PIA A320 Crash Karachi
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
RETIRED GUY
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Home
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a question regarding the reports of the scrape marks from the engines starting at about 4,500 feet from the begin of the runway. (I am not a pilot)
Had both pilots been completely unaware of the landing gear not being down, wouldn't the scrape marks have started slightly after the normal touchdown zone or even still within it?
On the other hand, had the pilots become aware of the gear not being down just seconds before touchdown and initiated countermeasures, would the plane really have continued gliding downwards for so long until it finally made ground contact so far down the runway?
Had both pilots been completely unaware of the landing gear not being down, wouldn't the scrape marks have started slightly after the normal touchdown zone or even still within it?
On the other hand, had the pilots become aware of the gear not being down just seconds before touchdown and initiated countermeasures, would the plane really have continued gliding downwards for so long until it finally made ground contact so far down the runway?
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: USVI
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
LESS than 260 KTS on the ADR AND Lever down....
There is no wording one way or the other ...a combination of less than 260 KTS on both ADR's AND the lever down will open the hyd valve....
Last edited by turbidus; 24th May 2020 at 22:51.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: More or less all over the place
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wether or not the gear was actually down
during the initial landing and wave off. (different than go around…)
Thereafter we saw pictures of damaged engines during the subsequent approach.
That’s why I posted this…
As I had crews scraping the engines,
whilst prematurely raising the gear,
because, instead of looking at the altimeter,
they were looking at the vsi
that showed a positive rate, which in reality we had not...
Indeed: Relax and no rush…
learner . . .
With engine bypass ratios becoming higher and ground clearance being reduced, has adequate consideration gone into the location of vital components such as pumps, gearbox’s and supply lines ? Whilst space is obviously constrained, having vital systems in a vulnerable position should be avoided.
Many larger engines (larger than a CFM - e.g. PW4000, GE90, GEnx) have the gearbox located on the core instead of the fan case - but that's done for aerodynamic drag reasons (smaller diameter nacelle), not any consideration of wheels-up damage. On CFM sized (and smaller) engines there simply isn't enough room to make a core mounted gearbox practical. Similarly the 3 spool RB211 and Trent engines have a relatively fat core that also makes a core mounted gearbox impractical. The 737 engines have 'split' accessories on the fan case - instead of at ~six o'clock, they're moved to ~4 and 8 o'clock - but that's done for ground clearance - not for any consideration of a wheels up landing - furthermore there is a great deal of plumbing and wiring crossing the six o'clock so I doubt it would fare any better in a similar scenario.
Administrator
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.
With respect to your experience, there is a chance that the forensic based investigation may or may not prove this consideration to be valid.
And we still don't know whether or not they put the gear down before the first approach.
FFS, how about we work with the basics and then climb up the causation tree. (And for all I know, you may be right!)
To put this in perspective: I had a pilot in our multi crew aircraft (a great many years ago) who - a pilot who was not Muslim nor observing Ramadan - get a bit strange on me during a night flight due to him being mildly hypoglycemic.
Negligence on his part for not taking care of an issue (diet) that he knew about ahead of time.
Different root cause, same result: he was useless to me. (Yes, he got a piece of my mind once we got back to terra firma)
How may accident investigation boards have you been on?
It's bloody hard work.
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: USVI
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We did/do not know for certain,
wether or not the gear was actually down
during the initial landing and wave off. (different than go around…)
Thereafter we saw pictures of damaged engines during the subsequent approach.
That’s why I posted this…
As I had crews scraping the engines,
whilst prematurely raising the gear,
because, instead of looking at the altimeter,
they were looking at the vsi
that showed a positive rate, which in reality we had not
during the initial landing and wave off. (different than go around…)
Thereafter we saw pictures of damaged engines during the subsequent approach.
That’s why I posted this…
As I had crews scraping the engines,
whilst prematurely raising the gear,
because, instead of looking at the altimeter,
they were looking at the vsi
that showed a positive rate, which in reality we had not
Looking at the engine skid marks,,,they bounced it down the runway for a bit...
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: kuwait
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is possible that the crew were unaware they had contacted the runway, the GO around was probably initiated during the flare when they noticed the unusual attitude from the lack of gear, by the time the engines had spooled up the nacelles just touched the runway, hard enough to damage them and the IDG's but not hard enough to be catastrophic or even erode the fan cowl latches (Fan cowls stayed on). This could be why they don't mention it or call a mayday until the IDG's and engines start to fail later in the go around due to the damage sustained.
SAP
SAP
L/Gs were down during 1st attempt. G/A was opted to avoid runway overshoot due to high altitude approach from very beginning, Flaps selection to position 3 from 4 and Gears Up selection was too early, which caused acft to sink and engines rubbed the runway, got damaged and packed up during GA to 3000 ft, acft couldn't hold 3000 ft due to dual engine failure,
RAT deployed automatically to provide emergency elect and prssurise Blue Hyd circuit to power Flt Controls, but due thrust loss acft descended to 2000 ft, that's the time pilot reported Mayday Myday--- aircraft crashed short of Runway by 1300 meters on residential area.
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.
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.
Landing unstable at my outfit would result in a temporary withdrawl from flying duties until an quick investigation and subsequent retraining package is provided (if deemed necessary). They often put send the guilty party to a room or a videochat and play back the FDM and ask you for your opinion, it's an open and inquisitive discussion rather than a dressing-down. I haven't had this personally but friend did for a bit of a rushed approach where they forgot the gear (a bit of swiss cheese due to ATC pressure requesting a 1200ft platform and a 4-5nm final for an ILS), they went around at 750ft with the master caution and landed safely 5 mins later. The facts and FDM were the sum of his debrief - food for thought, not a punitive slap on the wrist, but demonstrating the findings of the investigation. For most normal pilots, that should be a bit of a kick up the backside to get you to slow it down and tell ATC unable. Obviously if the pilot still thinks they did nothing wrong, questions will have to be asked.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: More or less all over the place
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apart from the fact that many, many landing gears have already been unintentionally raised with weight on wheels,
the game is not necessarily over yet, after humbly just having been able to manage to only get your aircraft airborne,
you could still bounce back onto the runway…
Better not rely on ’cannot’… learner . . .
