PIA A320 Crash Karachi

[giggitygiggity]

Originally Posted by Out Of Trim

Good Call, It wouldn't cost much to set up.

What will that really achieve except allow us to speculate on what happened at an earlier stage if the video is leaked rather than wait for the report to come out. The CVR and FDRs were both recovered. It is exceedingly rare for one not to be read properly. Some are never recovered, but those are not the ones that crash in view of a tower.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t speculate though, just that it might add little value to the investigation beyond fodder for the daily mail et al to broadcast.

[Fawad]

There appears to be a complete lack of any credible information on the first landing attempt:
- Why pilots were too high at this distance?
- Did Pilots announce any problem onboard (landing gear or otherwise)?

Surely, if there was a serious problem, ATC would have been informed and emergency services would be at the runway. Given the number of people that work in an airport, this would have leaked within minutes to media if not even prior to touchdown. Survivor says nobody knew about anything onboard which suggests there was no problem serious enough to let passengers know or brace for landing. Passengers first clue was when the plane "jolted 3 times", possibly engines scraping the runway incident, before taking off again. Pilots again announced to passengers that they are coming in for another landing (again no emergency, brace, evacuation procedure). ATC certainly mentions belly landing but it could be because they saw the first attempt.

[Fursty Ferret]

to try to really ’delete’ the call: ”positive rate !” from the brains of experienced pilots,

That's a Boeing-ism anyway. The Airbus call is "positive climb" which I've always taken to mean VSI, altimeter, and radio altimeter all showing a climb.

[champair79]

I’m not sure why everyone has ignored my theory but I’m betting false glide capture (a la Bishkek 747 a few years back) with no sense checking using their 3x table. Then target fixation, get-there-itis, steep cockpit gradient and selective hearing due to overload. The rest seems obvious once the aircraft scraped down the runway. What a shambles.

[what next]

Originally Posted by Fursty Ferret

That's a Boeing-ism anyway. The Airbus call is "positive climb" which I've always taken to mean VSI, altimeter, and radio altimeter all showing a climb.

It doesn't reall matter what you say: "Rate", "climb", whatever. The important thing is that things don't need to be rushed when it comes to clean up the plane. There is absolutely no need at all to retract the gear at the earliest possible moment, especially not during the (now mostly practised) noise abatement climbouts, which are done at V2+10kt (or 20). There is no danger of exceeding the gear retraction speed during that kind of initial climb, and the drag of the extended gear is no big factor at low speeds either, even in an engine-out scenario. So just wait as long as it takes to see all needels/tapes (altimeter, VSI, radio altimeter) pointing upward, wait another second or two or three (sometimes things change...) and then stretch out your hand towards the gear lever.
But I don't think that premature raising of the gear is a factor in this accident. It rather looks as if it was never down.

[dmba]

Could anyone post a comparison with the same flight on previous days, with the same graphs?

[Mgggpilot]

Airbus driver here.
Our Company SOP dictates we call "positive climb". ...announce PM
announce positive climb, when the vertical speed indication is positive and radio height has increased.

[PJ2]

Originally Posted by krismiler

Current info is that "Below 260 kt, the hydraulic pressure supply remains cut off as long as the landing gear lever is up." I can't find any reference to having to recycle the lever in the PRO or SYS sections in recent FCOMs, a system chart shows that an indication of speed < 260 kt from ADR 1 or 3 and the lever selected down should open the safety valve and allow gear extension. The procedure may call for recycling the handle but I doubt they had time to refer to the QRH.

Once below 260kts, the valve opens and the gear extends as per the gear handle selection. It's a trap if it doesn't work that way.

[Superpilot]

Originally Posted by PJ2

Once below 260kts, the valve opens and the gear extends as per the gear handle selection. It's a trap if it doesn't work that way.

This was demonstrated to us as part of initial training, I'm pretty sure you're correct.

Here is the text from the FCOM and a logic diagram. Nothing suggests a recycling is required. It would be mentioned here if it was.






