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, 22:50
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 110
I am mystified that when a B738 runs through a localizer antenna and then over a 20+ meter cliff at 60+ kts, people on this board are concerned at how the fuselage broke up!?
Lake1952 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 22:50
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,293
Originally Posted by Admiral346 View Post
"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,"

No, AVH reported them at 1500m out, and that is less than a mile, at 194 knots. that is so far from a stabilized approach as I am from China right now.
For avoidance of doubt, at 1500 m out from the THR the aircraft was at approximately 575' AMSL (275' AAL), based on ADS-B and reported QNH. I have no idea where Avherald got 950' AMSL/661' AGL from.

IAS would obviously have been somewhat less than the 194 kts groundspeed, based on the reported wind.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 23:17
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: England
Posts: 484
I wonder how many of those “If it ain’t Boeing I’m not going” bumper stickers / T-shirts / beer mats they’re selling these days?

Training, training, training plus experience should become the top priority for all airlines when giving the reins of these complex jet aircraft to future commanders.
Commuting Pilot is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 23:31
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uae
Posts: 2,568
Pushing a bad situation, avoidable. Repeat offence points to culture . Suspen AOC.
fatbus is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 23:36
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: here and there
Age: 66
Posts: 76
granular data


from FR24 granular data ADS-B for PGT87R

the runway length is 3000m
the distance from threshold of 06 to the last blue marker is almost 2000m ! (2/3)

vmandr is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 23:58
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: England
Posts: 484
Originally Posted by fatbus View Post
Pushing a bad situation, avoidable. Repeat offence points to culture . Suspen AOC.
Completely and totally avoidable
Commuting Pilot is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 00:14
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 997
With a heavy thunderstorm over head, wind reports become unreliable as speed and direction can shift markedly within a few seconds. Use the reported wind as a guide to the intensity of the storm rather than a means of determining if it falls within limits as a 10kt headwind can soon become a 20kt tailwind. A rapid succession of differing wind reports from the tower should be ringing alarm bells on the flightdeck.

Aquaplaning may well have been a factor with such a high touch down speed.

I remember being told on my CPL ground school 30 years ago that if there was a thunderstorm overhead, "wait for half an hour", if you haven't got the fuel to do that then divert.
krismiler is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 00:52
  #88 (permalink)  
ddd
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Paradise
Age: 58
Posts: 93
https://news.sky.com/story/plane-spl...unway-11926970
ddd is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 01:01
  #89 (permalink)  
YRP
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 140
Originally Posted by Lake1952 View Post
I am mystified that when a B738 runs through a localizer antenna and then over a 20+ meter cliff at 60+ kts, people on this board are concerned at how the fuselage broke up!?
It is similar to the comments on how the Asiana 777 crash at SFO showed how strongly built the plane was... you know, apart from the tail breaking off.
YRP is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 01:07
  #90 (permalink)  
fdr
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 3rd Rock, #29B
Posts: 798
Originally Posted by Lake1952 View Post
I am mystified that when a B738 runs through a localizer antenna and then over a 20+ meter cliff at 60+ kts, people on this board are concerned at how the fuselage broke up!?
A pertinent observation.
fdr is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 01:14
  #91 (permalink)  
fdr
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 3rd Rock, #29B
Posts: 798
Originally Posted by YRP View Post
It is similar to the comments on how the Asiana 777 crash at SFO showed how strongly built the plane was... you know, apart from the tail breaking off.
Irony is not a metal on the periodic table.
fdr is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 01:34
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: redditch
Posts: 9
Originally Posted by Lake1952 View Post
I am mystified that when a B738 runs through a localizer antenna and then over a 20+ meter cliff at 60+ kts, people on this board are concerned at how the fuselage broke up!?
sadly people can't stop trying to put the boot in on Boeing and link this as another failing
andyjoy is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 01:51
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,983
Originally Posted by YRP View Post
It is similar to the comments on how the Asiana 777 crash at SFO showed how strongly built the plane was... you know, apart from the tail breaking off.
Lets see, the 777 tail breaks off after it hits a rock sea wall, a 737 fuselage breaks after it goes over a cliff and hits a brick wall.
Lousy design - obviously we need to design fuselages not to fail when they hit a brick wall
tdracer is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 02:06
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 707
Originally Posted by vmandr View Post
the runway length is 3000m
the distance from threshold of 06 to the last blue marker is almost 2000m ! (2/3)
Wow. That is a really wild graphical presentation of what must have been a few really crazy moments of reality. What in the world . . .?
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 02:07
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 707
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
Lets see, the 777 tail breaks off after it hits a rock sea wall, a 737 fuselage breaks after it goes over a cliff and hits a brick wall.
Lousy design - obviously we need to design fuselages not to fail when they hit a brick wall
If it weren't for needing to fly . . .
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 02:41
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 64
Posts: 361
tdracer , you’re doing the same thing you always do . Using extensive experience and deep knowledge to come to a rational conclusion. That’s not what this site is about!
George Glass is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 03:13
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,382
Once again many folks like to pick at technical point figuring that it's easy to design better (by brute force if necessary)

