Plane crashes near Kazakhstan airport

[unworry]

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

FR24 doesn't support that analysis either, unless it's based on a different source of ADS-B data.

​​​​​

BBC has just published this graphic of the crash site location, FWIW

[Ganzic]

Icing

Originally Posted by Cloudtopper

I haven’t asked for your support.
However, you could perhaps analyse the correct graph.

I doubt it could climb very high at that distance, 50-100ft looks more likely. it pretty much stayed in the ground effect,

Passengers reported icing on the wing, while exiting via overwing exit everyone slipped and fell on "icy wing".

Almaty is an icing nightmare, flown there many times and in winter FOG, SMOG and high humidity make the conditions very interesting - very quickly.
Its another dark day in Kazakhstan Aviation. Assuming this is icing, it looks very similar to several other crashes in Almaty.

[Herod]

I concur with andrasz. The F100 wing will NOT tolerate ANY ice. (4,000 hours on type)

[rog747]

Freezing conditions, Temp/dew point M12/M13, Poor vis, (Freezing fog?)
Pretty full flight (heavy?)
Pax reported aircraft started to shake immediately on lift off, and that pax slipped on ice on the wings when exiting from over-wing exits during the EVAC.
Very sad accident - aerofoil icing with immediate loss of control after lift off?
...No fire was a blessing.

Fokkers in the past have suffered similar take off accidents with icing.

Kazakhstan President said those to blame will be severely punished - Phew gosh is that their Governments first reaction? Poor skipper is deceased...

[ReturningVector]

Originally Posted by rog747

Freezing conditions, Temp/dew point M12/M13, Poor vis, (Freezing fog?)
Pretty full flight (heavy?)
Pax reported aircraft started to shake immediately on lift off, and that pax slipped on ice on the wings when exiting from over-wing exits during the EVAC.
Very sad accident - aerofoil icing with immediate loss of control after lift off?
...No fire was a blessing.

Fokkers in the past have suffered similar take off accidents with icing.

Kazakhstan President said those to blame will be severely punished - Phew gosh is that their Governments first reaction? Poor skipper is deceased...

So much for safety culture.
This might also apply to foreign pilots and airlines who fly in and out of Kazakhstan and end up in an incident. Scary stuff.

[3wheels]

Originally Posted by andrasz

From what I can see wing appears to be clean, both the no-step markings and the registration is clearly visible.

Yes, but a few seconds later the camera pans, rather quickly, towards the right wing tip. Outboard of where the guy is standing seems to be covered in ice. Need to play it frame by frame.

[ManaAdaSystem]

When temperatures drop below -10 with FZFG you get into some very bad icing conditions, both for the airframe/wings and the engines. I have no idea if they deiced before departure, or if they did, what kind of fluid they used.
Type 1 (Clariant Safewing) will give you less than 10 minutes HOT. Type 2 nearly one hour.
If this takeoff was done without a proper engine run up before releasing the brakes... I’ve seen engine blades pick up 2-3 cm ice from landing to parking.
Wing ice can kill you. Engine ice can kill you. Combine the two and you need to be very careful and get everything right or you will get into trouble.

[Auxtank]

European regulators mandated the fitting of on-ground wing leading-edge heating systems on Fokker 70s and Fokker 100s following a series of icing-related accidents in 2009.

https://www.flightglobal.com/easa-ac.../84773.article

[AAKEE]

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

The "graph" shows a 15-second gap between the aircraft still on the runway at 01:21:03, and in a gentle descent at 01:21:18 (at approx 50' AAL).

FR24 graph can’t be used like this.
FR24 always show 0 feet ”on ground” and altitude when airborne and try to make an auto transition between.
The 2270-ish is virtually the same as airport altitude.
They dont look to have been high at all.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by AAKEE

FR24 graph can’t be used like this.

FR24 always show 0 feet ”on ground” and altitude when airborne and try to make an auto transition between.
The 2270-ish is virtually the same as airport altitude.
They dont look to have been high at all.

