B-738 Crash in Russia Rostov-on-Don

[Lost in Saigon]

Originally Posted by Sciolistes

The afore mentioned data shows a steady shallow climb and acceleration consistent with the phase of flight and the previous go around. There is no evidence of anything other than an adequately conducted manoeuvre. If they were in a relatively steady state flight path, which the data shows, and increasing airspeed, which the data shows, and maintaining the track, which the data shows, then they cannot have stalled. The sample rate of the FR24 data would be sufficient to show evidence of a stall, if it were to exist.


Actually they were vectored for an hour and held for an hour. They requested FL80 after a missed approach. The obvious inference is at FL80 they would be in VMC and hence not in icing conditions. Vectoring was at FL80 and holding at FL150. So it would seem they were not in icing conditions for anything other than the approach and missed approach phases. I think the chances of icing being a factor as extremely unlikely.


With a bit of trig, the descent angle was approximately 45 degrees and the avg speed in the descent around about 320kts. That would be consistent with the videos.

So I would say there is no evidence of uncommanded reverser, stall, uncommanded roll, mishandling upto the descent, significant icing nor bad judgement. The current FR24 data indicates only a very sudden pitch down with no other changes in parameters or their trend. What is most likely to be an uncommanded pitch down.

They may have requested FL80 just because it was a smooth altitude.

Do you have any evidence to show there was no icing at FL80 or FL150?

[FullWings]

It’s been a while since I operated the 737 but I remember it coping pretty well with icing conditions - most jets with bleed air wing and engine anti/de-ice do. Only once after extended holding did we add a bit to Vref and it was obvious from the buildup on the wipers, etc. that there was significant icing.

Anyway, if the flight under discussion was seriously iced up, enough to badly affect the aerodynamics, I would have expected the problems to occur as they slowed down on the approach or loaded the wings as they pitched up at the start of the GA. Neither of these happened but there does appear to have been a sudden LoC after accelerating to a speed with a much greater stall margin.

There may have been ice involved with this accident but it seems unlikely to be a direct result of contamination affecting the flying characteristics.

[A0283]

video 4 sec moment flash ?

In the 048 seconds Liveleak video post above - at the 004 seconds time point - there appears to be a very clear and bright flash to the right hand side of what appears to be the fuselage ... with the plane going nose down.

It is not possible to see if we are looking at the top or bottom of the plane. So hard to say if its the right or left engine.

Could that be a fire from either an engine separation or from a damaged wing? Or both in tandem?

You do not see that flash or light in the first seconds of the video.

Would be interesting to have that video enhanced.

[Sciolistes]

Do you have any evidence to show there was no icing at FL80 or FL150?

Your suggestion that the level was smooth is a good one. The METAR showed BKN CB at 3300 and overcast at 10,000. Smooth air would be above the cumulus layer and FL80 would be below the overcast. FL150 would most likely be above a stratified overcast. So I think that it is a reasonable assumption that they were not in icing.

However, the 737 should be able hold in light to moderate icing for two hours without any issues whatsoever.

[Nemrytter]

Do you have any evidence to show there was no icing at FL80 or FL150?

Judging from the closest met sounding to the accident time there almost certainly would've been icing at FL80 and probably also at FL150

[_Phoenix_]

Sciolistes,
I agree with your suppositions, that makes perfect sense based on data available publicly. Early GA suggests that the second landing attempt was "let's give another try". The main plan was to divert. Once GA maneuver looked stabilized, I guess both were programming the FMS for new destination, possibly unaware of A/P not engaged and the g factor shadowed by strong turbulence in clouds. Maybe they never noticed the runway lights coming up very fast.

[Sciolistes]

Judging from the closest met sounding to the accident time there almost certainly would've been icing at FL80 and probably also at FL150

Good info. Do you have a link to that please?

I guess both were programming the FMS for new destination, possibly unaware of A/P not engaged

I agree, their intention must have been to divert after that fateful approach. Good point about the A/P. I can't speak for this crew, but I would have got the A/P in pronto, but the air was very rough (which it can be at ROV) then it is quite likely that A/P engagement would have been later than sooner. I personally have made the cardinal error of pressing the CMD button but failing to check the FMA. The aircraft flew itself, in level flight, with slight turn for 30 seconds before I noticed! It is quite an insidious error to make.

The problem is with this suggestion is the pitch down was far too sudden. The aircraft would have had to have been massively out of trim and the effort require to make the steady climb shown in the data considerable if out of trim to such a degree. Likewise, even with moderate thrust and the aircraft trimmed, the amount of effort required to achieve such a sudden pitch change would, in my opinion, be beyond beyond reason.

If it banked enough to cause such a pitch change then surely it would have deviated a considerable distance from the runway centreline, which it didn't.

