Russia - Plane crash lands in field after bird strike
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Moscow
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the second question is, why the tower had to explain to the rescue team what they should do. Fourth phrase from the bottom: "Boys, you got the coordinates, the plane crashed beyond the runway. What do you mean you're staying? Move there. Fire engines stay. The rest of the rescue vehicles move there."
YOU'RE A RESCUE TEAM AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!? WHAT THE...
YOU'RE A RESCUE TEAM AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!? WHAT THE...
"Boys, you got the coordinates, the plane crashed beyond the runway. What do you mean you're staying? Move there. Fire engines stay. The rest of the rescue vehicles move there."
"All emergency rescue team had departed yet to the site".
"Ok, then all other stay there and wait".
So it was rather misunderstanding over radio.
Last edited by jettero; 17th Aug 2019 at 21:48.
If the MAX has taught us anything, it's that certified isn't necessarily the same as safe.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By clearly reducing the momentum G strain on your cervical vertebrae during a forward dead stop collision (as the airbag in your car does). As you say a comprise for the probability of most likely movement scenario but I most certainly wouldn't want my neck and heavy skull flailing about at 150mph
Flight, the question remains, is the simple fact that both events have happened with the same engine type meaningful or is it a statistical fluke? Does it point to some a deeper issue with the CFM56-5 bird strike abilities? Do the bird strike cert requirements need to be toughed up? Not to slight Sully or this Russian crew - but had their luck been a bit worse we could easily be looking at several hundred fatalities.
If the MAX has taught us anything, it's that certified isn't necessarily the same as safe.
If the MAX has taught us anything, it's that certified isn't necessarily the same as safe.
The cert basis has tried to keep up with the bird population in sizes and numbers of flocking birds in areas likely to be encountered.
Certainly the local bird hazard abatement needs to be reviewed as well in this accident.else we would be removing the certificate for a great many airplane/engine types.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: THAILAND
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He did a great job saved everyone. What's to bet he's also a stick and rudder pilot of some sort?
He's appropriately modest.
Like Sully he was lucky on one level. Like Sully he took it and they all walked away.
He says he's no hero, any pilot would do the same. He's right. But not all pilots could dead stick an electric jet into a cornfield.
He's appropriately modest.
Like Sully he was lucky on one level. Like Sully he took it and they all walked away.
He says he's no hero, any pilot would do the same. He's right. But not all pilots could dead stick an electric jet into a cornfield.
Meet the hero pilots who saved 233 lives in ‘miracle’ belly landing of jet in field
Hero pilot says landing in Russian cornfield ‘was only hope’
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As aviators (in my case non-pilot aircrew) we are all looking to learn from the mistakes of others or in this case and Sully's case, the success of others. We then assess this against our own decision making, knowledge and cognitive capabilities in order to determine if we were in that situation would we have done better or worse and what what would we now do differently to improve our chances of a successful outcome for some possible similar event in the future.
In this discussion there has been a lot talk about whether the gear should have been up or down, whether the BRACE command should have been given, whether the checklists should have been followed, referred to, or just thrown out of the window. In my opinion, I'm not sure any of us can learn much from this since every accident of this nature has such wildly different circumstances. Phase of flight (T/O,LDG), day or night, weather, visibility, terrain, obstacles, controlled flight with or without propulsion available, result of crew actions (or inactions) or unexpected aircraft malfunction. But probably most importantly is the time available. It seems that luck might be directly proportional to this. That is, the more time you have, the more chance you have to make your own luck (Gimli glider springs to mind) vs the less time you have, the more you rely on a bit of luck to walk away. There can be no doubt though, that whatever gets thrown at you unexpectedly, knowing your job and executing it well is going to give you the best chance of making use of Lady luck if she shows up. For tech crew that's ANC and particularly the A part which we seem to lament the loss of today!
But there is another factor. Whether it is crew error that has caused the situation to arise or an event beyond control of the crew, the survivability of these types of accidents comes down to three things. An acceptably low ROD, no significant obstacles in the landing path and the strength of the monocoque construction of the fuselage. The latter factor provides protection from flame, heat, debris and water impact during the event which I imagine must be akin to a heavily arrested landing on an aircraft carrier!!
