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

Pegasus accident in SAW; just reported

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

Pegasus accident in SAW; just reported

Old 5th Feb 2020, 17:38
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 544
The Trabzon incident was caused by the Captain overriding the FO whom had elected to go around due to vis being below the required minima. The aircraft landed deep with one reverser locked out and slewed off to the left. The crew tried to cover the mess up by claiming the trust levers advanced, which is possible if the aircraft lands in TOGA mode..which i did, real issue is the decision to continue to land. The last skid off at SAW was clearly pilot error, wet runway, landing with rudder applied and over controlling. This latest fiasco is yet another example of the gung- ho attitude and commercial pressures on the crews. I've landed at SAW hundreds of times, it's not unusual to have a tail wind whilst descending on the 06 ILS, especially above 400 AGL. If the TWC is out of limits, which it apparently may have been, the correct action must be taken, as demonstrated by previous aircraft. I know may PGS crews, they are not all cowboys and in fairness the management did mark some cards after the Trabzon incident, seems some slipped through the net!
Kirks gusset is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 17:44
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ***
Posts: 350
According to Mode-S data transmitted by the aircraft the aircraft landed long and hot, 1500 meters before the runway threshold the aircraft was descending through 950 feet MSL (corrected for local pressure, actual Mode-S reading 1500 feet)/661 feet AGL at 194 knots over ground, touched down about abeam taxiways T/F (about 1950 meters/6400 feet past the threshold, about 1000 meters/3300 feet before the runway end) at about 130 knots over ground, overran the end of the runway at about 63 knots over ground veering slightly to the left (last transponder transmission), hit the localizer antenna runway 06, went over an airport road and a cliff and impacted the airport perimeter wall.
from Aviation Herald

If that is true, this was a criminal negligence case,
Admiral346 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 17:48
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: in the barrel
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by Rarife View Post
Where did I say that? I just said that according to FR24 they were for 06 which is obviously true. And they probably were not the only going for this RWY in this weather. Maybe there was something in arrival/approach for 24. I was just commenting the decision for 06.
Not attacking you. Chill. Just wondering about their decision making.
AviatorDave is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:00
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 830
On first contact with the tower he called established ILS 06 and was told wind 300/11 kts so basically fully cross. He was then cleared to land and given a wind 270/25 knots which he seems to have missed. I have known tower controllers prompt with a query like, can you accept? The actual tailwind component is not absolutely reliably displayed on the 737 for various reasons. You can have the pilot non flying call it out from the FMC but there are caveats as to its accuracy. So the tower wind is the deciding factor. If you don't process the information and then fail to go-around when you miss the touchdown zone (which I see as just as big an issue as the tailwind) then this is what happens.
lederhosen is online now  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:05
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 15
Originally Posted by Kirks gusset View Post
The Trabzon incident was caused by the Captain overriding the FO whom had elected to go around due to vis being below the required minima. The aircraft landed deep with one reverser locked out and slewed off to the left. The crew tried to cover the mess up by claiming the trust levers advanced, which is possible if the aircraft lands in TOGA mode..which i did, real issue is the decision to continue to land.
Not exactly what I heard about LTCG. But the final question you have is still valid, even if your version is not entirely correct according to what I heard.
turker339 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:09
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: The South
Posts: 89
If Pegasus have done this 3 times; where are the regulators with their oversight of their operation?
Timmy Tomkins is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:09
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 9
Yet again!!!

Another 737-800 fuselage breaking up in exactly the same places!

As predicted and warned by the Boeing whistleblowers in 2010... see video on YouTube ‘People and Power - On a wing and a prayer’.

How has Boeing got away with this time after time?
skiver is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:12
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,991
Originally Posted by lederhosen View Post
On first contact with the tower he called established ILS 06 and was told wind 300/11 kts so basically fully cross. He was then cleared to land and given a wind 270/25 knots which he seems to have missed. I have known tower controllers prompt with a query like, can you accept? The actual tailwind component is not absolutely reliably displayed on the 737 for various reasons. You can have the pilot non flying call it out from the FMC but there are caveats as to its accuracy. So the tower wind is the deciding factor. If you don't process the information and then fail to go-around when you miss the touchdown zone (which I see as just as big an issue as the tailwind) then this is what happens.
300/11 is not fully cross but already a significant tailwind on 06.
PENKO is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:15
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,076
Originally Posted by Airbubba View Post
Here's the FlightRadar24 blog post with the granular dataset:
Interestingly, the granular data includes a 6-second segment of the landing rollout showing no discernable deceleration, covering about 900' at approximately 85 kts.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:17
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,047
radiosutch, #49, cabin breakup; there appears to some association, but this must not be used to assume 'cause'. Humans tend to find patterns everywhere we look.
However, this concern is worth pursuing because aircraft breakup and possibility of fire on the ground are high risk situations.
Similar thoughts arise from perceptions of the 737's likelihood of an overrun; see previous PPRuNe thread.

