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

Xiamen 737 crash lands at Manila?

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

Xiamen 737 crash lands at Manila?

Old 17th Aug 2018, 22:57
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Age: 43
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by flynerd View Post
Looks to me based upon the purported touchdown video and the end result, that they may have omitted to lower the UC.

FN.
Based on images from other fora, they indeed lowered the UC, however the left main and the nosegear appear to have departed the airframe.
Spacepope is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2018, 10:17
  #22 (permalink)  
TWT
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: troposphere
Posts: 725
Runway re-opened 0330 UTC Saturday.

Videos of aircraft recovery in these articles :

WATCH: How stalled Chinese plane was removed from NAIA runway | ABS-CBN News

Stalled Chinese plane out of NAIA runway ABS-CBN News
TWT is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2018, 13:47
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 922
I can't help but wonder how long the runway would have remained closed for had a wide bodied aircraft been involved instead of a B737. The chaos that resulted from this incident had diversions going all over the SE Asia, for a short while even narrow bodies couldn't land because of the tailwind on RWY13 (31 is T/O only). It will take days before schedules can return to normal as aircraft return to base, crewing is sorted out and passengers re-booked.

A capital city airport should be able to cope with an incident such as this without the amount of disruption that occurred over this weekend. Two independent, wide body capable runways should be the minimum for a country's gateway. Given the population of the Philippines and the ever growing volume of air traffic, a new airport must be built urgently.
krismiler is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2018, 15:09
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bishops Stortford
Age: 60
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
I can't help but wonder how long the runway would have remained closed for had a wide bodied aircraft been involved instead of a B737. The chaos that resulted from this incident had diversions going all over the SE Asia, for a short while even narrow bodies couldn't land because of the tailwind on RWY13 (31 is T/O only). It will take days before schedules can return to normal as aircraft return to base, crewing is sorted out and passengers re-booked.

A capital city airport should be able to cope with an incident such as this without the amount of disruption that occurred over this weekend. Two independent, wide body capable runways should be the minimum for a country's gateway. Given the population of the Philippines and the ever growing volume of air traffic, a new airport must be built urgently.
It has been built. It's called Clark.
caiman27 is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2018, 19:15
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 66
Posts: 248
Originally Posted by caiman27 View Post
It has been built. It's called Clark.
110 km in Philippine traffic. Good luck.
Per
Ancient Mariner is online now  
Old 18th Aug 2018, 21:38
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: downunda
Age: 73
Posts: 118
Originally Posted by Spacepope View Post
Based on images from other fora, they indeed lowered the UC, however the left main and the nosegear appear to have departed the airframe.
And I agree, now that I have looked at the other photos. Thanks for heads-up.

FN
flynerd is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2018, 00:08
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 922
Clarke is now single runway and even when there were two they weren't far apart enough for simultaneous operations. Only a couple of aerobridges and a relatively small terminal. It would need to be completely redeveloped, including transport links to be suitable as the new airport.
krismiler is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2018, 01:40
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 486
​​​​Clark has the space to build more runways , Manila does not , Clark can service northern suburbs of Manila and north Luzon . Fast rail link from Manila . It has to be looked at .
Toruk Macto is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 00:39
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Asia
Age: 58
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by Toruk Macto View Post
​​​​Clark has the space to build more runways , Manila does not , Clark can service northern suburbs of Manila and north Luzon . Fast rail link from Manila . It has to be looked at .
NAIA airport in Manila is constrained even normally with most arrivals having to hold for long periods.

A rail link is being built from Manila to Clark now, due for completion in 2021, but it's not going to be high speed and will have 17 stations. Travel time will be 55 minutes. But it would still be a much longer trip for most locations in Metro Manila. You would need to allow 4-6 hours prior to departure unless you lived near one of the new stations. There is talk of building another airport closer to Manila in Bulacan.

Transport infrastructure in Metro Manila is abysmal.
bud leon is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 03:35
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 528
Originally Posted by TWT View Post
Runway re-opened 0330 UTC Saturday.

