Lionair plane down in Bali.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bullethead,
Yes, Perth certainly does get its share of windshear and microburst activity...with more than its share of GA...
We are in fact, currently looking at a windshear system and DEP procedures for Perth. (it helped that a pretty high ranking ASA person happened to have a windshear encounter on final to Perth with a balked landing GA...)
Yes, Perth certainly does get its share of windshear and microburst activity...with more than its share of GA...
We are in fact, currently looking at a windshear system and DEP procedures for Perth. (it helped that a pretty high ranking ASA person happened to have a windshear encounter on final to Perth with a balked landing GA...)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Reality
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And just why did the hull crack where it did
Flight attendant opened the rear door flooding the Aircraft and that caused the break!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
Hardly, more likely the rear fuse impacting with the water at 140 odd knots did that!!
737's aren't designed to land tail first on land or water 
Boy some of the crap I read in here makes me sick......
Hardly, more likely the rear fuse impacting with the water at 140 odd knots did that!!
737's aren't designed to land tail first on land or water Boy some of the crap I read in here makes me sick......
Last edited by nitpicker330; 26th Apr 2013 at 22:58.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Reality
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight attendant opened the rear door flooding the Aircraft and that caused the break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hardly, more likely the rear fuse impacting with the water at 140 odd knots did that!! 737's aren't designed to land tail first on land or water
Boy some of the crap I read in here makes me sick......
Hardly, more likely the rear fuse impacting with the water at 140 odd knots did that!!
737's aren't designed to land tail first on land or water Boy some of the crap I read in here makes me sick......
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this talk of black boxes and their information.
A couple of billion Rupiah and the black boxes will have been stolen by persons unknown. Either that or irradiated to a point wher the data is ruined.
This is after all Indonesia with the finest officials money can buy.
If you have never bribed a Cop or official in Indo, you haven't been there nearly enough.
A couple of billion Rupiah and the black boxes will have been stolen by persons unknown. Either that or irradiated to a point wher the data is ruined.
This is after all Indonesia with the finest officials money can buy.
If you have never bribed a Cop or official in Indo, you haven't been there nearly enough.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of billion Rupiah and the black boxes will have been stolen by persons unknown.
Aside from the insurance and liability needs for determining a cause, there is a 737-800 fleet safety need to know. If this airplane impacted the water similar to the US Air A320 on the Hudson, the fuselage should not have broken as it did. If it stalled (or hit by a microburst??) and dropped several hundred feet hitting tail first as the Turkish accident did at Schiphol airport, that may explain the condition of the fuselage and horizontal stabilizer.
The National 727-200 that landed in Pensacola Bay 35 years ago was largely intact. The aft fuselage belly skin was partially peeled away, but as pictured below, it was lifted out of the Bay in one piece.
It seems to me that there's an obvious reason the fuselage broke -- the airplane crashed. Presumably in breaking, the fuselage absorbed some energy that otherwise would have gone somewhere else. It's conceivable that it will turn out the fuselage wasn't overstressed and shouldn't have broken, but it seems much more productive to assume it was overstressed, and ask what that tells us about the crash.
Of course, if the fuselage broke before the crash, it would be an entirely different story. But no one's suggesting that, presumably for good reason.
Of course, if the fuselage broke before the crash, it would be an entirely different story. But no one's suggesting that, presumably for good reason.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assume it was
I think it tells us that one or more of the following was seriously out of the normal range for a landing approach: ROD, attitude, configuration, and/or airspeed. If those items were normal, landing in the (water absent a reef), or a gear up landing on a runway should not cause a fuselage break.
overstressed, and ask what that tells us about the crash
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mydadsbag
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having landed over the wreck several times in the past weeks, all I can observe (with respect to fuselage breakup) is that there is what appears to be a "swathe" cut through the reef just prior to what was the resting place of the jet.
I don't think it fair for some to suggest an inferior structural design when it seems this aeroplane wasn't obstructed by water alone.
I don't think it fair for some to suggest an inferior structural design when it seems this aeroplane wasn't obstructed by water alone.
Since we're all guessing, try this.
Aircraft lands in water in a slight right bank. Starboard engine/wing take much of the impact, engine drops off, the sudden yank to starboard cracks the hull aft of the wing.
The aircraft groundloops (sealoops?) around the starboard wing, coming to rest very suddenly after doing a 270 to its original direction. Sudden stop serves to complete tail section fracture/separation.
Aircraft lands in water in a slight right bank. Starboard engine/wing take much of the impact, engine drops off, the sudden yank to starboard cracks the hull aft of the wing.
The aircraft groundloops (sealoops?) around the starboard wing, coming to rest very suddenly after doing a 270 to its original direction. Sudden stop serves to complete tail section fracture/separation.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft groundloops (sealoops?) around the starboard wing, coming to rest very suddenly after doing a 270
The location of the engines is of interest. It is likely that they both separated near where it touched down. They should be found on the bottom in that area. Buzzy reports seeing a "swathe" cut through the reef just prior to what was the resting place of the jet. It sounds like the engines would be found in shallow water. Why is there no news coverage on the recovery of the wreckage?
I flew in to DPS a couple of days ago and saw the wreckage, now placed along side the runway covered in tarpaulin. This is what's left of the 89.1 million dollar, 2 month old aircraft.
Jetstar2pilot;
Re, "I'm really curious as to what was found on the FDR/CVR. Why hasn't this information been released by "someone" ????? "
ICAO Annex 13 (link within the ICAO article here), requires a preliminary report be published within 30 days of an accident. So we have about two weeks before anything must be published.
From Annex 13:
7.4 The Preliminary Report shall be sent by facsimile, e-mail, or airmail within thirty days of the date of the accident unless the Accident/Incident Data Report has been sent by that time. When matters directly affecting safety are involved, it shall be sent as soon as the information is available and by the most suitable and quickest means available.
Re, "I'm really curious as to what was found on the FDR/CVR. Why hasn't this information been released by "someone" ????? "
ICAO Annex 13 (link within the ICAO article here), requires a preliminary report be published within 30 days of an accident. So we have about two weeks before anything must be published.
From Annex 13:
7.4 The Preliminary Report shall be sent by facsimile, e-mail, or airmail within thirty days of the date of the accident unless the Accident/Incident Data Report has been sent by that time. When matters directly affecting safety are involved, it shall be sent as soon as the information is available and by the most suitable and quickest means available.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Misd,
I don't pretend to know the levels of protection that the guys had left, or how relevant it is to this discussion... My point was that they understood the situation that they were in and maintained control, and controlled their end result, hence the frame remained intact..
I don't pretend to know the levels of protection that the guys had left, or how relevant it is to this discussion... My point was that they understood the situation that they were in and maintained control, and controlled their end result, hence the frame remained intact..
repariit;
From photos, the flaps appear to be in the 30 or poss. the 40deg position.
yowieII, from the looks of things this accident appears to be more like the THY B737 stall accident at AMS than the Hudson ditching.
From photos, the flaps appear to be in the 30 or poss. the 40deg position.
yowieII, from the looks of things this accident appears to be more like the THY B737 stall accident at AMS than the Hudson ditching.
Last edited by PJ2; 28th Apr 2013 at 17:29.