B-738 Crash in Russia Rostov-on-Don
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Age: 64
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, the NG flies quite nicely if you go around. It produces thrust to give a climb rate of 1000-2000 ft/m unless you press TOGA a second time. It climbed 2500 ft, not to 2500 ft if I understand it correctly.
The NG flies well with ice on it. It flies well with a lot of ice on it. They would have been pretty much ice free when they went around, and I don't see how they could have accumulated enough ice to fall out of the sky in a 2500 ft climb.
The NG flies well with ice on it. It flies well with a lot of ice on it. They would have been pretty much ice free when they went around, and I don't see how they could have accumulated enough ice to fall out of the sky in a 2500 ft climb.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: est
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"At 15.22:51 (6 seconds after initiating Go Around) engine power reached 83% N1. By 15.23:11 pitch angle increased to more than 25 degrees, and the first "push" movement of the yoke was registered. At that moment airplane was at 2000', climbing 4000'/min. During next 5 seconds pitch decreased from 25 degrees to nearly normal horizontal flight condition and continued to decrease. Plane stopped climbing at 2300'. G-force = 0,5g. At 15.23:16 the second "push" movement of the yoke was registered. As a result of it, pitch changed to -20 degrees, speed to -5000'/min, G-force =0g, speed 140 kt, increasing 10kt/s. At 15.23:21 the third "push" movement of the yoke was registered. As a result of it, G-force changed to -0.9g, pitch angle to -60 degrees. At 15.23:28 airplane collided with the ground close to runway with an airspeed 245kt and pitch angle -75 degrees."
17.11.2013, Tatarstan 363, Kazan.
17.11.2013, Tatarstan 363, Kazan.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
821 - whilst there were extenuating circumstances (drunk CP and asymmetric thrust levers) is was essentially a loss of spatial disorientation following a discontinued approach (an EXTREMELY messy one at that) followed by a high nose attitude (soon after applying 'almost' take off power) which went unchanged, followed by a steep turn of up to 76 degrees before performing almost a complete 'barrel roll' then impacting the ground at very high speed with the wreckage highly fragmented spread over a small area.
That's how I can say there is a possible relation. In this instance I'd bet my house on there being no alcohol in the FZ crew's system.
ManaAdaSystems - the aircraft was likely very light, it would have climbed quickly.
Anyone know if it's FZ policy to 'double click' during a G/A balked landing?
Syntax Error I totally agree. However UAE does have some high standards. In fact the world does, apart from South East Asia. I'd have no problem boarding an FZ flight, any European, North American LCC and in Australia I'd even board a Tiger Airways flight. These days on a whole LCCs are extremely safe.
That's how I can say there is a possible relation. In this instance I'd bet my house on there being no alcohol in the FZ crew's system.
ManaAdaSystems - the aircraft was likely very light, it would have climbed quickly.
Anyone know if it's FZ policy to 'double click' during a G/A balked landing?
Syntax Error I totally agree. However UAE does have some high standards. In fact the world does, apart from South East Asia. I'd have no problem boarding an FZ flight, any European, North American LCC and in Australia I'd even board a Tiger Airways flight. These days on a whole LCCs are extremely safe.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ManaAdaSystems - the aircraft was likely very light, it would have climbed quickly. Anyone know if it's Faz policy to 'double click' during a G/A balked landing?
It climbs with a rate of 1000-2000 ft/m no matter how light it is.
That is how the aircraft works.
Now, if you hit TOGA a second time you will go up like a bat out of hell if you are light. 5000 ft/m+
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why am I saying this? How do you know they didn't hit TOGA a second time? Would make sense to me. If there are CBs about or WSHR it would make perfect sense. Notwithstanding the fact that pressing it once will give you a margin above buffet speed to account for any turbulence or shear surely it would make sense to use all power available. A windshear go around is an escape manoeuvre after all. I'd rather escape with a big margin than just what is required for certification. Wouldn't you?
Only half a speed-brake
The x-axis is just timestamp, not lateral distance. Data taken from FR24. The corrections are mine, back of the fag-packet. The wind would indeed increase with height, but also veer keeping HWC similar - that's the assumption.