NB: This FCOM covers MSN 5xx all the way to 45xx

[learner001]

Originally Posted by fox niner

Nah. Semantics really.
”positive rate” as said in many SOP’s around the globe, simply means that a positive rate of climb has been established. It is the abbreviated form of “positive rate of climb”.
Same as: “gear down, flaps 20”, which means “select the gear lever down and subsequently select flaps 20, please”
Let’s not get into this. Just make sure you do a go-around when too hot and high.

The change of just one little word, or in the sequence of words or items, in SOPs (all areas…) could make tremendous progress on safety…
Unfortunately, I see that ignored in many companies…

”Nah, Semantics really” IMHO is inviting ’room for error’…

Despite the different SOPs several DOFOs or companies may have printed, let’s very briefly try to talk basic semantics.
But then, correctly… They are applicable for all phases of flight...

• There are several ways to confirm that an aircraft is climbing. Each way has its own shortcomings/restrictions/conditions. Out of all these ways, the altimeter has virtually none…
• The actions of a pilot usually follow ’mindset’ and ’input’, unless otherwise ’drilled’… Hence, in the startling phase of a go around or wave off, during the preparation to confirm and subsequently call out: ”Positive rate” the ’mindset’ and ’input’ will pull the pilots attention and eyes towards the VSI in the first place.(Solely, because of the word: rate…)

Even whilst the pilot should know better, (s)he keeps staring at and waiting for a needle to go up, at an instrument that is useless in those moments. And the pilot is wasting her/his precious energy whilst unnoticed the altimeter probably has already slowly started going up…)

Had the pilot been looking with the same intensity at the altimeter in the first place, (s)he would have instantly grabbed the precious information about climbing or not by just looking at one spot...
Just a plain, simple example of basic semantics kept simple…

(A great deal of my training is done at high elevation airfields in mountainous regions, where room for error diminishes very rapidly.
That’s also an environment where you really find out things which you would normally, during years of flying, never notice !)
learner . . .

[LTC8K6]

Originally Posted by Fursty Ferret

That's a Boeing-ism anyway. The Airbus call is "positive climb" which I've always taken to mean VSI, altimeter, and radio altimeter all showing a climb.

"Positive Climb" seems redundant.

"Positive Rate" makes a little more sense to me.

Maybe everyone should just call out "Climbing"?

[FlightDetent]

Originally Posted by champair79

I’m not sure why everyone has ignored my theory but I’m betting false glide capture (a la Bishkek 747 a few years back) with no sense checking using their 3x table. Then target fixation, get-there-itis, steep cockpit gradient and selective hearing due to overload. The rest seems obvious once the aircraft scraped down the runway. What a shambles.

I did not. Also g.g.'s 2500 fpm from well above the changeover level to 10k on average sounds - like a quiet day in the office.

It's been a few times already when the 1000 ft stable rule failed the crew and perhaps a little questioning is due. Not the crew, questioning of the rule.

FWIW my employer says when you land from unstable at 500, the PIC is fired. When you go-around from unstable at 500, the PIC is demoted for 6 months before being allowed an attempt to regain the second half of the salary.

[meleagertoo]

Originally Posted by Fursty Ferret

The Airbus call is "positive climb" which I've always taken to mean VSI, altimeter, and radio altimeter all showing a climb.

Quite.
Much more comprehensive and much more specific.

The (many other companies, not just Boeing) 'positive rate' call infers only a reference to the VSI whch is, as any thinking pilot knows, only tells part of the story...

'Positive climb' encompasses all that is required.

Still, what matters is SOPs. The mouth music on your type is scripted, so stick to it!

[Joejosh999]

Interesting wording on the LG “the hyd system remains cut off as long as the gear lever is Up” when <260 knots,
But it doesn’t say explicitly that if lever is down and speed reduces from above 260,to below 260, that hyd is automatically restored and gear will drop.
i wish the wording was clearer.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Joejosh999

Interesting wording on the LG “the hyd system remains cut off as long as the gear lever is Up” when <260 knots,
But it doesn’t say explicitly that if lever is down and speed reduces from above 260,to below 260, that hyd is automatically restored and gear will drop.