I have selected some flights below where aircraft made unexpected 'landings' and where despite in some cases spectacular crew mistakes, the vast majority of people survived primarily because the fuselage remained intact. Other's will know better than me, but I'd be surprised if the BRACE command was given in many of them and checklists would not have been considered in some at all. It's also instructive to note the Air France outcome in relation to passengers being dazed and the high probability that no Brace for impact command was given.
Air France Flight 296 6 January 1988. Airbus A320. 136 crew and passengers. Pancaked into a sapling forest. All survived crash. Many of the passengers were dazed from hitting their heads on the backs of the seats in front of them. Three died during evacuation in post crash fuel fire.
Asiana Airlines Flight 214 6 July 2013. B777. 307 crew and pax. Tail hit seawall and cartwheeled on runaway. 1 died in crash. 2 non seat belt wearing pax died after being thrown from aircraft. All remaining crew and pax evacuated safely despite post crash fire caused by oil and engine fluids.
Air Niugini Flight 73. September 28, 2018. B737. 47 crew and pax. Aircraft 'landed' short of the runway in to a lagoon. All but one survived the crash.
British Airways Flight 38. 17 January 2008. B777. 152 crew and pax. Fuel freezing shutdown both engines on finals. Aircraft glides and 'lands' short of threshold casuing gear collapse and significant air frame damage. All crew and pax evacuate safely. No post crash fire.
Miracle on Hudson.
Ural Airlines U6178, Moscow - Simferopol.
It's axiomatic that when faced with an off runway landing the crew will do everything possible to reduce ROD but an obstacle free pathway ahead may just be down to lady luck and to time available. Assuming these go right, it is the strength of the fuselage (that cacoons the occupants) that will now determine the outcome and it seems that regardless of manufacturer, or whether landing gear, engines or complete wings get ripped off, fuselage construction has saved many lives in these accidents. I think this is worth noting when discussing grandfathering certifications arising from real air frame crash testing against the newer composite material constructions, the safety of which i understand is determined more by computer modeling. Not arguing either way (I'm just not that bright) but just saying that this accident, others I have mentioned above and the many others I haven't mentioned, all highlight an important element of aircraft construction that despite all of the unknowns that leads an aircraft to 'land' off runaway, has most likely saved thousands of lives.
In this discussion there has been a lot talk about whether the gear should have been up or down, whether the BRACE command should have been given, whether the checklists should have been followed, referred to, or just thrown out of the window. In my opinion, I'm not sure any of us can learn much from this since every accident of this nature has such wildly different circumstances. Phase of flight (T/O,LDG), day or night, weather, visibility, terrain, obstacles, controlled flight with or without propulsion available, result of crew actions (or inactions) or unexpected aircraft malfunction. But probably most importantly is the time available. It seems that luck might be directly proportional to this. That is, the more time you have, the more chance you have to make your own luck (Gimli glider springs to mind) vs the less time you have, the more you rely on a bit of luck to walk away. There can be no doubt though, that whatever gets thrown at you unexpectedly, knowing your job and executing it well is going to give you the best chance of making use of Lady luck if she shows up. For tech crew that's ANC and particularly the A part which we seem to lament the loss of today!
But there is another factor. Whether it is crew error that has caused the situation to arise or an event beyond control of the crew, the survivability of these types of accidents comes down to three things. An acceptably low ROD, no significant obstacles in the landing path and the strength of the monocoque construction of the fuselage. The latter factor provides protection from flame, heat, debris and water impact during the event which I imagine must be akin to a heavily arrested landing on an aircraft carrier!!
I have selected some flights below where aircraft made unexpected 'landings' and where despite in some cases spectacular crew mistakes, the vast majority of people survived primarily because the fuselage remained intact. Other's will know better than me, but I'd be surprised if the BRACE command was given in many of them and checklists would not have been considered in some at all. It's also instructive to note the Air France outcome in relation to passengers being dazed and the high probability that no Brace for impact command was given.
Air France Flight 296 6 January 1988. Airbus A320. 136 crew and passengers. Pancaked into a sapling forest. All survived crash. Many of the passengers were dazed from hitting their heads on the backs of the seats in front of them. Three died during evacuation in post crash fuel fire.
