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 22nd Jun 2020, 17:14
  #1241 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,362
Originally Posted by andrasz View Post
The images of the aircraft scraping the ground look very much like some photoshop job, were they genuine I would have expected them to surface weeks ago. Same goes for any unsourced statements on that forum.
The post originates from one of the admins of the site in question, so I'd be inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2020, 17:54
  #1242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 574
It is now 21.53 in Karachi, 22nd June 2020.

Was the initial report made public today or not ?

Last edited by Teddy Robinson; 22nd Jun 2020 at 18:03. Reason: local time ...
Teddy Robinson is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2020, 18:21
  #1243 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: France
Posts: 1
Geo tv (Pakistan) has just announced that it will be presented on Wednesday 24 June, after all.
Klhr is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2020, 18:38
  #1244 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 574
Many thanks for that information
Teddy Robinson is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2020, 18:42
  #1245 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 77
Posts: 6,542
There's clearly a bit of misunderstanding about the authority and responsibility of ATCOs. Their role is "to provide a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic".

They are neither trained, nor authorised, to tell an aircraft captain what to do with his aircraft ... beyond the aforementioned parameters.

"Go Around", if timely, is relevant. Telling the PIA pilot NOT to Go Around after the runway scrape is completely inappropriate.

Last edited by MPN11; 24th Jun 2020 at 08:29.
MPN11 is online now  
Old 22nd Jun 2020, 19:16
  #1246 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 57
Posts: 802
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
The post originates from one of the admins of the site in question, so I'd be inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.
Thanks for the info, that pushes up the confidence level by a notch or two. Still strange that they are only surfacing now (or maybe sourced from the report... ?)
andrasz is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2020, 21:31
  #1247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,904
From ARY News:

Aviation Division refutes PK-8303 reports aired on media, nothing released yet

On Jun 22, 2020 Last updated Jun 22, 2020

ISLAMABAD: Aviation Division of the country has refuted various news stories airing on media channels and social media as possible investigative report of PIAís flight PK-8303 crash, ARY News reported on Monday.

Spokesperson of the aviation division categorically stated that the institute has released no such investigative work on the national tragedy and termed the news stories being aired in their name by various news outlets as incorrect.

Multiple news media outlets of the country had run stories on the matter claiming that the investigative report compiled by the aviation division held the pilot and air traffic controller of the ill-fated PK-8303 crash responsible for the harrowing incident that engulfed 97 lives.

It must be noted that Prime Minister Imran Khan had asked the federal minister for aviation, Ghulam Sarwar Khan to produce the investigative report by Monday (today).

Ghulam Sarwar Khan had assured the prime minister of bringing forth the preliminary report and presenting it to the premier, sources privy to the development claimed in the past.

On May 22, flight PK-8303 crashed in Model Colony near the Jinnah International Airport in Karachi, two passengers miraculously survived out of the 99 onboard.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2020, 22:07
  #1248 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 20
Well, apparently ARY News was showing earlier on TV some pages from the report, so it seems they had at least some version of the report, maybe a draft, if not the final version. The video is linked to this article:

https://arynews.tv/en/pilot-air-traf...pk-8303-crash/

And another TV station, Dunya News was apparently showing CCTV screenshots from the report, including those with the sparks as the aircraft touched the runway, that have been posted earlier in this thread:

Preliminary PIA plane crash report presented to PM Imran - Pakistan - Dunya News
MikeSnow is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 00:46
  #1249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the land of smog
Posts: 197
Originally Posted by Uplinker View Post
To a degree, but well before the flare on an A320, you would have had GPWS mode 4A shouting "TOO LOW GEAR. TOO LOW GEAR" audio, with a RED master warning, AND a bloody great big RED down arrow lighting up next to the gear lever. Or would all of that be inhibited if the gear lever had been put down above 260kts?

I will be fascinated to read the CVR to find out how they got themselves into this situation.
The A320 has a hydraulic lock that engages above 260kts as sensed by ADIRS 1 or 3. If you try and put the gear down nothing will happen until below 260kts. Then the gear will move but will most likely rip the gear doors off. It would be near impossible to flare at 260kts and not balloon to 2000ft at the same time. The gear must have been selected up at some point very close to the ground.
TSIO540 is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 01:31
  #1250 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,052
Given its speed, presumably the aircraft would have climbed away pretty quickly if it were held in a nose-up attitude. To touch the runway three times, it must have been at a lower pitch attitude at some point in the sequence. It doesn't seem farfetched that it might have touched in the attitude shown in the photos at least once.
Chu Chu is online now  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 02:23
  #1251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by vilas View Post
Had the engines touched near the fan the loss of tip clearence failed the engines on ground itself saving many more lives.
The engine manufacturers anticipate some level of damage to the fan tips (bird/ice etc. ) and tend to make engines that don't quit immediately with such damage. The result is the engine turbines have to work harder and hotter so you may use up their life quicker. But here we have a chance to be patient and see what's in the report.

