Crash-Cork Airport
Guest
Posts: n/a
This accident could draw attention to quite a few areas that IMHO need attention.
For example.
1. Duty hours. It's been reported on here at least that the crew had operated a flight before this one. I wonder how alert they actually were, even if they were FTL legal?
The FTLs are in danger of being re-jigged for the worse. This accident MAY impinge on that plan.
2. Experience levels. We know the F/O was very new. The Captain was also newish to the LHS. Too new? THe first thing pilots do at Manx 2 is join. The second thing is leave.
3. Ticketing issues. The whole plot will be unravelled by the lawyers. There's a can of worms here with ref to Manx2 and the AOC of the operator.
4. Commercial pressures. Sure, we all know the rules. I wonder what the CVR will reveal. Plainly these guys were keen to get in. I usually find that if I do an app in CAT 1 weather, I get in. I have NEVER had three goes in CAT 1 wx without getting in. I've been to Cork many times btw.
5. Cheap/ Loco carriers. It's not such a bargain if you get killed.
I know that some LOCOs, like EZY are top notch training wise, but plainly the 'bottom feeders' are quaintly different. In life, you tend to get roughly what you paid for.
It'll be a revealing AAIB report methinks.
For example.
1. Duty hours. It's been reported on here at least that the crew had operated a flight before this one. I wonder how alert they actually were, even if they were FTL legal?
The FTLs are in danger of being re-jigged for the worse. This accident MAY impinge on that plan.
2. Experience levels. We know the F/O was very new. The Captain was also newish to the LHS. Too new? THe first thing pilots do at Manx 2 is join. The second thing is leave.
3. Ticketing issues. The whole plot will be unravelled by the lawyers. There's a can of worms here with ref to Manx2 and the AOC of the operator.
4. Commercial pressures. Sure, we all know the rules. I wonder what the CVR will reveal. Plainly these guys were keen to get in. I usually find that if I do an app in CAT 1 weather, I get in. I have NEVER had three goes in CAT 1 wx without getting in. I've been to Cork many times btw.
5. Cheap/ Loco carriers. It's not such a bargain if you get killed.
I know that some LOCOs, like EZY are top notch training wise, but plainly the 'bottom feeders' are quaintly different. In life, you tend to get roughly what you paid for.
It'll be a revealing AAIB report methinks.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blind, Mary and a few others, will you please stop referring to the AAIB. This accident occurred in Ireland and it will be the AAIU who investigate.
Sorry for appearing tetchy, it is just one of those (little) things that are important to me.
Sorry for appearing tetchy, it is just one of those (little) things that are important to me.
If it is determined in court that Manx2 have at least partial liability, then questions turn to the UK CAA for allowing an operation of this nature in the first place without involving them in any oversight.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. Experience levels. We know the F/O was very new. The Captain was also newish to the LHS. Too new? THe first thing pilots do at Manx 2 is join. The second thing is leave.
3. Ticketing issues. The whole plot will be unravelled by the lawyers. There's a can of worms here with ref to Manx2 and the AOC of the operator.
3. Ticketing issues. The whole plot will be unravelled by the lawyers. There's a can of worms here with ref to Manx2 and the AOC of the operator.
Why is it a can of worms? I don´t see the real difference if someone would charter the metro for a flight from a to b for group of 18 vs. doing more or less the same as a ticketing agent. The AOC operator has the duty and will be held responsible for fulfilling all requirements set forth by the authorities (hence the AOC, right?). If Manx2 were an operator, they would operate to the same standards, wouldn´t they?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am reading a lot of confusion and, because I am still reading, I thought it might be helpful to try to sort some of it out in the hopes that commentary might become more pertinent.
The accident took place in the Republic of Ireland. The investigating agency is thereby the Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU), part of the Department of Transport of the Republic of Ireland.
The operator of the flight is FlightlineBCN, a company with headquarters in Barcelona. Does anyone know with which regulatory authority the company's AOC is held?
FlightlineBCN is apparently contracted to an Isle of Man company, Manx2, to operate flights of which the accident flight was one. Aviation in the Isle of Man is regulated by the Isle of Man Civil Aviation Administration. The Isle of Man is not part of the EU, and is a sovereign entity with regard to civil aviation regulation. It has adopted European legislation as well as UK legislation into its civil aviation regulations.
