Pegasus accident in SAW; just reported
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This relatively poor quality video clearly shows the aircraft porpoising, you can see the surface contamination. Having said that, it was avoidable.
Although SAW is often closed at night for "repairs" it appears nothing actually gets fixed, the airport stopped the heavy cargo aircraft for a while, but that didn't help much. In truth the runway needs digging up and completely re-laying.. just like Gaziantep, although hopefully quicker.
For Dave Reid https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=20200205-0
Although SAW is often closed at night for "repairs" it appears nothing actually gets fixed, the airport stopped the heavy cargo aircraft for a while, but that didn't help much. In truth the runway needs digging up and completely re-laying.. just like Gaziantep, although hopefully quicker.
For Dave Reid https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=20200205-0
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
. Then I learned that they have 38 B737 but 43 A32x in their fleet
... 
.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: redditch
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This frame 737 was ex Air Berlin and was 2nd hand and leased in by Pegasus so Boeing had nothing to do with with it.People are looking to tie Boeing into this because of the MAX you only have to look at some of the stupid comments further up this thread about being some fault because the fuselage split into 3 parts.I can't see the likes of Boeing/Airbus stopping sales to airlines because of an airlines record of running aircraft off the runway i think in this case they could look at it as a small victory in the safety of the 737 as most walked away from the crash.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.airporthaber.com/pegasus...untulendi.html
Apologies the text is Turkish, the pictures are quite clear. Thankfully the construction of the new tunnels meant the ground is relatively soft mud, 3 years ago it was a rocky escarpment and the outcome would have been potentially much worse
Apologies the text is Turkish, the pictures are quite clear. Thankfully the construction of the new tunnels meant the ground is relatively soft mud, 3 years ago it was a rocky escarpment and the outcome would have been potentially much worse
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SEQ
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
METAR would have been valid for the entire flight, therefore the wind would have been appicable. Poor planning, poor decision making, poor CRM, take your pick. They had plenty of options. Even the old, yet still functioning Ataturk Airport would have taken them if required. A 180 dgree turn would have had them almost aligned with Runway 23 there.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Way north
Age: 47
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm "just" the ATCO, I don't make the final decision, that responsibility lies in the cockpit.
But doesn't ICAO state that gusting wind shall only be given it more than 10 knots off the mean wind?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: It used to be an island...
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 737NG Airplane Flight Manual Limitation is 15 knots tailwind maximum.
Of course braking action is another factor, as is overshooting the touchdown zone.
Of course braking action is another factor, as is overshooting the touchdown zone.
It is not, that you physical can not land with higher tail winds. The problem is that the ground speed is the tailwind component higher than your IAS (Which makes your airplane fly).
So the normal 3 degree slope will need to be less than 3 degrees and you run faster out of runway because your touch down speed is by the tailwind component higher. So you need a longer runway, the slope should be lower than 3 degrees which often terrain clearance, noise abatement, ILS slope and procedures do not allow for, and your touch down ground speed is higher, which might be limited by tire rating and breaking performance.
The theoretical lower than 3 degree slope needed for tail wind also mean, if you are high on a 3 degree slope with tail wind, forget it. You need much more runway with tail wind and if you touch down late...
So the normal 3 degree slope will need to be less than 3 degrees and you run faster out of runway because your touch down speed is by the tailwind component higher. So you need a longer runway, the slope should be lower than 3 degrees which often terrain clearance, noise abatement, ILS slope and procedures do not allow for, and your touch down ground speed is higher, which might be limited by tire rating and breaking performance.
The theoretical lower than 3 degree slope needed for tail wind also mean, if you are high on a 3 degree slope with tail wind, forget it. You need much more runway with tail wind and if you touch down late...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 46
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not, that you physical can not land with higher tail winds. The problem is that the ground speed is the tailwind component higher than your IAS (Which makes your airplane fly).