But what are we protecting? the aircraft for re-use or the passengers for re-use?. You see if you continue to beef up the aircraft you wind up saving only the non-functioning passenger bodies who can't take the G-loads generated by the forces. At high impact loads you actually aid the passengers by expectations of some breakup (fusing?) and in survivable event it also provides a access point or two.

The keys to risk in these events, are avoid trapped by fire or smoke and get out although cut and damaged. With a too strong aircraft you may have a lot more shock trauma (aortic collapse) and stay trapped longer awaiting the fire to take hold)

I vote to stay with what we got now, at least it sometimes work to some advantage.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 03:28
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,983
Originally Posted by George Glass View Post
tdracer , you’re doing the same thing you always do . Using extensive experience and deep knowledge to come to a rational conclusion. That’s not what this site is about!
Yea, I know, I need to stop being so logical.
On a more serious note, maybe it's time for some airports to look into installing EMAS - it's saved a few aircraft (and likely some lives) on this side of the pond. I've heard that there isn't a single EMAS installation outside of North America - if true that's borderline criminal.
tdracer is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 03:51
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,834
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
I've heard that there isn't a single EMAS installation outside of North America - if true that's borderline criminal.
I believe you've heard wrong on that one. On the ATC tape for yesterday's Air Canada B-763 incident at MAD the crew is briefed that there is EMAS on both ends of the runway. The Madrid EMAS was installed in 2007.

From Wikipedia:

Non U.S installations

Of the 15 Non-U.S. installations, 8 were provided by Zodiac Arresting Systems (2 in China, 2 in Madrid, 1 in Taiwan, 2 in Norway & 1 in Saudi Arabia), 6 were provided by RunwaySafe (1 in Switzerland, and 3 in overseas departments of France - 1 in Reunion Island, 2 in Mayotte), 1 in Japan and 1 in Germany. 1 provided by Hankge (China)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine...rrestor_system


Airbubba is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 04:06
  #100 (permalink)  
568
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Castletown
Posts: 180
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
Yea, I know, I need to stop being so logical.
On a more serious note, maybe it's time for some airports to look into installing EMAS - it's saved a few aircraft (and likely some lives) on this side of the pond. I've heard that there isn't a single EMAS installation outside of North America - if true that's borderline criminal.
It will be interesting to see what the crew calculated for their landing distance in view of known runway and weather conditions and if they factored in their maximum tail wind component for landing.
When a stable approach is flown and the touchdown made in the "touch down zone" then performance calculations should be such that the aircraft will remain "on the hard surface" (with all systems operating normally) at the end of the landing roll.
Local airport authorities are probably not going to install EMAS for cost or for other reasons, but some Air force bases in Greece do have "an arrestor system" for their fighters, such as Heraklion, I believe, and these airports are also used for domestic/charter flights.

The CVR transcript will highlight HF and SA performance, if it will be released.
568 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.