Asiana Airlines Flight 214 6 July 2013. B777. 307 crew and pax. Tail hit seawall and cartwheeled on runaway. 1 died in crash. 2 non seat belt wearing pax died after being thrown from aircraft. All remaining crew and pax evacuated safely despite post crash fire caused by oil and engine fluids.
Air Niugini Flight 73. September 28, 2018. B737. 47 crew and pax. Aircraft 'landed' short of the runway in to a lagoon. All but one survived the crash.
British Airways Flight 38. 17 January 2008. B777. 152 crew and pax. Fuel freezing shutdown both engines on finals. Aircraft glides and 'lands' short of threshold casuing gear collapse and significant air frame damage. All crew and pax evacuate safely. No post crash fire.
Miracle on Hudson.
Ural Airlines U6178, Moscow - Simferopol.
It's axiomatic that when faced with an off runway landing the crew will do everything possible to reduce ROD but an obstacle free pathway ahead may just be down to lady luck and to time available. Assuming these go right, it is the strength of the fuselage (that cacoons the occupants) that will now determine the outcome and it seems that regardless of manufacturer, or whether landing gear, engines or complete wings get ripped off, fuselage construction has saved many lives in these accidents. I think this is worth noting when discussing grandfathering certifications arising from real air frame crash testing against the newer composite material constructions, the safety of which i understand is determined more by computer modeling. Not arguing either way (I'm just not that bright) but just saying that this accident, others I have mentioned above and the many others I haven't mentioned, all highlight an important element of aircraft construction that despite all of the unknowns that leads an aircraft to 'land' off runaway, has most likely saved thousands of lives.
Last edited by Lord Farringdon; 18th Aug 2019 at 09:34. Reason: Corrected Air Niugini Flight 73 details.
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for the sake of accuracy and in order to once again name and shame the incompetent idiots at the SFO fire dept, the two passengers died after they were run over by a fire truck. And the department's only response to the accident was banning the helmet cams that were used as evidence. SHAME!
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gordy (Proud) — ZIA callsign.
SJR178 — U6178 callsign.
Tower radio commuications:
06:00:32 — 06:01:45
Pilot: Gordy ground, good morning, SJR 178 at parking, weather please and vectors to Simferopol.
Dispatcher: Gordy, goodmorning. Departure runway 12, wind 110, 5 ms, visibility 7 km, ceiling undefined, QNH 1008, QFE 994, temperature 16 degrees, friction 0.5, scattered birds. Calculate departure from runway 12. Departure route – straight ahead 900 meters, contact Gordy at 125.25. Squawk later.
Pilot: Copy that. Runway 12. Straight ahead 900, work with 125.25. Squawk later, SJR178.
Dispatcher: That’s correct.
06:05:38 — 06:05:54
Pilot: Requesting pushback and startup.
Dispatcher: Pushback to second position, startup when ready.
Pilot: Second position, startup when ready, SJR 178.
06:09:25 — 06:09:46
Pilot: SJR 178, requesting taxi.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, holding short of 12. Follow the follow-me to runway 12 to V7.
Pilot: Hold short of runway 12, following V7 behind follow-me.
06:11:20 — 06:11:38
Pilot: SJR 178, hold short of 12.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, right on. Have a good trip!
Pilot: Working with 125.250. Thank you very much and have a nice day!
Communication with tower:
06:11:39 — 06:11:57
Pilot: Gordy tower, SJR 178, hold short of runway 12.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, good morning! Line up runway 12. Wind 110 deg, 4 ms.
06:12:28 — 06:12:51
Pilot: SJR 178. Ready for takeoff.
Dispatcher: ВПП 12. Cleared for takeoff, scattered birds.
SJR 178: Runway 12, cleared for takeoff, SJR 178.
06:14:10 — 06:14:21
Pilot: SJR, PANPAN, PANPAN, PANPAN, SJR.
06:14:29 — 06:14:39
Dispatcher: SJR 178.
Pilot: PANPAN, PANPAN, PANPAN, SJR 178. One engine failure.
Dispatcher: SVR 178, your decision.
06:14:55 — 06:15:09
Pilot: Requesting turn around. Altitude.
Dispatcher: Cleared for turn around.
Pilot: Cleared for turn around, SJR 178.