I don't see anything remotely untoward about an Isle of Man company offering air services which are contracted out to an airline which is a separate entity. This happens all over the US with so-called "feeder services" for the majors.
(Exactly who has liability for what in this accident is something to be left to legal experts and likely a court, since apparently it is disputed.)
The bottom line is that an aircraft operating scheduled carriage has crashed at Cork and we don't know why, but most are convinced the weather conditions are almost certain to have something to do with it.
I find it somewhat disappointing that most of the messages have concerned people's likes and dislikes, beefs and bitches, hypthoses and suppositions about some of the organisations involved. Let us not lose sight of the fact that, at the time at which the accident happened or, alternatively, could have been avoided, there were two actors involved, namely two pilots, of whom we may presume the joint goal was safe completion of the flight (it usually is, except in two known instances in the last few decades, one of which is disputed). These actors obtained information about prevailing weather conditions from ATC at points in time close to the accident time.
No company directors, licensing agents, company boards, ticketing agents, regulators, wives, girlfriends or children were flying that airplane - just the crew. Perceived or internalised social influence from such third parties might have led the crew to make decisions different from those they would have made were this perceived or internalised influence to have been absent, but exactly how such influence works on a crew to affect what they decide at DH is a matter for considerable sociological and psychological theorising because, well, nobody actually has a clear idea of how it happens which commands universal assent (and that is not through want of trying from some of the best HF minds on the planet!).
The facts as we know them are sparse. The AAIU has apparently said to the press that there was nothing untoward with the aircraft up to LOC. They have said the right wing-tip struck the ground, followed by the aircraft rolling inverted. This is corroborated by an anecdote here reported to derive from a surviving passenger. I am still interested to know how the left prop became feathered before it struck something, and nobody has yet explained that to me satisfactorily.
Somebody knows where the airplane was with regard to runway centerline when the tip struck, because they have seen the marks. But nobody here does yet.
Crucially, nobody knows what the weather was like at DH or from DH to runway. And I doubt whether anybody ever will.
PBL
The accident took place in the Republic of Ireland. The investigating agency is thereby the Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU), part of the Department of Transport of the Republic of Ireland.
The operator of the flight is FlightlineBCN, a company with headquarters in Barcelona. Does anyone know with which regulatory authority the company's AOC is held?
FlightlineBCN is apparently contracted to an Isle of Man company, Manx2, to operate flights of which the accident flight was one. Aviation in the Isle of Man is regulated by the Isle of Man Civil Aviation Administration. The Isle of Man is not part of the EU, and is a sovereign entity with regard to civil aviation regulation. It has adopted European legislation as well as UK legislation into its civil aviation regulations.
I don't see anything remotely untoward about an Isle of Man company offering air services which are contracted out to an airline which is a separate entity. This happens all over the US with so-called "feeder services" for the majors.
(Exactly who has liability for what in this accident is something to be left to legal experts and likely a court, since apparently it is disputed.)
The bottom line is that an aircraft operating scheduled carriage has crashed at Cork and we don't know why, but most are convinced the weather conditions are almost certain to have something to do with it.
I find it somewhat disappointing that most of the messages have concerned people's likes and dislikes, beefs and bitches, hypthoses and suppositions about some of the organisations involved. Let us not lose sight of the fact that, at the time at which the accident happened or, alternatively, could have been avoided, there were two actors involved, namely two pilots, of whom we may presume the joint goal was safe completion of the flight (it usually is, except in two known instances in the last few decades, one of which is disputed). These actors obtained information about prevailing weather conditions from ATC at points in time close to the accident time.
No company directors, licensing agents, company boards, ticketing agents, regulators, wives, girlfriends or children were flying that airplane - just the crew. Perceived or internalised social influence from such third parties might have led the crew to make decisions different from those they would have made were this perceived or internalised influence to have been absent, but exactly how such influence works on a crew to affect what they decide at DH is a matter for considerable sociological and psychological theorising because, well, nobody actually has a clear idea of how it happens which commands universal assent (and that is not through want of trying from some of the best HF minds on the planet!).