So the normal 3 degree slope will need to be less than 3 degrees and you run faster out of runway because your touch down speed is by the tailwind component higher. So you need a longer runway, the slope should be lower than 3 degrees which often terrain clearance, noise abatement, ILS slope and procedures do not allow for, and your touch down ground speed is higher, which might be limited by tire rating and breaking performance.
The theoretical lower than 3 degree slope needed for tail wind also mean, if you are high on a 3 degree slope with tail wind, forget it. You need much more runway with tail wind and if you touch down late...
So the normal 3 degree slope will need to be less than 3 degrees and you run faster out of runway because your touch down speed is by the tailwind component higher. So you need a longer runway, the slope should be lower than 3 degrees which often terrain clearance, noise abatement, ILS slope and procedures do not allow for, and your touch down ground speed is higher, which might be limited by tire rating and breaking performance.
The theoretical lower than 3 degree slope needed for tail wind also mean, if you are high on a 3 degree slope with tail wind, forget it. You need much more runway with tail wind and if you touch down late...
To answer jmmoric the older NGs were definitely 10 knots. This airframe came from AirBerlin, originally D-ABKD and was relatively new (delivered 2009) so would probably have had the higher 15 knot tailwind limitation. When I listened to the ATC recording I don`t remember hearing anything from the tower about the runway being wet. It may have been in Turkish and therefore I missed it. But on the video it looks very wet and that would obviously be more limiting.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the LDA it would be interesting if full reverse and manual braking would have stopped it if they’d actually landed in 06’s TDZ rather than 24’s.
Anyone at work with access to 73 landing perf? 22-37kt TW, braking action good or medium to good, 3000m rwy, ZFW for 177 pax, probably <2T fuel.
Anyone at work with access to 73 landing perf? 22-37kt TW, braking action good or medium to good, 3000m rwy, ZFW for 177 pax, probably <2T fuel.
However, with 3000m I am sure it would have worked using all of the runway. They left the runway with around 60kt. 500m more and they easily would have made it.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Way north
Age: 47
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: the 10 or 15 knot tailwind limit:
737NG: We had a 10 kt limit. Sometimes we lended an airframe to one of our sister airlines, which has a separate AOC. The plane wasn’t even painted over, just some paperwork was changed. Suddenly this same airplane was now allowed a 15 kt tailwind! That simple.
737NG: We had a 10 kt limit. Sometimes we lended an airframe to one of our sister airlines, which has a separate AOC. The plane wasn’t even painted over, just some paperwork was changed. Suddenly this same airplane was now allowed a 15 kt tailwind! That simple.
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: netherlands
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not, that you physical can not land with higher tail winds. The problem is that the ground speed is the tailwind component higher than your IAS (Which makes your airplane fly).
So the normal 3 degree slope will need to be less than 3 degrees and you run faster out of runway because your touch down speed is by the tailwind component higher. So you need a longer runway, the slope should be lower than 3 degrees which often terrain clearance, noise abatement, ILS slope and procedures do not allow for, and your touch down ground speed is higher, which might be limited by tire rating and breaking performance.
The theoretical lower than 3 degree slope needed for tail wind also mean, if you are high on a 3 degree slope with tail wind, forget it. You need much more runway with tail wind and if you touch down late...
So the normal 3 degree slope will need to be less than 3 degrees and you run faster out of runway because your touch down speed is by the tailwind component higher. So you need a longer runway, the slope should be lower than 3 degrees which often terrain clearance, noise abatement, ILS slope and procedures do not allow for, and your touch down ground speed is higher, which might be limited by tire rating and breaking performance.
The theoretical lower than 3 degree slope needed for tail wind also mean, if you are high on a 3 degree slope with tail wind, forget it. You need much more runway with tail wind and if you touch down late...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Age: 46
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAW, RWY06, BA medium, Max LDW, GND speed 174kts
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FL390
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, with 3000m I am sure it would have worked using all of the runway. They left the runway with around 60kt. 500m more and they easily would have made it.