06:15:49 — 06:15:57
Dispatcher: SJR 178 to Gordy.
Pilot: Sverdlovsky, requesting ambulance and rescue.
Dispatcher: Stand by. What’s your altitude and souls onboard?
Pilot: Altitude. We landing just beyond the runway. 226 passengers and seven crew.
Dispatcher: Say again.
Pilot: 226 and 7 crew.
Dispatcher: 226 passengers and 7 crew?
Pilot: 7 crew.
06:16:52 — 06:16:57
Dispatcher: SJR 178, where are you?
Pilot: Hold on, SJR 178. Do you read emergency beacon?
Dispatcher: Come again. Repeat.
Pilot: Do you read emergency beacon?
Dispatcher: No.
06:18:11 — 06:18:22
Dispatcher: CU, SJR 178.
Pilot: Don’t distract, we’ve evacuating.
06:19:18 — 06:19:45
Dispatcher: SJR 178, situation report.
Pilot: All passengers evacuated, SJR 178.
Dispatcher: Report injured, casualties.
Pilot: No casualties, injured later.
Dispatcher: Copy, later.
06:25:36 — 06:27:31
Dispatcher: SJR 178 to Gordy.
Pilot: Go ahead.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, could you report the number of injured?
Pilot: None injured.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, copy that, no injured. Everyone evacuated, is that correct?
Pilot: Everyone evacuated. Do you have our location? We turned on the emergency beacon.
Dispatcher: Search and rescue informed.
Pilot: Thank you.
06:48:10 — 06:48:29
Pilot: Standing by, SJR 178. Standing by. Standing by.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, could you give us your location?
Pilot: Moment.
Pilot: SJR 178.
Dispatcher: Gordy responded, SJR 178.
Pilot: Coordinates.
Crew: 30.46.55.7’ N. 38?15,7 E.
Dispatcher: Repeat latitude.
Pilot: 55.30,6 N, 38.15,2 E.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, Repeat latitude, please.
Pilot: Corrdinates 55?
Dispatcher: Got it.
Pilot: 6 N.
Dispatcher: Got 6.
Pilot: 15 decimal 2 E.
Dispatcher: Copy that.
Tower to SR:
04:13:40
Dispatcher: 03, Gordy.
03: Go ahead.
Tower: Inspect the runway.
03: Copy that.
Dispatcher: Especially the “Trap” (fork between taxiway 3 and runway 12/30) and V7 vicinity for birds. Hardly possible but do it.
03: On my way.
06:46:28
05: Gordy to 05.
Tower: Gordy. Go ahead.
05: Shall we dispact a bus for passengers?
Tower: Of course. You have to evacuate them somehow.
05: Copy that. Dispatching the buses. Do I have it right, it’s near the outer marker, where the fishermen are?
Tower: About there, right.
05: Copy that.
07:06.04
05: Gordy to 05.
Tower: Go ahead.
05: Do we stay here or go back to base location? What’s our alert status?
Tower: Boys, you got the coordinates, the plane crashed beyond the runway. What do you mean you stay?! Move there. Fire engines stay where they are. The rest of rescue vehicles all move there.
05: Search and rescue all went there already.
Tower: Then everyone stay and wait.
05: Copy that. Stay and wait.
SJR178 — U6178 callsign.
Tower radio commuications:
06:00:32 — 06:01:45
Pilot: Gordy ground, good morning, SJR 178 at parking, weather please and vectors to Simferopol.
Dispatcher: Gordy, goodmorning. Departure runway 12, wind 110, 5 ms, visibility 7 km, ceiling undefined, QNH 1008, QFE 994, temperature 16 degrees, friction 0.5, scattered birds. Calculate departure from runway 12. Departure route – straight ahead 900 meters, contact Gordy at 125.25. Squawk later.
Pilot: Copy that. Runway 12. Straight ahead 900, work with 125.25. Squawk later, SJR178.
Dispatcher: That’s correct.
06:05:38 — 06:05:54
Pilot: Requesting pushback and startup.
Dispatcher: Pushback to second position, startup when ready.
Pilot: Second position, startup when ready, SJR 178.
06:09:25 — 06:09:46
Pilot: SJR 178, requesting taxi.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, holding short of 12. Follow the follow-me to runway 12 to V7.
