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 25th May 2020, 04:31
  #501 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,421
his would explain why they were above profile continually from the TOD after having being offered a straight in approach for 25


Same old story. Blind adherence to what the flight director is telling you. A common habit among those brought up on automation dependency as well as the cultural trap of 'real men don't go around.'
A37575 is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 04:37
  #502 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
All we can say for certain at this stage is:

1. They were high and fast.
2. The approach was unstable.
3. The engines scraped the runway.
4. They became airborne again and tried for another approach.
5. They aircraft crashed.

Once the FDR is read we will know what the position of the landing gear was:

1. Selected up the whole time.
2. Selected down but did not extend.
3. Selected down but retracted too early before the aircraft was positively climbing away resulting in ground contact.
4. Which systems were lost and what was the aircraft state afterwards.

Crew actions seem to be the major factor here, and the CVR should prove vital in determining:

1. Were they aware of the height/distance situation in the first place ?
2. Was there a CRM breakdown ?
3. Were they aware that they had a damaged aircraft or if they had contacted the runway at all ?


I was questioning the location of critical components underneath the engine with the Sioux City DC10 in mind, a turbine failure managed to sever all the hydraulic lines due to them being concentrated in a small area. Standard military doctrine is to spread things out, be it soldiers not bunching up whilst on patrol or aircraft parked close together. Unfortunately it appears that aircraft engines don't offer too much freedom in this area.
You don't have the Sioux city lessons learned correct.

The hyd lines were separated apart but so were the high energy bits of the fan. It wasn't so much that the lines were completely severed but more to them bleeding out due to no check valves This stuff is now addressed in the cert rule advisory which also allows design leeway for the stuff Tdracer mentioned above

OK, we may learn something new in this accident, but I prefer to wait for the on-site reports
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 04:39
  #503 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 732
Inexperienced?

“With a 24-year experience in the airline industry, Gul had flown over 17,000 hours, including 4,700 hours of Airbus A320. He is survived by his wife and four children.” Extract from Khaleej Times. He seemed to be in his early 50’s
Wannabe Flyer is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 04:58
  #504 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,002
[QUOTE][Heck, we could go back to fixed gear - that would solve the problem.../QUOTE] Instead of piecemeal solutions the technology is moving towards removal of the elements itself that have too many limitations. They already have technology for one pilot aircraft. Not far from none pilot aircaft.
vilas is online now  
Old 25th May 2020, 06:23
  #505 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,296
krismiler is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 06:57
  #506 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: 5Y
Posts: 538
Originally Posted by 1.3vso View Post
I heard the instruction as fly heading 180. I figured the controller realized the were high and close and tried to vector them but they said they were established. Also the ATC observation of being 3,500 FT and 5 miles was likely a polite way of saying "do you guys know what you are doing".
You are right, ATC does say turn left to 180, that's a wrong transcription on the video. That makes much more sense rather than a confusing attempt to request a left orbit.

In fact, that was a moment at which they could have halted the entire spiral into disaster. Had they simply complied with ATC's request, almost certainly they would have got back on top of the situation and it would have been a non event.

Last edited by double_barrel; 25th May 2020 at 09:00.
double_barrel is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 07:07
  #507 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,250
Originally Posted by mnttech View Post
I kind of read it slightly differently
How about "A combination of less than (260 KTS on #1 ADR OR less the 260 KTS on #3 ADR OR WOG) AND the lever down will open the hyd valve."
Yes, that's a correct reading of the schematic.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 25th May 2020, 07:23
  #508 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Chicago
Age: 63
Posts: 35
Reports are there is a preliminary report. Can anyone find a link to it?
SquintyMagoo is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 07:23
  #509 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 66
Posts: 3,371
Originally Posted by jolihokistix View Post
Built into the fuselage somehow?
How is that going to help, when on nearly all 'low wing' installations the engines extend well below the bottom of the fuselage? What you're proposing is not meaningfully different than the fixed landing gear arrangement that was abandoned for commercial transports ~80 years ago.
Better to figure out a way to keep the pilots from attempting wheels up landings. Since aural alerts can (and have been) be ignored, I keep thinking about an old James Bond movie: There was some 'game' that shocked the player when they were losing. Maybe we need a system like that - if the pilot is doing something really stupid such as landing wheels up or CFIT - it's starts shocking the PF to get their attention.

I have a vague memory of a story about 727 pilots being clever with the flaps in flight from years ago that would illustrate that point, but can't find a reference at the moment
There is considerable controversy about this incident: It happened in 1979, TWA Flight 841, Hoot Gibson was the PF (I remember this because I met a different Hoot Gibson - Space Shuttle Astronaut - with the associated name confusion). Anyway, the story was you could get lower cruise drag/better fuel burn on a 727 by extending the trailing edge flaps - except to make it work you needed to disable the leading edge devices first. Allegedly, Hoot and company did this while the flight engineer was in the toilet - when he returned to the flight deck he noticed that the leading edge device CB's were out so he restored them. One side extended, the other side jammed due to the aero loads and the asymmetric lift rolled them into a dive. They were only able to recover when the extended leading edge ripped off. The controversy was (short story) that the flight crew claimed they were scapegoats - that the leading edge device extended uncommanded, while the official report basically says what I described.
It didn't help the flight crew's story when they erased the voice recorder after they landed
tdracer is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 07:44
  #510 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,470
Are the engine cowlings on the A320 made of composite material? Is that why the scrape marks are black?