Videos of aircraft recovery in these articles :

WATCH: How stalled Chinese plane was removed from NAIA runway ABS-CBN News

Stalled Chinese plane out of NAIA runway ABS-CBN News
Wonder how much damage the crane did. Are they planning on reusing this plane again?
armchairpilot94116 is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 06:27
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,059
Originally Posted by armchairpilot94116 View Post
Wonder how much damage the crane did. Are they planning on reusing this plane again?
I doubt the crane added significantly, if at all, to the damage sustained when the engine and gear were ripped off ...
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 09:03
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: In a hold
Posts: 160
RPLL 161500Z 25017KT 2500 +TSRA FEW020CB BKN022 OVC080 24/24 Q1007 TEMPO 5000 TSRA 2974 CB OHD


i think more to the point: +TSRA Tempo 5000 TSRA CB OVD - The approach should never have been made in the first place.
Fly26 is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 12:52
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here and there
Posts: 374
The approach should never have been made in the first place
Reading all these posts we still have no idea what happened apart from seeing a 737 sans an engine and off the runway.
Judd is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 18:28
  #34 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 70
Posts: 2,854
Originally Posted by Judd View Post
Reading all these posts we still have no idea what happened apart from seeing a 737 sans an engine and off the runway.
Absolutely Correct . in fact this thread reminds me of the AF A340 in Toronto ,a few moons ago . Lots of speculations (and blames) initially , but in the end one of the main reasons was the wind as reported and given by ATC was definitively not what was in reality. in the touch down area.
One big lesson of you land with a CB in the vicinity is that the wind can be totally different of what you will have in reality , remember ATC can only give you what its anemometer says, and this will be depending where the sensor is ( or are ) located.
Not saying it is what happened here, but a possibility.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 23:36
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Denver
Age: 52
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by Airbubba View Post
I disagree. Looks like they went around for weather on the first try and did not report any problem to the tower on the second attempt.

Check out the 1530Z tower tape at liveatc.net for both approaches:

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/rp...2018-1530Z.mp3

RPLL 161500Z 25017KT 2500 +TSRA FEW020CB BKN022 OVC080 24/24 Q1007 TEMPO 5000 TSRA 2974 CB OHD
first approach at 10:00, second at 25:00
hans brinker is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2018, 23:50
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Asia
Age: 58
Posts: 129
Just so people are clear, this was not an overrun, this seems to be an excursion to the left I would say somewhere about 900 metres from the touchdown zone. The plane should have been in full view of the control tower in normal weather where it came to stop.

Last edited by bud leon; 21st Aug 2018 at 00:03.
bud leon is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2018, 21:06
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Asia
Age: 58
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by Joe le Taxi View Post
ATC watcher - any flight crew worth their salt, would be well aware what wind component they are landing in, even when given a misleading wind report - not least from the wind arrow on the ND. Most over runs result from touching down beyond the touch down zone, including Montreal. It's pretty simple - if you've already wasted most of the runway and you're still airborne, go around - no good blaming ATC.

Excursions to the side - well that's often from trying to take the runway exit too fast for the conditions, but there are various other causes.
There is no exit on the side this plane left the 3,737 metres long runway.
bud leon is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2018, 10:18
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 56
Posts: 20
The 737-800 is a great aircraft, BUT as with any aircraft it has it limits.
For starters it is fast on approach
There is a tendency to use F30 instead of F40 due to tight speedband to max flaps speed on F40 with high flyspeed if using up to ref40 plus 15kts.
If this was a F30 configuration and plus 15( to avoid flaploadrelief on a F40 landing) we are looking at 150 to 160 kts over the threshold.
If You as much as think of flaring , You float, and viola: The Old Girl takes You for a ride.
She is unforgiving if You dont force her.

I have no idea what ACTUALY happened , but it will continue until such time as people know her limits. Know how to stay inside them. And respect her.
Go around is always an option!
As for reuse , Yeah. SodaPopp cans.

Lastely
Can any expert ( tdracer maybe) enlighten us on the recommended recovery lifting "procedure" with a crane and the likely-hood of further damage during this process.

Regards
Cpt B
BluSdUp is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2018, 11:21
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Asia
Age: 58
Posts: 129
Look at the video posted earlier in this thread. If it is of the aircraft landing, and it is likely so, the plane landed well to the left of the runway centreline and continued left onto the grass to the left of the runway.

A rough calculation tells me the aircraft would have travelled about 500 to 700 metres before it left the runway, and if it landed in the touchdown zone, that would put it coming to a stop somewhere around 900 metes from touchdown which is where I think it ended up.

Last edited by bud leon; 22nd Aug 2018 at 11:32.
bud leon is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2018, 11:31
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 400
Bud,

could it not have spun round as its final resting place had tarmac to the left not the right? - could explain as left engine and main gear removed as dug in and spun.
paulc is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

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