[Hotel Tango]

In the 048 seconds Liveleak video post above - at the 004 seconds time point - there appears to be a very clear and bright flash to the right hand side of what appears to be the fuselage ... with the plane going nose down.

It is not possible to see if we are looking at the top or bottom of the plane. So hard to say if its the right or left engine.

Could that be a fire from either an engine separation or from a damaged wing? Or both in tandem?

Not a fire. Not an explosion, but a strobe light as mentioned before.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Where has the idea come from that the aircraft was banked? The 'disappearing into and re-appearing from cloud' video shows a straight-ahead GA, and over half a minute later a dive on a similar or same heading out of the cloudbase to impact.

[portmanteau]

depends on which video you are referring to. the clearest one shows 4 lights forming a square with what appear to be the landing lights at top right and bottom left and the anti-collision lights at the other corners. my interpretation is that the aircraft was banked around 45 deg to the right.

[_Phoenix_]

The problem is with this suggestion is the pitch down was far too sudden.

Yes, the change in pitch was massive as the pitch up moment given by light landing configuration + THR at max. Once this big moment is removed by reducing power and changing to clean configuration, the aircraft will pitch down.

[threemiles]

First and second G/A data

[silvertate]

Graphs

Interesting graphs, Threemiles.

The rate of climb on the second go-around is pretty steady, and consistent with the first. And if one presumes that the throttles were not being retarded for no good reason, it does not exactly look like a stall. More like loss of control for all the other possible reasons - iceing, engine failure, disorientation, flaps - there are many to choose from at present.

[Jwscud]

Now,having flown more than 10000 as PIC in the 737NG,i have yet to fly myself into an actual windshear...not a predictive one,,,an actual
one,(TS induced).
You have flown into 3 already?maybe one should better use of its radar...

It depends where you fly. I only have 2500h on the NG but have experienced 3 windshear goarounds. It depends where you fly - 2 were DUB RWY16 in winter where it is a known issue. In all cases the shear was associated with terrain and wind rather than the classic down draft windshear profile.

[poke53281]

In the 048 seconds Liveleak video post above - at the 004 seconds time point - there appears to be a very clear and bright flash to the right hand side of what appears to be the fuselage ... with the plane going nose down.

It is not possible to see if we are looking at the top or bottom of the plane. So hard to say if its the right or left engine.

Could that be a fire from either an engine separation or from a damaged wing? Or both in tandem?

If you mean the LL video in post #585 its a Strobe and is not the Crash in Rostov-on-Don, its from 2013.

[de facto]

i flew in europe,africa,asia all the way to Korea via china.
I understand the type of windshear you are talking about,obviously i have done a few myself,weather radar picked up WS (PWS),but never had a Windshear windshear windshear gpws call out.
Again,if people cared to read,when you go around from such "light" windshear as in the UK windy conditions,you will be out of it fairly quickly and FD will revert to normal toga mode,ie alt acq.
I am discussing the alt acq during a reactive windshear escape maneuver procedure,not for PWS,short windshear alert.

[Chronus]

Originally Posted by RAT 5

It is most disturbing to hear that even the glamorous gulf airlines are tarred with the fatigue brush. Their external image is for well paid and looked after crews and heavily pampered pax -business class the more so. Is the veil coming off, finally. However, the profits are achieved from the pax, and their perception is still of the flashy upmarket airline. That's what they are paying good for, a good value ticket with all its parameters. It will be difficult, without 'dispatches/panorama' type undercover investigation to reveal the truth. Whinging crews are always whinging crews in the publics' eyes. To them everyone in the working world has a gripe; why not pilots. If you shove safety in their faces, with related facts, you might get them to support you: the XAA's? Ah, they sit on a different fence and might be influenced by deep pockets.

Did the Romans give a toss about those pulling the oars on their galleons.

[silvertate]

Originally Posted by Chronus

Did the Romans give a toss about those pulling the oars on their galleons.

How true. Not sure you will get away with saying that, but how true.
The term you are looking for is dhimmi.

And P.S. to de facto - the WS I experienced were mainly in the sim. Only had two outside, and they were both quite noticeable without the warning. And one was at higher level, about 2,500 ft.

[Old Boeing Driver]

45 Seconds

On the very good graph posted by threemiles, it looks like something catastrophic happened about 45 seconds after they started the GA

I'm using the starting point of 2470 seconds to 2515 where the break starts.

After the 2515 mark, it only takes them about 10 seconds to go from 3,500 feet to the ground.

Is there an airspeed plot for the 2515 mark?

Regards,

OBD

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Old Boeing Driver

Is there an airspeed plot for the 2515 mark?

Airspeed isn't one of the parameters captured by FR24 in this instance.

As a proxy, the groundspeed at impact-10s (the point at which the aircraft stops climbing) is around 185kts.