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

PIA A320 Crash Karachi

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

PIA A320 Crash Karachi

Old 23rd May 2020, 11:36
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Yes.
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Without upsetting anyone, it looks to me like crew incapasitation, as a contributing factor somewhere during the flight.

I don't know about the Airbus, however it seems to me the airbus philosophy is over complication.

When I advance the throttles on an aircraft, i want the power i requested. No if or buts. Period.

Old fashioned Dinosaur? Probably.
Dan_Brown is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 11:40
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
Apart from Jetstar I can think of an Air France incident some years ago which was very similar (hot and high into CDG and failure to push all the way to TOGA ending up rather lower than intended). Go-arounds as we have discussed many times are one of the most often poorly performed basic manoeuvres.
lederhosen is online now  
Old 23rd May 2020, 11:43
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Yes.
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by lederhosen
Apart from Jetstar I can think of an Air France incident some years ago which was very similar (hot and high into CDG and failure to push all the way to TOGA ending up rather lower than intended). Go-arounds as we have discussed many times are one of the most often poorly performed basic manoeuvres.
I could not agree with you more! Well put.
Dan_Brown is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:03
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Zone of Alienation
Age: 79
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by freshgasflow
Also tower talks about belly landing, when no such thing was hinted before. Is it possible that tower has seen something untoward for them to suggest belly landing ?
Surely they saw the first attempt with no wheels down. A belly landing is not something a control tower would normally ask about after a mayday call. This report will make interesting reading.
FIRESYSOK is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:17
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,361
Received 115 Likes on 59 Posts
Originally Posted by Sriajuda
Well, maybe they had a scrape. But apparently their engines were able to spool up and provide TOGA thrust. So why schould they both, quite simultaneously, suddenly cut out?
There are Oil lines, pumps, generators, manifolds, etc. on the bottom of the nacelles. A touchdown on the pods bears a big risk of severing oil lines. The resulting oil loss leading to freezing of the engines would fit rather well to the timing of the events.
henra is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:20
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Here and there
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by lederhosen
Apart from Jetstar I can think of an Air France incident some years ago which was very similar (hot and high into CDG and failure to push all the way to TOGA ending up rather lower than intended). Go-arounds as we have discussed many times are one of the most often poorly performed basic manoeuvres.
Air France A319 in Sept 2009. Pilot did not apply sufficient thrust while willing to go around due to bad weather conditions leading to the Autopilot remaining in landing mode. A/P was disengaged and aircraft regained speed and altitude at only 76 feet above the ground. Enquiry concluded that main responsibility was on Pilot's inadequate commands being applied but also identified the lack of proper altitude checks and incorrect procedures / training at AF. Systems automation was also pointed as a secondary contributor to the incident by AF Unions.
N600JJ is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:24
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FL390
Posts: 256
Received 16 Likes on 5 Posts
ʜᴏᴛ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏᴀᴄʜ ⇨ ᴄᴀʟʟ ɢᴏ ᴀʀᴏᴜɴᴅ ⇨ ɢᴇᴀʀ ᴜᴘ ⇨ ᴄʟɪᴍʙ ɴᴏᴛ ᴇsᴛᴀʙʟɪsʜᴇᴅ ʙᴇғᴏʀᴇ ɢᴇᴀʀ ᴜᴘ ᴛᴏᴜᴄʜᴅᴏᴡɴ ⇨ ᴄʟɪᴍʙ ᴏɴ ᴛᴇʀᴍɪɴᴀʟʟʏ ᴅᴀᴍᴀɢᴇᴅ ᴇɴɢɪɴᴇs
That’s where my money would be.
Fursty Ferret is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:28
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: india
Age: 38
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FIRESYSOK
Surely they saw the first attempt with no wheels down. A belly landing is not something a control tower would normally ask about after a mayday call. This report will make interesting reading.
Yes, It seems ATCO and crew communicated about gear problems before attempting the approach. That looks more likely than crew retracting gear early, after all they were light, 90plus pax
maddog2872 is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:30
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: EC
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Many technical questions being asked about the A320’s protections and warnings.

For those not familiar with the FBW Airbus types a Google search of “A320 CBT YouTube” provide some good presentations that will give you a better understanding of the warnings an A320 will give you, the protections it can provide, and by default the ones it doesn’t, particularly in Alternate Law or Direct Law, which is what it is likely to default in to with multiple failures, why the RAT extends automatically, what a continuous uncancellable warning horn is likely to be for close to the ground etc.
babybaby is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:30
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surely they saw the first attempt with no wheels down. A belly landing is not something a control tower would normally ask about after a mayday call. This report will make interesting reading.

