Air Niugini Aircraft crash, Truk Lagoon
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the reasons so many passengers might have survived before the airline sank into 100 feet of water is the quick work of Navy sailors.
Members of Underwater Construction Team 2 were conducting operations near the lagoon and sailors immediately began shuttling passengers and crew to shore using their inflatable boat, according to the 30th Naval Construction Regiment.
The crew’s chief hospital corpsman rendered medical aid to at least one passenger who sustained minor injuries, Navy officials added.
UCT 2 is working to revamp Chuuk’s wharves and restore the coral reefs that have been damaged by boat anchors.
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...e=facebook.com
Members of Underwater Construction Team 2 were conducting operations near the lagoon and sailors immediately began shuttling passengers and crew to shore using their inflatable boat, according to the 30th Naval Construction Regiment.
The crew’s chief hospital corpsman rendered medical aid to at least one passenger who sustained minor injuries, Navy officials added.
UCT 2 is working to revamp Chuuk’s wharves and restore the coral reefs that have been damaged by boat anchors.
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...e=facebook.com
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Guam
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It’s common to bust published minimums going into those islands. You simply build your own VNAV/LNAV approach and fly Pacific IFR (I Follow Reef). Perhaps this crew wasn’t as familiar with Pacific IFR procedures.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Guam
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having flown for many years in the Pacific, the reality is that sometimes the lines between IFR and VFR gets blurred...it shouldn't,..but it does....it's how you get the job done. 99.9% of the time it's fine because you use local knowledge and experience to achieve the result. Not ideal but it's the reality. If you've flown in the Pacific or Africa, you'll know what I mean. …...from the photo in the (2) above post, look how low the cloud base is.... suspect these guys were trying to get under the base when they hit the water ?
I'm not so sure about that...the operator gets no choice where the FDR/CVR from their bent aircraft gets sent. Quite possibly it will go to the NTSB in the US.
Maybe so. However. If they descended below the MDA without having the required visual reference the crew is going to get crucified for this one. And if they intentionally descended below the MDA doing a plan of their own design they are going to get crucified twice. "Trying too hard" for the company to get the job done is going to be a career ending effort.
I've flown as a commercial air passenger in PNG for many years. I don't recall any instances of PX pilots inventing their own thing, and I never felt uncomfortable flying with them. However, Airlink and APNG, time and time again I remember transitioning through the bottom of the gloop into the tops of the coconut palms when I knew full-well the MDA was much higher than tree top level. I complained about it. Nothing was ever done about it. Then Kokoda happened. Problem of their own making.
It’s common to bust published minimums going into those islands. You simply build your own VNAV/LNAV approach and fly Pacific IFR (I Follow Reef). Perhaps this crew wasn’t as familiar with Pacific IFR procedures.
What is commonly misunderstood about Chuuk (and several other Pacific destinations) is that it is a cloud break procedure; although a 3 degree profile is published, it takes you to the MDA at the MAP. From this point you either need to fly level (if visual) to acquire the PAPI or follow the missed approach procedure (if not visual). Simply continuing to descend on the same profile (even if visual) is not an option.
I don't have the IT skills to post the GPS or NDB approaches to 04 here, but I'm sure someone does.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: australia
Age: 81
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Niugini crews are very professional and very familiar with Pacific weather, and they don't "build" their own procedures. 45 years of safe operations in a very demanding environment is testament to that.
What is commonly misunderstood about Chuuk (and several other Pacific destinations) is that it is a cloud break procedure; although a 3 degree profile is published, it takes you to the MDA at the MAP. From this point you either need to fly level (if visual) to acquire the PAPI or follow the missed approach procedure (if not visual). Simply continuing to descend on the same profile (even if visual) is not an option.
I don't have the IT skills to post the GPS or NDB approaches to 04 here, but I'm sure someone does.
What is commonly misunderstood about Chuuk (and several other Pacific destinations) is that it is a cloud break procedure; although a 3 degree profile is published, it takes you to the MDA at the MAP. From this point you either need to fly level (if visual) to acquire the PAPI or follow the missed approach procedure (if not visual). Simply continuing to descend on the same profile (even if visual) is not an option.
I don't have the IT skills to post the GPS or NDB approaches to 04 here, but I'm sure someone does.
it is a cloud break procedure; although a 3 degree profile is published, it takes you to the MDA at the MAP. From this point you either need to fly level (if visual) to acquire the PAPI or follow the missed approach procedure (if not visual). Simply continuing to descend on the same profile (even if visual) is not an option.
Touch wood.
Well, it's not clear to me...if you stick to the rules and follow the PROC as it's published you don't end up flying a perfectly good aircraft into the sea....assuming this was a CFIT.
I was attempting some artful sarcasm, mixed with irony. Finished with a hint of ‘I hope I don’t do that’. But; you’re correct of course. Normally this should not end in the water.
I was curious about the “cloud break procedure”. Which sounds like (If I may be frank) bull****e, masked as technique.
Air Niugini said in a release that as of Saturday afternoon, it was unable to account for a male passenger. The airline said it was working with local authorities, hospitals and investigators to try to find the man.
We are presently working with the embassy and the passenger’s travel facilitator to contact his family, as well continuing to work with on ground responders to locate this man. Locating him, as well as providing ongoing support to the other passengers, crew and families is and remains our primary concern. We will provide updates as they are available.
The airline did not immediately respond to requests for more details about the passenger, such as his age or nationality.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further confirmation here, were any still required, that the aircraft ended up off the SW end of the runway. It quotes an employee who watched the aircraft sinking from the rooftop of the High Tide Hotel, which is just off the LH edge of fdr's photo (south of the red-roofed building):
As to how the aircraft ended up there, presumably once it's hauled out of the lagoon we'll be able to see if it has reversers deployed, which would support the overrun theory.
As to how the aircraft ended up there, presumably once it's hauled out of the lagoon we'll be able to see if it has reversers deployed, which would support the overrun theory.
Thrust reverse are never used to compute landing distance as they may not deploy.
Chukk is a difficult airport.
Straight in landing but winds at the end.
Touch down long and no help stopping before the end.
Ask many airlines how many tires they have to change there due to thermals.
United seems to do well, Asia Pacific does not, many tire changes there.
They changed the regs FAA before claimed grooved runway was considered dry
Thank God FAA stepped in and said its wet even if grooved.
It was a accident just waiting on a time to happen.
Flew in there many times .
...but it was an undershoot, so none of that is relevant unless the crew were twitched into getting down on or before the piano keys. Will be interesting to see whether same crew as diverted on the previous evening if the FR aircraft movement history is correct.
By the way, over 24hrs ago Jimmy Emilio, general manager of Chuuk Airport at Weno in Micronesia, told Reuters by telephone that “it was supposed to land but instead of landing it was 150 yards short and she went down,” so I'd say he should know.
By the way, over 24hrs ago Jimmy Emilio, general manager of Chuuk Airport at Weno in Micronesia, told Reuters by telephone that “it was supposed to land but instead of landing it was 150 yards short and she went down,” so I'd say he should know.
Last edited by Max Tow; 29th Sep 2018 at 07:28.