Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Pakistani PK-661 reported missing near Havelian (07 Dec 2016)

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Pakistani PK-661 reported missing near Havelian (07 Dec 2016)

Old 7th Dec 2016, 11:12
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 2
Pakistani PK-661 reported missing near Havelian (07 Dec 2016)

BBC reporting PIA aircraft missing.
SimCX is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 11:15
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,022
PK-661, 47 pax onboard according to The Dawn (local newspaper). 37 according to FrancePress. Eyewitness reports plane was seen down near Havelian.
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 11:21
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 586
Chitral (CJL) - Islamabad (ISB) PK 661, ATR 42
Less Hair is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 11:49
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Air OPS apply
Posts: 26


For factual updates, I recommend following AvHerald.

AP-BHO, ATR 42-500, MSN 663.
Delivered in 2007, PW127E engines.
No ADS data available for the area.

The aircraft was already involved in two occurrences:
• in 2009, veered off the runway on landing
• in 2014, left engine suffered a compressor failure in flight


Last edited by Wrist Watch; 7th Dec 2016 at 12:22.
Wrist Watch is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 11:50
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: N24 E56
Posts: 1
“We regret to inform that PIA’s ATR-42 aircraft operating as PK-661, carrying around 40 persons lost its contact with control tower on its way from Chitral to Islamabad a short while ago. All resources are being mobilised to locate the aircraft. Media will be kept informed as situation develops,” PIA spokesperson Danial Gilani said in a statement.
inducedrag is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 11:51
  #6 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 58
Posts: 4,204
c52 makes a valid observation. I have edited the title of the thread. Posters are asked to make thread titles more informative, so they can be easily distinguished in later times.
Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 12:52
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wales
Posts: 1
Pilots were brothers Capt Saleh Janjua & Ahmed Janjua.
V0cnorth is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 13:53
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 54
Posts: 556
The aircraft was already involved in two occurrences:
• in 2009, veered off the runway on landing
• in 2014, left engine suffered a compressor failure in flight
According to AVHerald, crew reported problem with LEFT engine shortly before crash... coincidence with the previous left engine issue from 2014?
GarageYears is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 14:52
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 6
"Dozens of bodies pulled from wreckage after Pakistan plane crash" AFP
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/806516637247664129
kilfeder is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 16:36
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austria
Posts: 674
Here´s something for the benefit of the press:

If an aircraft has had a previous incident, this is by no means an indication of a possible cause for a crash many years later. Most aircraft have one or another system failure or whatever in their service life and nearly none of them are newsworthy in any way. After an engine has flamed out and was found to have compressor damage, it will be replaced (look up modular construction if You like - a significant feature of aircraft) and, seeing that that incident was already in 2014, almost certainly was no longer on the wing on this flight. So this is a red herring.

Also there apparently was a runway excursion in 2009 in Lahore. This is already 6 to 7 years ago, and the aircraft has obviously been repaired and flown several times afterwards, as the residual value of the aircraft was such that a repair was worth the while as opposed to disassembling it and selling the parts as spare (both normal procedures). Also this is likely a red herring.

And: Also an ATR belongs to the aircraft category that is required to be flyable with only one engine running. Losing an engine on a turboprop airliner should by no means be a problem if procedures are followed.

There is a reason why aircraft accidents are formally investigated: They are extremely complex and have multiple layers of direct and indirect reasons, contribuents and other issues that might have played a role in them. Quick answers, finger pointing and dishing out blame are all most likely to lead up completely wrong alleys at this stage.
Tu.114 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 17:21
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,684
Originally Posted by Tu.114 View Post
If an aircraft has had a previous incident, this is by no means an indication of a possible cause for a crash many years later.
However many, if not most, accident investigations will include a search for and analysis of precursor incidents that have similar characteristics but did not, on those occasions, result in an accident.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 17:33
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: A place in the sun
Age: 78
Posts: 748
TU.144 is right. Nevertheless the investigation has to include the past history of the aircraft, witness the tail-scrape on the JAL 123 Boeing 747 in 1985.
Bergerie1 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 17:52
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: N24 E56
Posts: 1
Pilots were not at all related as mentioned before
inducedrag is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 18:07
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austria
Posts: 674
DaveReid and PH-SBE, you are right. There were accidents that were traced back to faulty repairs of previous substantial damage, and I must admit to simplification in my previous post.