Logansi's raw data is much finer resolution, but I do not know how to obtain those to my spreadsheet.
Logansi's raw data is much finer resolution, but I do not know how to obtain those to my spreadsheet.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Age: 41
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously the reasons are very different, however, I am posting this video of the 747 crashing after a stall in Afghanistan. Would you agree about the similarities in the descent angle between this video and what is apparent from the CCTV footage shown from this accident in Russia?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGnSYiXv8hE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGnSYiXv8hE
Last edited by JumpJumpJump; 19th Mar 2016 at 18:15. Reason: Removed USAF reference
Only half a speed-brake
Tatarstan airlines flight 363 anyone?
The data on this one show speed to increase during the go-around, crew well organized on the radio. Tatarstan did not touch the controls, approached stall at peak and botched the recovery. To begin with, they got lost over familiar airport.
Personally, I struggle to se any significant similiarities. Do you?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Refer to the following B737-800 botched Go Around in Bournemouth in 2007
GA and then stall?
Not again???
Not again???
Nowadays, we are all encouraged to go around for a wide variety of reasons, as if going around is a risk free procedure that will automatically cure all your troubles.
Yes, I know a GA is a normal manoeuvre, and shouldn't cause a regular crew any difficulty, but here's another accident on the go around.
Yes, I know a GA is a normal manoeuvre, and shouldn't cause a regular crew any difficulty, but here's another accident on the go around.
On the widebody Boeings that I've flown you leave the autopilot on but disconnect the autothrottles and manually apply full thrust on a windshear escape maneuver on a coupled approach. Would this be the same on a B-738?
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wilmington
Age: 46
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am posting this video of the USAF 747 crashing after a stall in Afghanistan
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbubba,
my typo IT was a B737-3 in the UK in 2007
and the 737 does not have the same logic as wide body boeing.
The A/P on the 737 will disconnect , once you press the TO/GA buttons
You fly the initial Missed Approach manually, and then re-engage at an appropriate time
my typo IT was a B737-3 in the UK in 2007
and the 737 does not have the same logic as wide body boeing.
The A/P on the 737 will disconnect , once you press the TO/GA buttons
You fly the initial Missed Approach manually, and then re-engage at an appropriate time
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: On a tree
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbubba is very right.. a not close to ground GA can get nasty..and the most probable scenario...+ 6 hours flight in a cockpit designed for 1,5..night, bad weather may be some icing.. and probably already tired and stressed out crew. I wonder why they did to go to their alternate...well I know the answer... Start getting used to this events in low cost non unionized or partially unionized airlines squeezing life out of their crew ..
Only half a speed-brake
BOURNEMOUTH: "During the go-around the aircraft pitched up excessively; flight crew attempts to reduce the aircraft’s pitch were largely ineffective. The aircraft reached a maximum pitch of 44º nose-up and the indicated airspeed reduced to 82 kt."
How is this similar to FZ, who climbed by 2500 feet whilst increasing speed from 150 to 220 kts?
How is this similar to FZ, who climbed by 2500 feet whilst increasing speed from 150 to 220 kts?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The A/P on the 737 will disconnect , once you press the TO/GA buttons
You fly the initial Missed Approach manually, and then re-engage at an appropriate time
You fly the initial Missed Approach manually, and then re-engage at an appropriate time
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A/P on the 737 will disconnect , once you press the TO/GA buttons
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Nice
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
V-bars
The biggest problem for them was a V-bar Flight Director; the rest of their fleet had Cross-bars.
I had a f/o try to turn the aircraft upside down one dark night because of V-bars (only one in the fleet again). We were 4 or 5 seconds from being upside down at 2,000'. And I was heads down with a frequency change.
Left the company and warned the authorities, but nobody seems to care. Tombstone regulation.
P.S. Nothing wrong with V-bars, I think they are brilliant. But you cannot mix and match, just as you cannot have half the fleet with western ADIs and half with Russian.
T
Last edited by tatelyle; 19th Mar 2016 at 17:05.