The facts as we know them are sparse. The AAIU has apparently said to the press that there was nothing untoward with the aircraft up to LOC. They have said the right wing-tip struck the ground, followed by the aircraft rolling inverted. This is corroborated by an anecdote here reported to derive from a surviving passenger. I am still interested to know how the left prop became feathered before it struck something, and nobody has yet explained that to me satisfactorily.
Somebody knows where the airplane was with regard to runway centerline when the tip struck, because they have seen the marks. But nobody here does yet.
Crucially, nobody knows what the weather was like at DH or from DH to runway. And I doubt whether anybody ever will.
PBL
Last edited by PBL; 25th Feb 2011 at 09:39.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In the house
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And your're still confused, fella. There is no such thing as an Isle of Man CAA. What regulation there is is only for aircraft on the manx register and there's some legal jurisdiction over airspace. There is no direct regulation or control, apart from some occasional ramp checks, over airlines that come and go on the rock with monotonous regularity.
Perhaps you are connected with the crew or operator cos' your post seems very defensive and that's your call.
''I am still interested to know how the left prop became feathered before it struck something, and nobody has yet explained that to me satisfactorily.''
The prop feather is probably the biggest bit of conjecture in all these pages.
"but most are convinced the weather conditions are almost certain to have something to do with it".........you don't say
Perhaps you are connected with the crew or operator cos' your post seems very defensive and that's your call.
''I am still interested to know how the left prop became feathered before it struck something, and nobody has yet explained that to me satisfactorily.''
The prop feather is probably the biggest bit of conjecture in all these pages.
"but most are convinced the weather conditions are almost certain to have something to do with it".........you don't say
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In the house
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look PBL, no apology, you just need to read on..
''The CAA's role is to administer the Isle of Man Aircraft Registry and regulate the Isle of Man Airport"
See that word Administer. They have no AUTHORITY to regulate the operators on the Rock.
Now, you think what you want over there in BFPO but you're giving the Manx ADIMISTRATION more AUTHORITY than they've got.
Now, resume your iffy observations on the matter in hand.
''The CAA's role is to administer the Isle of Man Aircraft Registry and regulate the Isle of Man Airport"
See that word Administer. They have no AUTHORITY to regulate the operators on the Rock.
Now, you think what you want over there in BFPO but you're giving the Manx ADIMISTRATION more AUTHORITY than they've got.
Now, resume your iffy observations on the matter in hand.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since (from my own choice) I only see half of the current handbag fight, can I ask for a refresh here (to avoid trawling all the many posts)?
Have we established whether an FDR was fitted and if so which parameters it was likely to record - and thus whether or not the obviously vexing question for some (NOT involved in the investigation) about the port prop is likely to be cleared up in any report? My understanding is that the initial investigation declared 'engine ops normal' before the crash?
With apologies to the doubtless fine people who work there, I profess a total lack of interest in the IoM 'CAA' and do not see much relevance in the obvious furious slagging that it appears to generate.
Have we established whether an FDR was fitted and if so which parameters it was likely to record - and thus whether or not the obviously vexing question for some (NOT involved in the investigation) about the port prop is likely to be cleared up in any report? My understanding is that the initial investigation declared 'engine ops normal' before the crash?
With apologies to the doubtless fine people who work there, I profess a total lack of interest in the IoM 'CAA' and do not see much relevance in the obvious furious slagging that it appears to generate.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
hum: I disagree PBL. I would not assume that the port prop was feathered from the photo.
Therefore, we were instructed during our type rating course to fly the aircraft as fast as possible for as long as possible (if runway length permitted of course) to maintain good control authority in every event. In practical terms, this was achieved by flying the approach fully configured not slower that 140kt until over the lights and bringing back the power to (flight) idle thereafter, which resulted in a touchdown speed of about 100kt. This procedure made sure that the time spent in the "difficult" speed range was reduced to a minimum (and with the engines at idle, there was no threat of asymmetric power).
Pulling back the throttles to idle in flight makes the governor sense an overspeed condition and move the blades to higher angles similar to the feathered position (for an overview of the system see here: Articles). Oil pressure is required to move the propeller blades back to low angles, but unless power is reapplied, this does not happen.