Pilot: Hold short of runway 12, following V7 behind follow-me.
06:11:20 — 06:11:38
Pilot: SJR 178, hold short of 12.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, right on. Have a good trip!
Pilot: Working with 125.250. Thank you very much and have a nice day!
Communication with tower:
06:11:39 — 06:11:57
Pilot: Gordy tower, SJR 178, hold short of runway 12.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, good morning! Line up runway 12. Wind 110 deg, 4 ms.
06:12:28 — 06:12:51
Pilot: SJR 178. Ready for takeoff.
Dispatcher: ВПП 12. Cleared for takeoff, scattered birds.
SJR 178: Runway 12, cleared for takeoff, SJR 178.
06:14:10 — 06:14:21
Pilot: SJR, PANPAN, PANPAN, PANPAN, SJR.
06:14:29 — 06:14:39
Dispatcher: SJR 178.
Pilot: PANPAN, PANPAN, PANPAN, SJR 178. One engine failure.
Dispatcher: SVR 178, your decision.
06:14:55 — 06:15:09
Pilot: Requesting turn around. Altitude.
Dispatcher: Cleared for turn around.
Pilot: Cleared for turn around, SJR 178.
06:15:49 — 06:15:57
Dispatcher: SJR 178 to Gordy.
Pilot: Sverdlovsky, requesting ambulance and rescue.
Dispatcher: Stand by. What’s your altitude and souls onboard?
Pilot: Altitude. We landing just beyond the runway. 226 passengers and seven crew.
Dispatcher: Say again.
Pilot: 226 and 7 crew.
Dispatcher: 226 passengers and 7 crew?
Pilot: 7 crew.
06:16:52 — 06:16:57
Dispatcher: SJR 178, where are you?
Pilot: Hold on, SJR 178. Do you read emergency beacon?
Dispatcher: Come again. Repeat.
Pilot: Do you read emergency beacon?
Dispatcher: No.
06:18:11 — 06:18:22
Dispatcher: CU, SJR 178.
Pilot: Don’t distract, we’ve evacuating.
06:19:18 — 06:19:45
Dispatcher: SJR 178, situation report.
Pilot: All passengers evacuated, SJR 178.
Dispatcher: Report injured, casualties.
Pilot: No casualties, injured later.
Dispatcher: Copy, later.
06:25:36 — 06:27:31
Dispatcher: SJR 178 to Gordy.
Pilot: Go ahead.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, could you report the number of injured?
Pilot: None injured.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, copy that, no injured. Everyone evacuated, is that correct?
Pilot: Everyone evacuated. Do you have our location? We turned on the emergency beacon.
Dispatcher: Search and rescue informed.
Pilot: Thank you.
06:48:10 — 06:48:29
Pilot: Standing by, SJR 178. Standing by. Standing by.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, could you give us your location?
Pilot: Moment.
Pilot: SJR 178.
Dispatcher: Gordy responded, SJR 178.
Pilot: Coordinates.
Crew: 30.46.55.7’ N. 38?15,7 E.
Dispatcher: Repeat latitude.
Pilot: 55.30,6 N, 38.15,2 E.
Dispatcher: SJR 178, Repeat latitude, please.
Pilot: Corrdinates 55?
Dispatcher: Got it.
Pilot: 6 N.
Dispatcher: Got 6.
Pilot: 15 decimal 2 E.
Dispatcher: Copy that.
Tower to SR:
04:13:40
Dispatcher: 03, Gordy.
03: Go ahead.
Tower: Inspect the runway.
03: Copy that.
Dispatcher: Especially the “Trap” (fork between taxiway 3 and runway 12/30) and V7 vicinity for birds. Hardly possible but do it.
03: On my way.
06:46:28
05: Gordy to 05.
Tower: Gordy. Go ahead.
05: Shall we dispact a bus for passengers?
Tower: Of course. You have to evacuate them somehow.
05: Copy that. Dispatching the buses. Do I have it right, it’s near the outer marker, where the fishermen are?
Tower: About there, right.
05: Copy that.
07:06.04
05: Gordy to 05.
Tower: Go ahead.
05: Do we stay here or go back to base location? What’s our alert status?
