?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am probably best to answer the questions of sanctions on aircraft maintenance (I am of course not implying that this accident had anything to do with it) I finished working in an airworthines/QA role for an Iranian large airline last April having spent over a year there. The main problem I encountered was not a lack of spares (we flew Fokker 50s and 100s) though they did take alot of time clearing customs in Tehran no, the main issue I found was total lacking in basic aeronautical knowledge and trying to implement a part 145 ethos coupled with safety management and QA the nepotism is staggering inexperience people put in management because someone is married to the engineering directors daughter this guy (great guy personally) had no aeronautical training and had in fact failed the fokker 50 course prior to being appointed to mangement level in the engineering department. One thing I found that I could not get through to them was the ADs we once overflew and emergency AD I immediately put a plan together to ground and inspect the fleet, this was overuled and they continued to fly with an EAD that was out of date. There are many more instances of safety breach and blatant disregard of safety standards. I was at one point asked to instruct the Iranian CAA on 145 and continued airworthiness but whether it made and difference who knows??
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Mostly hotels
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was overflying Iran yesterday , and i got to tell you that i was feeling sorry for the guys doing domestic runs there yesterday. i did not know bout the crash at that time .Since we were overflying over some high terrain , i was constantly checking en route alternates and i had little to choose from as most ATIS were reporting snow and VOR approaches in use. In fact one was using a VOR approach circle to land in 2000m in heavy snow.
My condolence to all concerned .No crew wants to end up like this, what ever the reason.
My condolence to all concerned .No crew wants to end up like this, what ever the reason.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Wythenshawe
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Foolish priorities.
The Iranian government would be better advised to invest some of its loot in a decent aviation safety culture for the state airline, instead of unnecessary nuclear power/weapons development. The above contributors make it abundantly clear that the airline is incompetently and dangerously run.
I also feel for the pilots who have to work in the environment described so articulately above. Iran is a hostile country both in terms of weather and terrain. The pilots need all the technology and training support they can get.
There is no excuse for poor nav systems on a 727, with GPS readily available. And aircraft parts can be sourced throughout the Middle East, as well as decent maintenance. No excuses on the sanctions front. The country is wealthy enough, but chooses to spend its money on other things. Dare I say Iran has something of a medieval outlook on its expenditure?
I also feel for the pilots who have to work in the environment described so articulately above. Iran is a hostile country both in terms of weather and terrain. The pilots need all the technology and training support they can get.
There is no excuse for poor nav systems on a 727, with GPS readily available. And aircraft parts can be sourced throughout the Middle East, as well as decent maintenance. No excuses on the sanctions front. The country is wealthy enough, but chooses to spend its money on other things. Dare I say Iran has something of a medieval outlook on its expenditure?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In a house
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
allowing for accuracy of the media in reporting this unfortunate accident in the BBC's report they mention that there was no explosion or fire. Unusual for an aircraft crash not to involve a fire, unless of course there was nothing onboard to catch light?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Costa del Thames
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackx123;
I believe that ban is only valid for the Boeing fleet, they are still allowed to operate their A300s to the EU. I saw one of them at LHR just weeks ago.
in time of cholera are there any rules? as long as the local caa signs off they are fit to fly and hence the ban as of 6 July 2010 flying to the EU
Last edited by Brenoch; 10th Jan 2011 at 21:58.
allowing for accuracy of the media in reporting this unfortunate accident in the BBC's report they mention that there was no explosion or fire. Unusual for an aircraft crash not to involve a fire, unless of course there was nothing onboard to catch light?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
An Iran Air Boeing 727-200, registration EP-IRP performing flight IR-277 from Tehran Mehrabad to Uromiyeh (Iran) with 94 passengers and 12 crew, was on final ILS approach to Uromiyeh's Urmia Airport runway 21 in fog and snowfall around 19:45L (16:15Z). The crew went around but the airplane impacted mountaineous terrain at Terman village about 5 miles southeast of the airport and broke up in six major parts. 73 occupants are confirmed dead, thereof 18 bodies were recovered, 33 occupants were hospitalised with a number in critical condition.
The Vice governor of West Azerbaijan province of Iran said, that the airplane was on short final when the crew declared emergency due to a technical problem explaining they could not land at Urmia in these circumstances and requested to return to Tehran. During the go-around the aircraft lost height for unknown reasons and impacted terrain.
Iran's Transport Ministry said, that there was no emergency. According to tower tapes the pilot aborted the approach when he could not establish visual contact with the runway at decision height and went around indicating they wanted to return to Tehran. 33 people have been taken to hospitals, 73 have perished.
Uromiyeh's Airport features a runway 03/21 of 3250 meters length, there are instrument approaches only to runway 21 (ILS, VOR/DME, VOR, NDB).
Metars:
OITR 091800Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091750Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091700Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091650Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091600Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091550Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091500Z 24006KT 0800 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1015
An Iran Air Boeing 727-200, registration EP-IRP performing flight IR-277 from Tehran Mehrabad to Uromiyeh (Iran) with 94 passengers and 12 crew, was on final ILS approach to Uromiyeh's Urmia Airport runway 21 in fog and snowfall around 19:45L (16:15Z). The crew went around but the airplane impacted mountaineous terrain at Terman village about 5 miles southeast of the airport and broke up in six major parts. 73 occupants are confirmed dead, thereof 18 bodies were recovered, 33 occupants were hospitalised with a number in critical condition.