So if these pilots operated their Metroliner the same way we operated ours, the angle at which the propellers were left at the time of the accident seems to me to be in accordance with normal operation.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This letter in the Belfast Telegraph from the Isle of Man's Director of Civil Aviation may assist those unsure of the Island's aviation authority:
Manx2.com article was irresponsible and misleading - Letters, Opinion - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk
Manx2.com article was irresponsible and misleading - Letters, Opinion - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for that link, drflight! It answers one of my questions, namely that FlightlineBCN's AOC is issued in Spain.
"what next", there is quite a bit of commentary earlier in the thread about the operation of the Garretts, which I referenced in a summary post. No one else I know with experience flying the Metroliner has yet answered this question for me - can you explain how the prop blades on the left engine became bent in the way they did?
"what next", there is quite a bit of commentary earlier in the thread about the operation of the Garretts, which I referenced in a summary post. No one else I know with experience flying the Metroliner has yet answered this question for me - can you explain how the prop blades on the left engine became bent in the way they did?
Hello What next, 
thanks for the link... I agree with your thinking & doubt the prop was 'feathered' in the conventional sense of the word. I reckon it stopped with a high blade angle and only momentarily struck the ground due to the dynamics of the final moments inverted on the ground before coming to a rest as we saw in the photos. This whole prop business is a 'red herring' in the big scheme of things - as the AAIU have told us so in so many words... ;-)
thanks for the link... I agree with your thinking & doubt the prop was 'feathered' in the conventional sense of the word. I reckon it stopped with a high blade angle and only momentarily struck the ground due to the dynamics of the final moments inverted on the ground before coming to a rest as we saw in the photos. This whole prop business is a 'red herring' in the big scheme of things - as the AAIU have told us so in so many words... ;-)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Memo to Journalists:
by now, the investigating authority has the tapes from the control tower/approach control...ask them (investigators) for the exact RVR reported when approach clearance was issued.
Confirm with investigators that ''black boxes" were installed, working properly, and yielded useable data.
while a full report isn't available, these two pieces of information would give alot of information to those interested parties.
Confirm with investigators that ''black boxes" were installed, working properly, and yielded useable data.
while a full report isn't available, these two pieces of information would give alot of information to those interested parties.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm amused to see PBL try and put down HUM, who I happen to know personally. Believe me, or not as you wish, but he does know a thing or two after the career he's had/having.
As for the engine failure theory/feathered prop theory. I'm not sure why this still prevails in some people's minds. We now have 'what's next's' contribution and there are also previous contributions from those with Metroliner experience who have satisfactorily explained why this might occur. On top of that, the AAIU's carefully worded statement early on effectively ruled out engine failure.
I suspect that lack of control authority at lower speeds will feature heavily in the final report and as usual with accidents will be the final link in a chain of events.
As for the engine failure theory/feathered prop theory. I'm not sure why this still prevails in some people's minds. We now have 'what's next's' contribution and there are also previous contributions from those with Metroliner experience who have satisfactorily explained why this might occur. On top of that, the AAIU's carefully worded statement early on effectively ruled out engine failure.
I suspect that lack of control authority at lower speeds will feature heavily in the final report and as usual with accidents will be the final link in a chain of events.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Ireland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prop blades
I'm more interested in why prop blades on the left engine survived while they are bent/sheared off (hard to tell) on the other side. Did this mean the left engine had stopped some time prior to impact? Or is this a product of the aircraft being mainly right wing down on the ground as it inverted and slid along the turf in a way that kept the left prop assembly clear of the ground for a longer period?
''The CAA's role is to administer the Isle of Man Aircraft Registry and regulate the Isle of Man Airport"
See that word Administer. They have no AUTHORITY to regulate the operators on the Rock.
Now, you think what you want over there in BFPO but you're giving the Manx ADIMISTRATION more AUTHORITY than they've got.
See that word Administer. They have no AUTHORITY to regulate the operators on the Rock.
Now, you think what you want over there in BFPO but you're giving the Manx ADIMISTRATION more AUTHORITY than they've got.
'The CAA's role is to administer the Isle of Man Aircraft Registry and regulate the Isle of Man Airport. The CAA is responsible for ensuring aviation legislation in the Isle of Man meets International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices and other relevant European aviation standards.'
So according to Tinwald's logic the Federal Aviation Administration has no authority or regulatory powers in the US!