Is there any chance of getting a A320 near a runway from 3500? 5 miles out with out the gear down ? Warnings where more likely to be flap over speed while pushing nose down ? ATC would be saying something if they saw an aircraft going through 500 ft with gear still up I’d hope?
Toruk Macto is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:35
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Taipei
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bedsted
I think you will find that all SOP's call for gear up after a positive rate of climb
Agree ! my mistake, I want to say early flaps retraction, combined with gear retraction before positive climb.
LegiossTypeH is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:45
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
The gear was certainly down the second time as the video clearly shows. So I cannot yet see any evidence that it was unserviceable or that it was not down the first time until it was selected up on deciding to go-around. By not properly engaging TOGA the engines would not spool up and the flight director commands would not provide guidance. The aircraft might then sink low enough to strike the runway. We don't yet know that is what happened, but others have got close on previous occasions. Nothing is sure, but it would fit with what we do know so far.
lederhosen is online now  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:57
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Toruk Macto
Surely they saw the first attempt with no wheels down. A belly landing is not something a control tower would normally ask about after a mayday call. This report will make interesting reading.



Is there any chance of getting a A320 near a runway from 3500? 5 miles out with out the gear down ? Warnings where more likely to be flap over speed while pushing nose down ? ATC would be saying something if they saw an aircraft going through 500 ft with gear still up I’d hope ?
Fifi can get down quickly; but not if you want to remain gainfully employed in aviation. This crash began several minutes before that.. if youre that close with that much energy your head is not in the game. Bug out; collect your thoughts and reset your head.
my company specifically states that a missed approach is not evidence of poor skill.
-its evidence of good judgement.

ATC aren’t looking at your gear; another pilot might; but it’s not the kind of thing you’re looking out for...
i wonder how much these folks had flown in the last few weeks; I wouldn’t be surprised if that was a factor, as well as the authority and recency gradients in CRM speak.
what a cluster..

Last edited by neilki; 23rd May 2020 at 13:11.
neilki is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 12:59
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: still in bed
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Automatic gear extension.

Originally Posted by neilki
theres no ‘automatically extend the gear option’
The only ‘protection is the gear can’t be extended over 10k above max extension speed
There are only two aircrafts that had and have that feature: the Bugatti racer and the latest lanceAir Mako. Now it seams a good idea to have this feature one more step towards Drones.
ZAGORFLY is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 13:10
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,487
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 12 Posts
WhatsaLizad?, #236

Anything amongst the previous speculations to negate a simpler view; oil leak from both engines after previous servicing. Hence under cowl staining, engine failure after GA climb out.

Or have I missed a post which actually confirms that the aircraft engines hit the ground.
safetypee is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 13:14
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 5 Posts
Ollie Onion.

Yours is the only explanation that makes sense to me. Very possible.
Capt Kremin is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 13:24
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: same planet as yours
Posts: 567
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
Originally Posted by safetypee
Or have I missed a post which actually confirms that the aircraft engines hit the ground.
Have you read post #165? 'Confirm' as in 'officially' maybe not yet, but strong indications from onboard eye-witness that some metal structure touched the concrete "...the jolts and sparks due to the friction were so severe that the pilots lifted the plane again". And engine cowlings are a good candidate, within field of view of the pax.

Last edited by DIBO; 23rd May 2020 at 13:25. Reason: grammar
DIBO is online now  
Old 23rd May 2020, 13:35
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,361
Received 115 Likes on 59 Posts
Originally Posted by safetypee
WhatsaLizad?, #236

Anything amongst the previous speculations to negate a simpler view; oil leak from both engines after previous servicing. Hence under cowl staining, engine failure after GA climb out.

Or have I missed a post which actually confirms that the aircraft engines hit the ground.
You might want to have a closer look at the picture in post #85
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/632693-pia-a320-crash-karachi.html#post10790064
If you look at the nacelles it is clear this wasn't just an oil leak. They are torn on the bottom. Those pods 100% scratched the tarmac. At a nose high attitude.
henra is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 13:37
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Madrid
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I watched the Blancolirio channel, and from the evidence he presents it seems almost certain that they landed without the gear down, scraped the engines and then took off again and crashed when the engines failed. It seems the initial contact damaged both engines, but unfortunately not enough to stop them from getting back into the air. Here is a fairly clear video of the crash itself and the aftermath:

peterinmadrid is offline  
Old 23rd May 2020, 13:37
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DIBO
Have you read post #165? 'Confirm' as in 'officially' maybe not yet, but strong indications from onboard eye-witness that some metal structure touched the concrete "...the jolts and sparks due to the friction were so severe that the pilots lifted the plane again". And engine cowlings are a good candidate, within field of view of the pax.
Which would then make sense of ATC asking if they wanted to attempt a belly landing, presumably on next attempt.
b1lanc is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.