However allow me to maintain that an engine failure and also a runway excursion that may have happened earlier in the accident aircrafts history is not entirely the same as a tailstrike that left the rear pressure dome and other vital parts damaged as happened to the two 747.

The point I was trying to make is that technical incidents are a part of day-to-day aircraft operation and do not necessarily leave an aircraft jinxed...
Tu.114 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2016, 18:44
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: A place in the sun
Age: 78
Posts: 748
Tu.114, Agreed!
Bergerie1 is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2016, 06:49
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Modiin
Age: 32
Posts: 1
Hello.
I looked at the isobar and I see a very good sigmet Last 12 hours.
If the aircraft was in icing on this engine for the prohibit all to fly in single-engine due to boost flow in the ice condition level at level 2 ... Boots condiition on PW127E there are two, but they are separated by each engine difference PW127F / M has two boost two independent on my own.

Cant say much about PW127E engine because each company has its own modification, especially purchased. But I know from experience that most of these cases are due to not proper use of the inertial separator or part span stall.
Victor_IL is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2016, 07:07
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
However many, if not most, accident investigations will include a search for and analysis of precursor incidents that have similar characteristics but mdid not, on those occasions, result in an accident.
Sure they will obviously be looked at along with much else but unlike some accidents such as the Medellin one recently their is no obvious cause which justifies speculation. There are 1001 potential causes of an engine fire from bird strike through compressor failure, fuel leak etc etc. Assuming the engine fire was causal not consequential. Hopefully enough will remain to allow the cause to be accurately determined.
birmingham is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2016, 07:16
  #18 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,013
?Faulty engine? kills 48 in Pakistan plane crash | World | The Times & The Sunday Times

An aircraft with a faulty engine crashed into mountains in Pakistan yesterday killing all 48 passengers and crew and prompting claims that engineers had not cleared it for take-off.

Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) flight PK-661 took off at 3.30pm from the northern resort town of Chitral in the foothills of the Hindu Kush. It was making its approach to Islamabad, 250 miles to the south, about an hour later, when it lost contact with ground control and disappeared from radar. It crashed about 25 miles north of the capital, near Havelian. Witnesses reported that the plane was on fire as it came down and exploded on impact...........

Officials said that the pilots of the French-built twin-turboprop ATR 42 reported problems with the left engine and declared an emergency shortly before the flight disappeared. The aircraft had suffered an in-flight failure of the same engine two years ago.

Sources at Pakistan’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) said that engineers had not cleared the plane to fly. Muhammad Irfan Elahi, CAA chairman, confirmed that one engine was known to be out of order. “I cannot reveal more information right now,” he said. “First priority is the rescue operation.”

Shahid Lateef, a retired air-marshal, said that allowing the plane to fly without clearance from engineers was criminal. “I am unable to understand how come this plane was allowed to fly in the first place,” he said. “This is a serious violation and both PIA and CAA officials will have to come up with answers.”......
ORAC is online now  
Old 8th Dec 2016, 08:16
  #19 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,013
Council Van,
I will be interested to see how long the British media remain interested in this accident as the aircraft was only carrying normal passengers and not professional footballer's.
".....Junaid Jamshed, 52, a former rock star turned Islamic preacher and fashion designer, was said to have been on board the flight, along with his family. His band Vital Signs had a hit in 1987 with Dil Dil Pakistan, which has been called the “unofficial national anthem”.........
ORAC is online now  
Old 8th Dec 2016, 08:59
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,684
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Sources at Pakistan’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) said that engineers had not cleared the plane to fly. Muhammad Irfan Elahi, CAA chairman, confirmed that one engine was known to be out of order.
That sounds like b*ll*cks.

The statement issued was regarding an engine failure after takeoff, which is a world apart from saying that it departed with a known snag or without being signed off by maintenance.

Shahid Lateef, a retired air-marshal, said that allowing the plane to fly without clearance from engineers was criminal. “I am unable to understand how come this plane was allowed to fly in the first place,” he said. “This is a serious violation and both PIA and CAA officials will have to come up with answers.”......
Sounds like your typically uninformed rent-a-quote from someone who thinks his years of experience obviate the need to check facts before opening mouth.
DaveReidUK is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.