The Vice governor of West Azerbaijan province of Iran said, that the airplane was on short final when the crew declared emergency due to a technical problem explaining they could not land at Urmia in these circumstances and requested to return to Tehran. During the go-around the aircraft lost height for unknown reasons and impacted terrain.
Iran's Transport Ministry said, that there was no emergency. According to tower tapes the pilot aborted the approach when he could not establish visual contact with the runway at decision height and went around indicating they wanted to return to Tehran. 33 people have been taken to hospitals, 73 have perished.
Uromiyeh's Airport features a runway 03/21 of 3250 meters length, there are instrument approaches only to runway 21 (ILS, VOR/DME, VOR, NDB).
Metars:
OITR 091800Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091750Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091700Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091650Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091600Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091550Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091500Z 24006KT 0800 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1015
Pegase Driver
Re, training IR pilots and access to Sims abroad, incidentally the only functioning sim Iran Air has running in THR is a B727 sim.( I have been having some nostalgic sessions on it a year ago).
Re CAT 2 ops, if the aircraft that crashed had the same cockpit avionics as the sim, there is no flight director, no FMS and no integrated GPS. Just a basic and simple good old 727-200.
Spares is a huge problem. They get them at inflated prices and not always 100% tracable. Technical problems are one of their main problems and I would not be surprised if technical issues forced the go around.
The IR 727s are normally not used, just like their 2 747SPs ,only as Stand by spares I was told. On their published schedule the flights to that destination are (normally) all operated by F100 and A320s.
Re CAT 2 ops, if the aircraft that crashed had the same cockpit avionics as the sim, there is no flight director, no FMS and no integrated GPS. Just a basic and simple good old 727-200.
Spares is a huge problem. They get them at inflated prices and not always 100% tracable. Technical problems are one of their main problems and I would not be surprised if technical issues forced the go around.
The IR 727s are normally not used, just like their 2 747SPs ,only as Stand by spares I was told. On their published schedule the flights to that destination are (normally) all operated by F100 and A320s.
"The crew went around but the airplane impacted mountaineous terrain at Terman village about 5 miles southeast of the airport..."
Ugh. The highest terrain is almost all west of the airport (there being a huge lake to the east) - but there is a isolated area of high ground (marked by 6414' on that VOR chart) along the lake shore. A left turn from 210° to avoid the really high stuff could take one right into it.
Ugh. The highest terrain is almost all west of the airport (there being a huge lake to the east) - but there is a isolated area of high ground (marked by 6414' on that VOR chart) along the lake shore. A left turn from 210° to avoid the really high stuff could take one right into it.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ugh. The highest terrain is almost all west of the airport (there being a huge lake to the east) - but there is a isolated area of high ground (marked by 6414' on that VOR chart) along the lake shore. A left turn from 210° to avoid the really high stuff could take one right into it.
Lots of destroyed aircraft found in that part on Iran.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too fast ?
Some statements made from non-aviators to the Media and Press are pure speculation and not sustainable at all as long as the FDR is not analyzed.
....sadly to say that it does not need a sanction to run short of quality spare parts.
....sadly to say that it does not need a sanction to run short of quality spare parts.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: EU
Age: 82
Posts: 5,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atepster, you may wish to refer to Avherald's website, and there "Iran Air B722 near Uromiyeh on Jan 9th 2011, impacted terrain during go-around" for current information.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RegDep:
I suppose Jepp could be wrong in showing a current VOR to RWY 3, but less likely than any media publication.
Atepster, you may wish to refer to Avherald's website, and there "Iran Air B722 near Uromiyeh on Jan 9th 2011, impacted terrain during go-around" for current information.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: EU
Age: 82
Posts: 5,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not official information, though, mostly just rehashed press clippings as far as I can make out. I doubt they have a line to anyone official in Iran.
I suppose Jepp could be wrong in showing a current VOR to RWY 3, but less likely than any media publication.
I have nothing invested in it, just observing it.
Edit to say that I find an Iranian chart on an Iranian airport from 2009 more likely to be correct than a Jeppesen chart from 2007. Just a personal view
.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: EU
Age: 82
Posts: 5,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry aterpster, my point was made in an indirect way, hence the excursion to validity of Jeppesens:
My point was why argue against one line the previous post of Avenger #32 with an instrument approach to runway 03 while it is known (see some lines up on said post) that the approach was to runway 21. The actual approach has not, to my knowledge, been disputed so far.
With best regards,
Reg
My point was why argue against one line the previous post of Avenger #32 with an instrument approach to runway 03 while it is known (see some lines up on said post) that the approach was to runway 21. The actual approach has not, to my knowledge, been disputed so far.
With best regards,
Reg
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RegDep:
I wasn't arguing. I was correcting a factual error in the post he made from AvHearld. Although it likely had no bearing on the accident it is pertinent to know there are IAPs in both directions. At least it is to me; too many years looking at this stuff, I guess. Further, the reader of Aviation Heard might draw an incorrect inference from their report, for whatever reason.
My point was why argue against one line the previous post of Avenger #32 with an instrument approach to runway 03 while it is known (see some lines up on said post) that the approach was to runway 21. The actual approach has not, to my knowledge, been disputed so far.