The high levels of safety in the industry reduce opportunity for large data bases for conventional analysis, thus perceptions become increasingly relevant.

Also, in this media rich world, public perception could be an influencing factor - see other threads re 'I wouldn't fly that aircraft'.

For the professionals, the better action is to consider the validated information about the contributing factors in this accident, learn from them, and apply lessons learnt in future operations.
Fuselages don't breakup if the aircraft stops on the runway after a normal landing.
safetypee is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:25
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mid World
Age: 54
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by skiver View Post
Yet again!!!

Another 737-800 fuselage breaking up in exactly the same places!

As predicted and warned by the Boeing whistleblowers in 2010... see video on YouTube ‘People and Power - On a wing and a prayer’.

How has Boeing got away with this time after time?
I think the 737 is designed to break fore and aft of the wing section on high impact. The idea is it increases the chances of passenger survival. It’s called Crashworthiness. I know for a fact the B757 was designed to do do this, and that was proved in the Girona accident in 1998.
Ghostdancer is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:27
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 69
I assume the aircraft got airborne again as the incline at the 24 end is extremely steep, I would also assume that when it contacted terra firma again the tail contacted first hence the rear end split, I also assume that hitting the perimeter wall split the nose section... apologies for all the assumptions
ballyctid is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:35
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,047
Goastdancer, #58, your thoughts are without justification or regulatory requirement. Designs aim to keep the aircraft intact, passengers retained in their 16g seats, and to minimise risk of fire.

Designing structural breaks, with fuel cross-feed or fuel feed to APU, hydraulics, electrics defies logical thought.
safetypee is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:37
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 6,489
Originally Posted by Timmy Tomkins View Post
If Pegasus have done this 3 times; where are the regulators with their oversight of their operation?
I would expect the insurers to move if the regulator doesn't. In this case it is thankfully only a hull.
WHBM is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:38
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Hungary
Posts: 26
they havent even managed to get to the front bit , but already everyone is fine
maxxer is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:44
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern Shores of Lusitania
Age: 49
Posts: 648
Video here... It's just me or it seems pretty low and normal speed...?


Maybe he was trying to make any ground turn to avoid cliff...?
JanetFlight is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:56
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: .
Posts: 559
It’s a low and normal speed for 1/2 way down that massive runway. Not as you run off the end. The low speed as they over run the runway absolutely doesn’t indicate a normal landing and roll out. In fact the total obvious. This low and normal speed should have taken place much earlier on.

i think at that point they probably weren’t doing anything other than standing on the brakes and shouting. They weren’t going to out turn the cliff. Not at that speed. The pooch was well and truly screwed before that moment.
one post only! is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 18:59
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Originally Posted by lederhosen View Post
On first contact with the tower he called established ILS 06 and was told wind 300/11 kts so basically fully cross. He was then cleared to land and given a wind 270/25 knots which he seems to have missed. I have known tower controllers prompt with a query like, can you accept? The actual tailwind component is not absolutely reliably displayed on the 737 for various reasons. You can have the pilot non flying call it out from the FMC but there are caveats as to its accuracy. So the tower wind is the deciding factor. If you don't process the information and then fail to go-around when you miss the touchdown zone (which I see as just as big an issue as the tailwind) then this is what happens.
I don't believe this is quite correct. The FMC derived headwind/tailwind component is actually quite accurate, although it does have an averaging function and thus not instantaneous. The crosswind component on the other hand is not reliable. There were other cues, GS, ROD, thrust levers back close to idle and the visual picture would have looked like a rocketship.
There is a good paper on this tha covers FMC wind component calculation: Safety aspects of tailwind operationsSafety aspects of tailwind operations Safety aspects of tailwind operations G.W.H. van Es and A.K. Karwal

CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 19:00
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 875
Video here... It's just me or it seems pretty low and normal speed...?
It seems to moving at a fair rate as it goes over the slope. It'll be a miracle if everyone on board has indeed survived as is being reported.

Those folks driving up the motorway must have had a shock too. See them slowing down & bunching up after the event.
dead_pan is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 19:05
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Between security and gate...
Age: 42
Posts: 31
1 reported dead by the health minister.

https://t24.com.tr/haber/sabiha-gokc...calandi,859486
Tetsuo 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.