Thanks, I'm well aware of the limitations of FR24's use of ADS-B data (including synchronicity issues), hence my reluctance to draw conclusions. Particularly when data is missing.

[Thruster763]

Not clear when photos taken but post crash images show frosting on leading edge of vertical stabiliser.

[UltraFan]

According to Flight Global, Bek Air refused (sic!) to pass safety audit because... I can't believe it... "it is very costly and would unfairly affect their fares". And Kazakhstan aviation authorities who first insisted on the audit then suddenly "changed their mind" and allowed the airline to fly. I don't really wonder why.

[etudiant]

Originally Posted by UltraFan

According to Flight Global, Bek Air refused (sic!) to pass safety audit because... I can't believe it... "it is very costly and would unfairly affect their fares". And Kazakhstan aviation authorities who first insisted on the audit then suddenly "changed their mind" and allowed the airline to fly. I don't really wonder why.

Was it not the result of experience that the dictum 'If you think safety is expensive, try an accident' was coined?
Should be engraved on every aviation CEO's desk imho.

[BoostTheBoost]

It reminds me of the Air Ontario F28 loss in March 1989. Ice contamination on the wings was the cause then, and this accident is almost identical, but there may be other causes.

[Capt Scribble]

Madrid Aug 2008, warm conditions but a similar profile and crashing near the runway. Lack of lift but in this case incorrect (no) flap set.

[EDMJ]

Originally Posted by BoostTheBoost

It reminds me of the Air Ontario F28 loss in March 1989. Ice contamination on the wings was the cause then, and this accident is almost identical, but there may be other causes.

Does the F28 and F100 have the same or similar wings?

In any case, aviation-safety.net has no less than three F100 accidents with the same sequence of events, icing conditions on ground > no deicing carried out > aircraft barely becomes airborne and starts rolling right/left > aircraft crashes.

[Tu.114]

They do not have the same, but very similar wings. While the F28 wing leading edge is rather straight, the F70/100s consists of various straight parts with noticeable angles between them. When the F100 was designed, the F28 wing was taken to Delft (or Utrecht?) University for a revision and improvement, and this is what they made of it. Furthermore, the main difference between the Fokker and the DC9/MD80 is that the Fokker does not have slats or any other leading edge device (except for a small fence and a match-sized stall strip), which might well account for the Fokker wings criticality when it comes to contamination.

It has been a while since I last flew the type and I do not have the performance tables any more, but I would strongly expect the takeoff of the accident flight to have been made with flaps 0°, which is rather normal for this type on long runways and in absence of deicing fluid on the wings.

I do *very* clearly remember the words of many instructors, strictly warning me against accepting the aircraft with the slightest amount of contamination on the wings. Those warnings are best well heeded on the type.

[cessnaxpilot]

An operator I worked for had an aborted takeoff for indications before V1 in Almaty. The response was to have the police meet the airplane and take the crew away for drug and alcohol testing. Safety first!

[guadaMB]

Really?

Originally Posted by Capt Scribble

Madrid Aug 2008, warm conditions but a similar profile and crashing near the runway. Lack of lift but in this case incorrect (no) flap set.

Wx conditions, altitude, type and surely crew responsibility makes impossible to compare Spanair 5022 with this accident.

BTW, F-100 take-off procedure implies 0 flaps.

[CargoOne]

Originally Posted by UltraFan

According to Flight Global, Bek Air refused (sic!) to pass safety audit because... I can't believe it... "it is very costly and would unfairly affect their fares". And Kazakhstan aviation authorities who first insisted on the audit then suddenly "changed their mind" and allowed the airline to fly. I don't really wonder why.

In all fairness the talk is about IOSA registration, which Kazakstan authorities have decided to make mandatory at some stage. It doesn’t really mean much , for example Ryanair has no IOSA registration (or at least haven’t had until very recently). It is more like the rules of the game for IATA carriers rather than safety on its own.