Pegasus accident in SAW; just reported

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by Airbubba

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.

OK, fair enough - I stand corrected. However there are a whole lot of airports out there that could benefit from EMAS - it's a shame that it's use is not more widespread.

[FENA57]

Pegasus

Originally Posted by spammers1

Third runway excursion for pgs.this time in SAW . Hope everyone ok

3 fatalities

[SerGue99]

"Agile decision making" may not be easy, but is a must for a pilot.
It might be an early conclusion, but, I think Pegasus should concentrate on how to improve their cockpit resource management.
Taking into account the first runway excursion in TZX about a year ago, and last night's incidence, there is sufficient info that leads me think this way.

The one in SAW that occurred a couple of weeks ago may be a different case with different reasons behind it, though.
Of course, like in majority of incidences, there are multiple factors.

[Maxfli]

Originally Posted by zlin77

I doubt if many other current airliners would have fared much better, would an A320 still be substantially intact after a similar "rough landing"?

Yes as most A320 FMAs would have displayed.........

MAN TOGA | SRS | GA/TRK

[EDLB]

I am amazed that they did not go around. Coming in high and fast everything must have looked so wrong. If they had firewalled the throttles for TOGA even in the middle of the runway length they would have easy made it. You got two blokes with 4 eyes on row 0. Will be an interesting CVR to see how the decision making process went on. I think we do not need to discuss an additional dial which had indicated that they can’t make it. It is lack of basic airmanship.

[73qanda]

Is it just me or has the NG had more than it’s fair share of over-run events in the last decade? If I hear of an over-run I don’t think “A320 or 737?” I automatically assume it’s the 737. Is this accurate or some sort of bias seeing as I fly the 737?

[TheEdge]

Originally Posted by Maxfli

Yes as most A320 FMAs would have displayed.........

MAN TOGA | SRS | GA/TRK

To say it all, at the time of landing performance calculation, Flysmart would have told you that you cannot calculate the F-LD because your TW was more than 10 kts...not that a competent pilot needed to be reminded, but better be clear

[73qanda]

-15kts is the limit on all the NG’s I’ve flown.

[PEBflyer]

Not many good pictures to judge from, but I do not see any spoilers extended.
Would they retract with a loss of hydraulic pressure?

[FlyingStone]

Originally Posted by 73qanda

-15kts is the limit on all the NG’s I’ve flown.

15 kts is a customer option, a vanilla 737 comes out of factory with AFM data for only 10 kts.

[Ollie Onion]

I assume there was not a lot of fuel onboard as there was fire at the breakup but is seems to have extinguished itself which would suggest not too much fuel in the tanks which may have forced the issue of pushing on with such an tailwind.

[73qanda]

15 kts is a customer option, a vanilla 737 comes out of factory with AFM data for only 10 kts.

Thanks FlyingStone . I learn something every day

[bArt2]

Originally Posted by lederhosen

Penko the tailwind at 270/11 was 5 knots (10 cross). Hand flying on short final I would see no reason to break off the approach in a 737 to a long runway with that reported wind. In many years as a captain on the 737 I favored having the FMC page open with the wind component but again for the reasons given in the excellent post above you treat it with caution particularly with regard to gusts. The problem came when they did not react to the rapidly changing reported wind and crucially in not going around when they missed the touchdown zone.

I've listened to the ATC audio fragment posted before, at landing clearance the tower reported wind 270 22G34 that's 19 knots tailwind if you take the mean wind strength and possibly 29 knots (gust).Maximum tailwind for the 737-800 is 15 knots (or 10 if you don't have the 15 knots option).

[fox niner]

Originally Posted by Joe le Taxi

A question I expect Boeing are starting to ask themselves is, is it good business sense to sell our products to airlines who are given to smashing them to pieces, putting them on front pages and giving regulators palpitations?

I would expect the EU/easa to put them on the black list within the next 24 hours. The Turkish regulator should pull their AOC, but they don’t dare, considering the brown envelopes. Brown, because of all the mud that has been flying around lately.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by 73qanda

Is it just me or has the NG had more than it’s fair share of over-run events in the last decade? If I hear of an over-run I don’t think “A320 or 737?” I automatically assume it’s the 737. Is this accurate or some sort of bias seeing as I fly the 737?

There's a rather extended and facile debate on this topic in the Comments section of the Avherald report on the accident. Last time I looked, nobody had provided any non-anecdotal evidence to support the proposition that the 737 is more prone to overrun than the A320.

Accident: Pegasus B738 at Istanbul on Feb 5th 2020, overran runway, impacted wall, broke up

[ProPax]

Originally Posted by tdracer

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

Boeing 737 NG is a lousy design. It bloody wiggles its tail in turbulence!!! In 1997, ICE high-speed train at Eschede derailed at 200kph on a flat track, piled up, threw the pile-up into the bridge, collapsed it and killed 101 people injuring 80 more. In 1993, a much older TGV train derailed at 300kph due to a hole opening under the track, stayed upright, and produced one light injury. Which one was a better design?

[rog747]

Just seen a video of the landing and then 737 falls down the ravine at some speed and disappears from view - What I noticed was that a/c was very nose down during the landing run seen in the clip, Touch down was not on the clip.
Pax reported a very hard landing, so did they lose the nose gear?

[TheEdge]

Originally Posted by rog747

Just seen a video of the landing and then 737 falls down the ravine at some speed and disappears from view - What I noticed was that a/c was very nose down during the landing run seen in the clip, Touch down was not on the clip.
Pax reported a very hard landing, so did they lose the nose gear?

Could you provide the link for the video ?

[Nige321]

Originally Posted by ProPax

Boeing 737 NG is a lousy design. It bloody wiggles its tail in turbulence!!! In 1997, ICE high-speed train at Eschede derailed at 200kph on a flat track, piled up, threw the pile-up into the bridge, collapsed it and killed 101 people injuring 80 more. In 1993, a much older TGV train derailed at 300kph due to a hole opening under the track, stayed upright, and produced one light injury. Which one was a better design?

What a ludicrous post - what's a couple of train crashes got to do with a 737...??

[lederhosen]

I think we can agree that the wind was varying pretty quickly. Shortly beforehand the tower cleared a Turkish flight for takeoff, giving a wind of 300/11 gusts 22, if I heard right. Listening to the recording again I must correct myself, the next wind is indeed well out of limits. The standard limit when I flew the 737 by the way was 10 knots tailwind.

These kind of accidents do seem to occur more frequently in certain cultures. I remember the debate we had about stabilised approaches with the Turkish 737 crash in Amsterdam over 10 years ago. My point (perhaps not terribly well made) was that with the varying wind conditions I could well imagine why he did not immediately go around. But obviously at some subsequent point he should have.