Russian B737 Crash at Kazan.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX USA
Age: 62
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why the huge fireball anyway? How much contingency fuel does this flight normally carry? Just wondering.
The descent looks near vertical from the camera perspective. I am thinking though it was traveling away from the camera also, so not quite vertical. I agree with the commenter who claimed extreme banking (near 90 deg).
The descent looks near vertical from the camera perspective. I am thinking though it was traveling away from the camera also, so not quite vertical. I agree with the commenter who claimed extreme banking (near 90 deg).
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 82
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion it could be anywhere 80-120 kts since it is so hard to estimate the exact length of the aircraft from this video. Where the tail is it is obvious but the rest is hard to judge.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The explosion could easily account for the fragmentation, the speed is probably secondary here.
Plenty of fuel left (say 1- 4 t.) to cause such a fireball.
Why the huge fireball anyway?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 82
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The explosion could easily account for the fragmentation, the speed is probably secondary here.
Explosions cause shock waves. Do you see evidence of that?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see (even larger) pieces of aircraft flying apart, that's plenty. It is a rather poor video anyway I doubt you would see shock waves. But what's even more important your 200-250 kts can't be supported by the geometrical velocities observed in the video, not even assuming worst case for errors (post #86 above).
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why the huge fireball anyway? How much contingency fuel does this flight normally carry? Just wondering.
So, they fuel up tanks in order to carry fuel back to kazan instead of simply fueling AC at Kazan. That might explain long post crash fire..
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Strategic hamlet
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway does anyone still remember China Airlines CI676 at Taipei - the A300 botched go-around accident?
Online Report
flight path diagram
Online Report
flight path diagram
Russian aviation is still the wild west. Too many airlines flying junk and operating on a shoe string, flown by cowboys in total disregard of good operating practices or even the most basic common sense.
How many accidents will it take before the root causes are addressed ?
How many accidents will it take before the root causes are addressed ?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Elsewhere
Age: 56
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is another possibility other than mechanical failure or incorrect use of the slats/flaps etc that can happen to a perfectly serviceable aircraft:
The video looks from my previous experience as though the crew may have succumbed to somatographic illusion during a severe go around manoeuvre. The angle and speed of the final seconds would result from this effect.
A similar event happened in this report (link). Look at page 43 of the report (under somatographic illusion) and the FDR data. The false climb sensation experienced by the pilot resulted in a steep dive that was only identified upon breaking out of the cloud into visual conditions. This was too late to recover the dive.
Again, I understand that this is only speculation. I am only trying to include that there is a possibility that is not caused by a wrongly configured aircraft, broken component or airport/approach aid failures. These illusions can be overpowering in their effect on the pilot, and a recognition of them often only occurs when VMC is re-established, which in this scenario would have been unlikely. The basic principle of 'trust your instruments' can be easily disregarded during high stress situations.
The video looks from my previous experience as though the crew may have succumbed to somatographic illusion during a severe go around manoeuvre. The angle and speed of the final seconds would result from this effect.
A similar event happened in this report (link). Look at page 43 of the report (under somatographic illusion) and the FDR data. The false climb sensation experienced by the pilot resulted in a steep dive that was only identified upon breaking out of the cloud into visual conditions. This was too late to recover the dive.
Again, I understand that this is only speculation. I am only trying to include that there is a possibility that is not caused by a wrongly configured aircraft, broken component or airport/approach aid failures. These illusions can be overpowering in their effect on the pilot, and a recognition of them often only occurs when VMC is re-established, which in this scenario would have been unlikely. The basic principle of 'trust your instruments' can be easily disregarded during high stress situations.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: chicago
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw another video today on NBC tv...wow...maybe the stall scenario is right...
I do remember that cargo 747 that stalled, it had some rotation to it...but this russian plane is NOSE DOWN like a lawn dart.
I do remember that cargo 747 that stalled, it had some rotation to it...but this russian plane is NOSE DOWN like a lawn dart.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Elsewhere
Age: 56
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flash Airlines flight 604 in 2004 is another good example.
But what's even more important your 200-250 kts can't be supported by the geometrical velocities observed in the video,
As noted, the video quality is poor enough that it's very difficult to be sure, but I certainly wouldn't put money on that video being shown at the actual event speed.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Attitude at time of crash consistent with stall => dive, as in the Bagram accident and the Airbus accidents at Nagoya and Taipei.
Won't be surprised if the sequence turns out to be something like this (but with progression to a full stall and then dive):
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...9%20G-THOF.pdf
Won't be surprised if the sequence turns out to be something like this (but with progression to a full stall and then dive):
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...9%20G-THOF.pdf
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Moscow
Age: 52
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see various artifacts in the video that suggest it's not - that it's been slowed down.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only speculation, but this seems likely:
- High Fuel Load as Tanking Fuel into airport causing more then normal aft CG
- Pressure to land aircraft (fuel, weather, approach type, ...)
- Go-Around initiated
- Due location of engines (737 design) a high pitch is normal
- Possibly due to the fair amount of additional fuel carried and moving to an aft CG (fluid dynamics) an usually high pitch up occurs
- Possibly using Full TOGA instead of reduced TOGA causing additional nose up tendency
- Very high nose up instance established
- Rapid Speed Decay occurs in this attitude
- Large Forward Control column pressure to overcome high nose attitude
- Speed Decay results in stall with associated wing over
- Nose drops vertical, earlier nose down input would aggravate recovery efforts for crew
- No recovery height available for regaining speed and control
- Impact on ground vertical position unavoidable
- High Fuel Load as Tanking Fuel into airport causing more then normal aft CG
- Pressure to land aircraft (fuel, weather, approach type, ...)
- Go-Around initiated
- Due location of engines (737 design) a high pitch is normal
- Possibly due to the fair amount of additional fuel carried and moving to an aft CG (fluid dynamics) an usually high pitch up occurs
- Possibly using Full TOGA instead of reduced TOGA causing additional nose up tendency
- Very high nose up instance established
- Rapid Speed Decay occurs in this attitude
- Large Forward Control column pressure to overcome high nose attitude
- Speed Decay results in stall with associated wing over
- Nose drops vertical, earlier nose down input would aggravate recovery efforts for crew
- No recovery height available for regaining speed and control
- Impact on ground vertical position unavoidable
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
words of a person participating in the investigation:
...actual GA was initiated at outer marker. They climbed up to 900m and then the airspeed started to decrease. Pitch started to change to negative and they started to fall being at 800m from the threshold of 11 apprx with angle of 75-80 degrees.
AC came into contact with the ground at 500m from inner marker of 11.
location is on the map
...actual GA was initiated at outer marker. They climbed up to 900m and then the airspeed started to decrease. Pitch started to change to negative and they started to fall being at 800m from the threshold of 11 apprx with angle of 75-80 degrees.
AC came into contact with the ground at 500m from inner marker of 11.
location is on the map
Last edited by Sunamer; 19th Nov 2013 at 10:11.