MA60 overshot at Fuzhou Airport

[shimin]

In May 10, 2015, one MA60 of Joy Air, B-3476, flight JR1529 of Yiwu to Fuzhou, China,overshot at 11:57 local time at Fuzhou airport. All passengers and crew evacuated sucessfully. The flight included 45 passengers and 7 crew members. 5 passengers were slightly injured and sent to local emergency center. Joy Air launched the emergcy procedures, and made public announcement with apologizes. Fuzhou airport is now closing and more than 20 flights are delaying. The authorities said it would be re-opened before 17:30.

[de facto]

Enjoy the extra sim checks guys!

[Togue]

Seven injured, including pregnant woman, after China's Joy Air plane skids off runway | South China Morning Post

[jaytee54]

Interesting (but not relevant ) that 'shimin' writes in good English, rather than American (overshoot, UK English).
Glad that nobody was badly injured.

I am surprised that the wing failed in torsion before the U/C collapsed.

[Dan Winterland]

Seems to be a common theme with the MA60. There's a pic of one in Indonesia with the same issue. I would post a link, but I'm in China, and strangely, the link to the picture has been blocked.

The Kiwi government advised their nationals not to travel on them as they haven't been certified to international standards.

[TWT]

Report from the NTSC on the Merpati MA60 hard landing at Kupang,Indonesia on June 10,2013.Pictures start on page 10.

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/2994.pdf

[training wheels]

This appears to be more of a hydraulic (nosewheel steering and/or braking) issue than a hard landing. The Kupang incident was the result of the FO under line training, inadvertently putting the left power lever in to beta range when at 100 ft above the runway. The thing just dropped like a brick.

Joy Air is partly owned by AVIC, the manufacturer of the MA60. So even an airline with that level of technical support can have technical issues with this aircraft type.

[27/09]

The Kiwi government advised their nationals not to travel on them as they haven't been certified to international standards.

A bit of politics involved I suspect, being more to do with the means by which that aircraft was introduced into a certain operation rather than the aircraft itself. The lack of international certification was a handy red herring.

[Yeager]

7 crew on this aircraft... hmm.. wonder what sort of composition that would be.. 3 pilots.. 1 flight engineer.. 3 cabin crew.. or 2 pilots and 5 cabin crew.. Different ways of keeping up the numbers!

[shimin]

Hi friends here.
According to the local news, yesterday CAAC made a special tele-meeting to warn the situation nationwide after the accident. The meeting made the briefing of the investigation on Joy Air flight JR1529. The reason for the accident is the series of unofficial operations made by the flight crew. The captain as instructor ignored the SOP and the copilot failed to stand the basic operation standard.
The descent rate was up to 1500 ft/m with landing load of 6g, the briefing said.
The cause of the incident mentioned in the briefing as follows:

• Below flight idle when on 38ft, following the ground idle above 28ft thus produced the negative lift which was inhibited by the Flight Crew Operating Manual.
• The captain as instructor ignored the warning and the copilot did meet the basic standard (I don’t understand what that mean).

CAAC also pointed out some relative issues in Joy Air managements as the following facts were observed:
Firstly the QAR decoding showed the fleet repeated such an unofficial operation, unlock of ground idle throttle in air.
Secondly the pilots in the fleet made many landings despite such a warning.
Thirdly, some items of FCOM conflicted with ones of regulations, which need to be solved.
I am unfamiliar totally with the operation of propeller-driven aircraft. Forgive me if some terms and/or concepts are wrong.

[training wheels]

Originally Posted by shimin

Firstly the QAR decoding showed the fleet repeated such an unofficial operation, unlock of ground idle throttle in air.

It sounds like the Power Level (PL) Lock was opened, allowing the power levers to go to ground idle whilst in the air. The FCOM calls for the PL lock to be closed when the aircraft is in the air thereby preventing the power levers to be retarded past flight idle in to ground idle and beta range. With PL lock closed, the power levers will not go in to beta range until the wheels are on the ground through a 'weight on wheels' (WOW) mechanism.

So, it sounds like a repeat of the MA60 incident in Kupang then, with the power levers going in to ground idle and possibly even in beta range due to the PL lock being opened. Crews sometimes deliberately set the PL lock to open because the WOW mechanism sometimes does not function correctly, and prevents the power levers to be retarded to beta for reverse thrust after landing.

[shimin]

Thanks training wheels who made the precise explanation for the accident. Some more details from the official briefing. The copilot is the flying pilot. The action of flight crew during the post-accident was praised although they did wrong inflight. Within 13 second the captain issued the first order to evacuate which was recorded clearly in the CVR, but cabin crew failed to get the order due to "the reason of equipment” (I don’t know what that mean). In 51st second the captain made the order again then the cabin crew guided all the passengers to exit the aircraft. Meanwhile the flight crew communicated with control tower. Within 3 minutes, first fire engine arrived in the site, following the first ambulance team within 5 minutes. Totally 8 emergency vehicles with team of 59 saved all life onboard. The captain was the last man to leave the aircraft. He made the double check to ensure that no one else was onboard.

[Dan Winterland]

I recall the Indonesian accident was similar. The flight fine pitch lock was disengaged in flight and ground idle pulled before touchdown. The aircraft stopped in the air before landing and ....... ouch!