Doesn't Superpilot's schematic show exactly that ?

[deltahotel]

Come on guys/girls. I refer my honourable friend to my previous answer:

From the Boeing FCTM:

‘Retract the landing gear after a positive rate of climb is indicated on the altimeter.’

So if my company wants me to say ‘positive rate’, that’s fine by me. Yes, I do know that I need to look at the big white needle going clockwise or the alt tape numbers scrolling upwards.

If an airline (&/or Airbus) wanted me to look at three things - baro,radio,vsi I’d do that too. (Do Airbus say that?)

As it is my bunch say ‘When a positive rate of climb is seen on the barometric altimeter, call: “Positive Rate”’ which is pretty clear as to which instrument I need to look at to make sure the houses will be getting smaller.

rgds, stay safe

[Flyingmole]

Originally Posted by Pilot DAR

Posters,

Remarks about race and religious rituals have no place here. We're here to discuss aviation, not race and religion....

With respect, a key issue in aviation incidents is human factors, and where such rituals can affect human factors they are relevant to identifying possible causation of incidents and accidents. I say that as someone who has worked in the Middle East for 20 plus years, has a huge respect for the customs and religion, but is acutely aware of the detrimental effect on operational effectiveness of prolonged fasting. The crash was, I believe, around 14.40 local and the Al-Fajr prayer call, when fasting begins, is around 03.25 in Lahore at the moment. If - and it is a big 'if' - the pilot had been fasting then given the timings I have just quoted, it is relevant to consider this in an analysis of the crash.

[EFHF]

Originally Posted by Teddy Robinson

I fully concur, the ELAC failures and loss subsequent loss of pitch control in the Smartlynx accident have no direct relation to this accident, however, the runway contact itself to the point of dual engine failure does seem worthy of further discussion.

There are parallels indeed, like how both flights impacted terrain within a couple hundred meters from the threshold. Because the Smartlynx training flight was returning to the reverse runway from where it had the scrape instead of trying to fly a circuit, it came down on the runway centerline and hit the approach lights and then the RESA.

Here the impact location was off to the left of the runway centerline where there unfortunately were a group of buildings instead of flat terrain.

In both cases (due to RAT deployment), APU was not started before total engine failure, which contributed to further airframe damage in the Smartlynx accident and could easily have contributed here as well. In the A320 APU start is delayed for 45 seconds following dual IDG failure (I believe this is to maintain battery voltage during RAT deployment and emergency generator connection). When the Smartlynx crew lost their last engine, they also lost nominal hydraulic power to their only remaining pitch control (THS), relying on minimal Y system pressure from the windmilling engine 2.

Flying with just B hydraulics and the emergency buses is certainly more demanding than with the APU running and most hydraulics and electrics intact.

[Joejosh999]

Dave - only suggesting the wording is not as clear as could be. Not going to presume to read the schematic, which does seem to combine conditions such as speed < 260 comb8ned w Gear lever Down, but doesn’t show a Gear Lever Down over a changing speed condition.

[LegiossTypeH]

Is there any airspeed data during the first approach ?
Since speed break extention will increase VLS significantly, especially during approach (The aircraft is in low airspeed state that VLS is always close to you), pilots won’t be able to use full speed break when airspeed is at or below green dot speed, then the only way to increase descent rate is to lower the landing gear. Or pilots have to increase airspeed in OPN DES mode combined more speed break extention. In my personal experence, when airspeed is 250kts without speed break extention in OPN DES mode, the descent rate won’t be more than 3000 fpm. But according to the data above in 0932Z, decent rate is unbelivably more than 6000 fpm, and METAR shows WX is good that moment. So the airspeed information can be a clue to know the gear is lowered or not during the
first approach.