Last edited by ManaAdaSystem; 25th May 2020 at 08:02.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 08:09
  #511 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: .
Posts: 46
Originally Posted by SquintyMagoo View Post
Reports are there is a preliminary report. Can anyone find a link to it?
It's not a prelim, rather a 20 page PDF document put together by an insider of PIA stating a number of grievances and also pass accidents where management failed to respond to the lessons learned with the appropriate response.

You will find it shared on whatsapp
Cloudtopper is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 08:21
  #512 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by Cloudtopper View Post
It's not a prelim, rather a 20 page PDF document put together by an insider of PIA stating a number of grievances and also pass accidents where management failed to respond to the lessons learned with the appropriate response.

You will find it shared on whatsapp
I have that one. As stated it has grievances but so did many Boeing employees so I wouldn’t discount it on those grounds! It’s very well put together as a timeline of the events unfolding. Looks like a perfectly serviceable plane until the runway contact.
Retired Guy
retired guy is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 08:27
  #513 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 881
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
I was questioning the location of critical components underneath the engine with the Sioux City DC10 in mind, a turbine failure managed to sever all the hydraulic lines due to them being concentrated in a small area. Standard military doctrine is to spread things out, be it soldiers not bunching up whilst on patrol or aircraft parked close together. Unfortunately it appears that aircraft engines don't offer too much freedom in this area.
Hmmm, dunno. Are we really discussing about making airliners tolerant against landing on the engines and still being able to fly away afterwards???
How about not landing on the pods in the first place and if you can't help the urgency to land on the pods then simply leave it on the ground afterwards?
What other 'interesting' ideas do we want to make the planes idiot- proof against?!
henra is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 08:45
  #514 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,250
Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem View Post
Are the engine cowlings on the A320 made of composite material? Is that why the scrape marks are black?
Discussed earlier in the thread, IIRC, probably worth a forum search.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 25th May 2020, 08:50
  #515 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: grenoble
Posts: 28
Local news update
- Pilots were warned 3 times regarding altitude
- ATC was never informed the plane has any kind of troubles (including landing gear) on the first approach.
- Karachi approach was handling the plane and did not transfer to Tower.
- The plane had fuel for 2hrs30mins while the total flying time was 1hr30min.
- At 2:30 (PST), the plane was 15nm at MAKLI, flying at 10,000ft instead of 7,000ft. ATC gave the first warning. The pilot said he is comfortable. At 10nm, the plane was at 7,000ft instead of 3,000ft. Second warning by ATC. The pilot responded that he is satisfied and can handle it.
- During 1st attempt, engine scraped runway at 3 points - 4,500ft, 5,500ft, and 7000ft.
- Only during second attempt, the pilot informed of a landing gear problem.
Fawad is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 08:52
  #516 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 550
Those black 'scrape' marks look more like staining from a liquid - perhaps even engine oil!
H Peacock is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 08:53
  #517 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Posts: 3,960
Paint and probably the aluminium vaporises on contact between aluminium and concrete at speed. Footage from 20 years ago of a SAFAIR C130 belly landing into YPDN. Lots of smoke and a flash of flame for a few seconds.
found a link here:
compressor stall is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 09:21
  #518 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 486
10 miles 7000 ft and response is I’m comfortable ! Sorry I must have stepped into a twilight zone or logged into a different industry’s chat site ?
Toruk Macto is offline  
Old 25th May 2020, 09:31
  #519 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Commuting home
Age: 43
Posts: 3,390
Originally Posted by giggitygiggity View Post
Blimey, demoting someone for going around is hardly a just culture.

[...]

On the other hand, a pilot going around at 500ft because they're unstable here will probably result in the award of a bottle of champagne. This works well in the Europe and we don't crash planes due to unstable approaches. Your milage may vary elsewhere in the world.
Correct, horses for courses.

It was bait. Full story
1) SOP is to be stable at 1500'. And it is enforced with FDM, i.e. not a SOP to "please plan to be stable by 1500" but rather "we pay you to be stable by 1500, no "pleases", "buts" or "ifs";
2) 1000 is OM-A and NAA hard limit;
3) if you go around 1000-500 you will be processed (in a similar manner you have described above with allowances for the cultural differences, i.e. more public shaming);
4) if you go around but only as late as below 500 - demotion;
5) if you land from unstable at 500 - termination.

My point is whether the "standard" 1000 ft rule is sufficient. Somewhere I've read about a trial with the gate set as low as 300' and it worked better than 1000.



FlightDetent is online now  
Old 25th May 2020, 09:46
  #520 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Romford Essex
Posts: 73
I have searched this thread thoroughly, but I can only find 2 references to "ground effect".

How significant is this to an A320 with the gear retracted ?
Does the flap position affect it ?

It could explain how the aircraft managed to scrape the runway for around 8 seconds without more deceleration.
kit344 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 © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.