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX USA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do you guys think is the significance of the exchange during the 1st approach.where they say they are established on the localizer for 25L, ATC says 'turn left heading 280', they then repeat that they are established on the localizer with no further comment from ATC ? If they were truly on the localizer and flying 250, then 280 would require a right turn. This seems odd.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: india
Age: 38
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGPWS
Speculation 2.0 PF is expecting "Sink rate" warning, so he calls for EGPWS/TAWS off(not standard but management pilots can justify anything). Of course checklist was either not done or rushed through without xchecking. We know the rest.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Asia
Age: 62
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But since you don't know, any harangue on this as the causal factor - that is the problem we are dealing with in trying to keep this discussion professional - is a case of jumping to conclusions.
With respect to your experience, there is a chance that the forensic based investigation may or may not prove this consideration to be valid.
And we still don't know whether or not they put the gear down before the first approach.
FFS, how about we work with the basics and then climb up the causation tree. (And for all I know, you may be right!)
To put this in perspective: I had a pilot in our multi crew aircraft (a great many years ago) who - a pilot who was not Muslim nor observing Ramadan - get a bit strange on me during a night flight due to him being mildly hypoglycemic.
Negligence on his part for not taking care of an issue (diet) that he knew about ahead of time.
Different root cause, same result: he was useless to me. (Yes, he got a piece of my mind once we got back to terra firma)
How may accident investigation boards have you been on?
It's bloody hard work.
With respect to your experience, there is a chance that the forensic based investigation may or may not prove this consideration to be valid.
And we still don't know whether or not they put the gear down before the first approach.
FFS, how about we work with the basics and then climb up the causation tree. (And for all I know, you may be right!)
To put this in perspective: I had a pilot in our multi crew aircraft (a great many years ago) who - a pilot who was not Muslim nor observing Ramadan - get a bit strange on me during a night flight due to him being mildly hypoglycemic.
Negligence on his part for not taking care of an issue (diet) that he knew about ahead of time.
Different root cause, same result: he was useless to me. (Yes, he got a piece of my mind once we got back to terra firma)
How may accident investigation boards have you been on?
It's bloody hard work.
There are potential culturally-influenced dietary risks all over the world, such as alcohol and drug consumption or dieting for cosmetic reasons in the west. The issue of saving face is always raised, like a mantra that every asian person is obsessed with saving face, and there are never people in the west who want to save face. You don't have to look very far to see some very prominent western leaders spending most of their public life trying to save face. And the other issue that is always raised is power gradient in the cockpit, when we know some of the most significant disasters in western cultures involved causal factors that were the result of power gradient problems. Some or all of these factors may have played a part in this instance, but none of us know if any of them are relevant.
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."
As shown, once the ADR went under 260, the valve should have opened, unless there is some other input, or the lever switch is a Momentary (which I would doubt)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey, demoting someone for going around is hardly a just culture. Maybe that might be a necessary if the same thing keeps happening time after time, but that behaviour is a failure of the FDM, safety department and the training (re-training) system if they can't put the guy right.
Landing unstable at my outfit would result in a temporary withdrawl from flying duties until an quick investigation and subsequent retraining package is provided (if deemed necessary). They often put send the guilty party to a room or a videochat and play back the FDM and ask you for your opinion, it's an open and inquisitive discussion rather than a dressing-down. I haven't had this personally but friend did for a bit of a rushed approach where they forgot the gear (a bit of swiss cheese due to ATC pressure requesting a 1200ft platform and a 4-5nm final for an ILS), they went around at 750ft with the master caution and landed safely 5 mins later. The facts and FDM were the sum of his debrief - food for thought, not a punitive slap on the wrist, but demonstrating the findings of the investigation. For most normal pilots, that should be a bit of a kick up the backside to get you to slow it down and tell ATC unable. Obviously if the pilot still thinks they did nothing wrong, questions will have to be asked.
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.
Landing unstable at my outfit would result in a temporary withdrawl from flying duties until an quick investigation and subsequent retraining package is provided (if deemed necessary). They often put send the guilty party to a room or a videochat and play back the FDM and ask you for your opinion, it's an open and inquisitive discussion rather than a dressing-down. I haven't had this personally but friend did for a bit of a rushed approach where they forgot the gear (a bit of swiss cheese due to ATC pressure requesting a 1200ft platform and a 4-5nm final for an ILS), they went around at 750ft with the master caution and landed safely 5 mins later. The facts and FDM were the sum of his debrief - food for thought, not a punitive slap on the wrist, but demonstrating the findings of the investigation. For most normal pilots, that should be a bit of a kick up the backside to get you to slow it down and tell ATC unable. Obviously if the pilot still thinks they did nothing wrong, questions will have to be asked.
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.
Join Date: May 2020
Location: London
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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."
As shown, once the ADR went under 260, the valve should have opened, unless there is some other input, or the lever switch is a Momentary (which I would doubt)
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."
As shown, once the ADR went under 260, the valve should have opened, unless there is some other input, or the lever switch is a Momentary (which I would doubt)
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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".
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are potential culturally-influenced dietary risks all over the world, such as alcohol and drug consumption or dieting for cosmetic reasons in the west. The issue of saving face is always raised, like a mantra that every asian person is obsessed with saving face, and there are never people in the west who want to save face.