I will be very disappointed if all I see in the headlines is the criticism of crew an/or ATC
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 04:54
  #1252 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,904
Originally Posted by lomapaseo View Post
I will be very disappointed if all I see in the headlines is the criticism of crew an/or ATC
I sure don't think you can blame this one on the airplane.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 07:05
  #1253 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: PA
Posts: 7
IIRC, we can see in some crash photos that there is very little or no fan tip damage. The damage which stopped the engines was perhaps gear box or fuel or oil line damage.

Or perhaps we can add another mistake/problem such as not enough fuel?

Is it possible that they knew they were too low on fuel to have more than one landing attempt and this explains the big hurry to get down in one shot, and the failure to do the go around at the proper time?
LTC8K6 is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 08:11
  #1254 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 486
If your low on fuel you make sure the first approach works .
Toruk Macto is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 08:28
  #1255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: the dark side
Posts: 981
Originally Posted by andrasz View Post
The images of the aircraft scraping the ground look very much like some photoshop job,
The point isnít about the images. Itís about the runway being used before a FOD check had been carried out after the runway scrape. As thereís no clarity currently regarding what the tower controller observed, it seems odd that if the tower controller didnít see the event. Again odd that no one else reported it to them, for them to action a runway FOD check prior to the runway being used again.
jumpseater is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 11:20
  #1256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Korea
Posts: 119
Quite a decent summary with some simulations:


It also seems to affirm that the photos of the scrape itself are indeed authenthic.
Euclideanplane is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 11:47
  #1257 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,024
It's all clear now that there was enough fuel aircraft was serviceable, weather was fine and there was no traffic. The pilot missed TOD because either he was sleeping or doping. From the local audios and videos the following things are reasonably clear:
1. The pilot was on continuously rostered for 6th or 7th day without weekly off. When most of the pilots and Aircraft are on ground why should this be the case not known.
2. It was not possible that he wasn't fasting,
3. He missed the descent and asked for it much later.
4. He never cross checked his vertical and speed profile.
5. When ATC told him he was high he just dived the aircraft didn't use the gear to increase his rate of descent.
6. When given a vector refused by saying we are comfortable. Possibly a case of false glideslope.
7. He lowered flaps but was unable to slow down the overspeed warning came on and remained on.
8. Flap overspeed warning suppressed gear not down warning.and the excess speed prevented GPWS from triggering the "Too low gear warning""
9. Only GPWS too low terrain remained on which was ignored as false since RW was visible straight ahead.
10. On touchdown they realized gear was not down.
11. Being unsure of stopping within the remaining distance they executed a go around.
12. Possibility of Engine damage due to contact never occurred to them because they asked for another radar vectored ILS and accepted a divergent heading away from runway.
13 it's only after Engines failed they turned towards runway with gear down.
14. Due to insufficient height trying to clear the buildings Aircraft stalled and crashed.
15. Had the engine damage possibility occurred to them they could have asked for a circling approach and would have made the runway even without the engines.

vilas is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 11:49
  #1258 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Commuting home
Age: 43
Posts: 3,452
Originally Posted by Airbubba View Post
I sure don't think you can blame this one on the airplane.
I guess he wants to see organizational factors under dense scrutiny and brought to light.
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 12:39
  #1259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 433
12. Possibility of Engine damage due to contact never occurred to them because they asked for another radar vectored ILS and accepted a divergent heading away from runway.
Good point.

A tear drop maneuversaved a previous A320 incident.
CodyBlade is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2020, 13:13
  #1260 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by Airbubba View Post
I sure don't think you can blame this one on the airplane.
I didn't mean to imp[y otherwise

It's way too early to wrap this up by blaming persons. All I would like to see is the entire string of facts. After this we can all draw ideas about prevention.

I just don't like the idea of the future air travelers believing that if somebody has a bad day then they themselves wont make it out alive either
lomapaseo 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.