Tower: Boys, you got the coordinates, the plane crashed beyond the runway. What do you mean you stay?! Move there. Fire engines stay where they are. The rest of rescue vehicles all move there.
05: Search and rescue all went there already.
Tower: Then everyone stay and wait.
05: Copy that. Stay and wait.
Not that it really affects your argument, but the Air Niugini 737 came down short of the runway rather than beyond it.
To be fair loma, I can remember a total of two forced landings due to bird strikes taking out both engines during takeoff (fortunately both with happy endings). Both were A320 series with CFM56-5 engines.
Now, the A320 is a common aircraft with thousands flying, and the CFM56-5 powers a goodly percentage of those. But there are also a whole lot of V2500 powered A320s, not to mention several thousand more 737s powered by CFM56-7 engines (different fan) - and none of those have had bird strike related dual engine power loss. Perhaps it's a statistical fluke, and the CFM56-5 bird strike resistance is just as good as the other engines, but if it was up to me I'd be taking a good, hard look at the -5 bird strike resistance...
Now, the A320 is a common aircraft with thousands flying, and the CFM56-5 powers a goodly percentage of those. But there are also a whole lot of V2500 powered A320s, not to mention several thousand more 737s powered by CFM56-7 engines (different fan) - and none of those have had bird strike related dual engine power loss. Perhaps it's a statistical fluke, and the CFM56-5 bird strike resistance is just as good as the other engines, but if it was up to me I'd be taking a good, hard look at the -5 bird strike resistance...
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair loma, I can remember a total of two forced landings due to bird strikes taking out both engines during takeoff (fortunately both with happy endings). Both were A320 series with CFM56-5 engines.
Now, the A320 is a common aircraft with thousands flying, and the CFM56-5 powers a goodly percentage of those. But there are also a whole lot of V2500 powered A320s, not to mention several thousand more 737s powered by CFM56-7 engines (different fan) - and none of those have had bird strike related dual engine power loss. Perhaps it's a statistical fluke, and the CFM56-5 bird strike resistance is just as good as the other engines, but if it was up to me I'd be taking a good, hard look at the -5 bird strike resistance...
Now, the A320 is a common aircraft with thousands flying, and the CFM56-5 powers a goodly percentage of those. But there are also a whole lot of V2500 powered A320s, not to mention several thousand more 737s powered by CFM56-7 engines (different fan) - and none of those have had bird strike related dual engine power loss. Perhaps it's a statistical fluke, and the CFM56-5 bird strike resistance is just as good as the other engines, but if it was up to me I'd be taking a good, hard look at the -5 bird strike resistance...
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Korea
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There was no evidence of drowning and the Pathologists concluded that the passenger would have been
severely concussed and died within the first 3 minutes of receiving the traumatic head injuries."
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Euclideanplane. I have edited my post accordingly.
Cheers
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My biggest question to the investigators is, why they continued to roll after the FIRST strike? The cabin video clearly shows at least six birds hitting the left engine, yet the plane kept on rolling. If I understand this recording correctly, they realized the problem with the left engine just 8-19 seconds after the start of the take-off roll, and declared panpan. They were still on the ground when it happened. I just checked, ZIA has 4,600m long runway, enough tarmac to abort and stop. Why didn't they?
And the second question is, why the tower had to explain to the rescue team what they should do. Fourth phrase from the bottom: "Boys, you got the coordinates, the plane crashed beyond the runway. What do you mean you're staying? Move there. Fire engines stay. The rest of the rescue vehicles move there."
YOU'RE A RESCUE TEAM AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!? WHAT THE...
And the second question is, why the tower had to explain to the rescue team what they should do. Fourth phrase from the bottom: "Boys, you got the coordinates, the plane crashed beyond the runway. What do you mean you're staying? Move there. Fire engines stay. The rest of the rescue vehicles move there."
YOU'RE A RESCUE TEAM AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!? WHAT THE...
.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was a new pilot in aviation, I remember some advice. If you care about your own survival you don't need to worry about how many hundreds of passengers you have behind you. You will do what is necessary for your own survival and then your passengers will be OK too.
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See above. Translation just got approved.
Last edited by UltraFan; 18th Aug 2019 at 10:39.