Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Lionair plane down in Bali.

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Lionair plane down in Bali.

Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:22
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: I don't really hate them...I just miss flight attendants.
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RAF?

Seriously? Someone tried to argue that a 2000 hour RAF pilot is somehow equal to a Lion Air captain? YGTBSM. Pay for training and flying a completely automated aircraft is nothing like flying in the RAF.

I have also been to Bali numerous times. if the fence is intact, how does one think this was an overrun from 27? Looks like a visual approach gone horrible wrong to runway 9 off the Indian Ocean.
FR8R H8R is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:24
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bali, Indonesia
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If it overshot 09 it would have taken out the main highway running down from Ngurah Rai to Nusa Dua? If it was landing on 09 it must have landed short NOT overshot. Oh, and in reverse?

If it landed short why are all the media reports still referring to "Overshooting"?

Last edited by philipat; 14th Apr 2013 at 02:34.
philipat is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:28
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 360
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It was landing on runway 09 and crashed short of the runway.

Its not that hard! Jesus wept!

Look at the radar traces.
ad-astra is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:30
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,650
Received 120 Likes on 68 Posts
Originally Posted by 1a sound alseep
If radar data confirmed the aircraft was fairly consistently about 100 feet below a 3 degrees glide path then it sounds more like pilot error than a sudden wind shear event.
Have you done any NPAs? Unless you are coupled to an FMS VNAV path, being 100ft below on an NPA is no big deal, and in fact is a good idea especially with low cloud but good vis, because it allows you to get Visual during the level-off at the MDA while still being just below the on-slope PAPI. The only requirement is not be below any limiting steps during the approach.

If I am correct, that suggests that the aircraft overflew the entire length of Runway 27 before landing in the ocean, which raises the question of why the PF did not just go around?
Oh come on. End up in the water, 50m from the seawall, bascially in one piece, after overflying the whole length on the runway? Don't be ridiculous.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:32
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you had the FDR, what is the first thing you would want to know????
Engine status!
repariit is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:33
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wilmington
Age: 47
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Were they schtooping any of the F/As?
TRF4EVR is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:33
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On a clear day landing on 09 and landing short I would weap unless I lost power. Did they?
bubbers44 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:34
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Aus
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
philipat ,
you can see all the other planes landing on 09 , then the virgin aircraft circle as im guessing he was next in line to touch down

LNI904 live flight tracking - Plane Finder

as well as on Accident: Lionair B738 at Denpasar on Apr 13th 2013, landed short of runway and came to stop in sea which shows this track.

edit: removed img as it doesnt allow linking.

Last edited by wooski; 14th Apr 2013 at 02:51.
wooski is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:40
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 360
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
If it landed short why are all the media reports still referring to "Overshooting"?
If we have to explain the accuracy of the press in such circumstances then we will have no hope in convincing you that they were landing on 09.
ad-astra is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:41
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oz
Age: 70
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Main gear on the reef.

You can see part of the main gear on the reef, just left of the nose.......

Sabreman24 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:42
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bali, Indonesia
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OK thanks, apologies and I stand corrected. 09 is the default and there was very little wind at the time. I guess the aircraft must have turned around on impact to face West.

Last edited by philipat; 14th Apr 2013 at 02:44.
philipat is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:53
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I totally agree with an Avherald (wooski's link) quote -

Facts
By WorldWideWelshman on Saturday, Apr 13th 2013 20:18Z

What do we know?

It ended up short of the runway, and without warning
according to interviews with pax. Happily, everyone
survived.

Errr.... that's it. We have no clue whether this crew is Sully
v2 or whether they were at fault,
and nor will we for some
time. (my bold)

Speculation is utterly pointless. Racist, childish remarks
even more so.

Wait and see. As is always the case, the truth will out in
due course.....
Slasher is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:54
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess the aircraft must have turned around on impact to face West.
The photos indicate that it is floating well, With wind and currents it could pivot on any ground contact.
repariit is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:56
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bali, Indonesia
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

On a clear day landing on 09 and landing short I would weap unless I lost
power. Did they?
Exactly, which is why it took so long to understand. There were scattered low clouds and localised rain showers but nothing heavy and visibility was good.
philipat is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 02:57
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A track I got shows they were landining on 09 so unless they lost power I guess they just landed in the water. Why? Did they just follow the FD?
bubbers44 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 03:00
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
Have you done any NPAs? Unless you are coupled to an FMS VNAV path, being 100ft below on an NPA is no big deal, and in fact is a good idea especially with low cloud but good vis, because it allows you to get Visual during the level-off at the MDA while still being just below the on-slope PAPI. The only requirement is not be below any limiting steps during the approach.
What the? You can't be serious.
blueloo is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 03:00
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I only had one female FO that stupid trying to land in vinyards short of ONT. Her FD stuck nose down. Wasn't her fault she said.
bubbers44 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 03:11
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The World
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not sure if it has been mentioned however simply "forgetting" to set the QNH could have caused this accident. If the pilots left standard 1013 set instead of the actual QNH of 1007 it would place the aircraft 180' low on the approach.
Combine this with poor visibility !!!!!
Tangan is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 03:20
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Left Seat
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Blogg, you do know that levelling off at MDA is banned by most aviation authorities? Not to mention it is a requirement to pass the IOSA audit that you don't conduct dive and drive approaches.

With a modern aircraft flying a continuous descent down to a DDA is simple.
airbus_driver319 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2013, 03:33
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,047
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 5 Posts
Sure...and then continue below minimum, continue below 50..30...20.10.. without the runway in sight? Guys, this speculation is useless.

Last edited by PENKO; 14th Apr 2013 at 05:55.
PENKO is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.