"So far, we have had verbal diarrhea from someone saying the accident looks survivable! Not to me Jose- I suppose really careless of the victims to succumb."

Ok then oh great one, point me in the direction of ANY a/c accident where there were no survivors and where this much of the fuselage maintained this degree of structural integrity and without manifest evidence of fire.

Please - any - just one - please.

It was an observation of my suprise - no conjecture why - no opinion - nada.

But in your forum, I take it that it is yours - yes/no? - I guess that's verboten.

411A
You're right on the money! Maybe the time has finally come or else we have to accept that these forums have descended into a free-for-all rather than a place for serious discussion between professionals..............

:(

Does that mean all non-glass aircraft should be grounded due plenty of potential for crew disorientation?

PBL
I have learned never to antognize lawyers journalists or academics so I'm not trying to provoke your anger, but just trying to broaden your insight.
and yes your postulation above is certainly worthy of discussion by those that choose.
I tend to agree that it likely went in underside first, partly broke up and bounced. But my judgement is clouded because I haven't recognized more than the center wing box and the tail and of course no wreckage scatter diagram as yet.
However I don't agree that striking underside first necessarily points to a stall. I have two points of experience that conflict with that supposition.
First, I have only seen flat impacts from stalls in rare cases. In most cases of stall one wing drops and the aircraft upsets leaving asymentrical damage from one side to the other. In other events the nose pitches down.
Second; I have seen numerous CFIT events where the wreckage pattern had bottom fuselage impacts, breakup and bounce. Much of which depended on what side of the terrain it impacted. Consider that in most events you are not centered on the hill so either the left or right wingtip hits first, sometimes spinning the fuselage as it progresses forward.
In this case I have no conclusions (too little data), but I am always mindful that it takes a lot of time to go from a flameout to an uncontrolled ground impact. Most pilots use this time to aviate, navigate and communicate

well they did fine until they touchdown long, on the runway and then departed off the right hand side. I got a laugh out of the link reporting about the loss of the inlet cowl as a factor (it was only a pointer that an engine failed)

Actually I value PBL's input. A good number of years ago at University (early 90's) as a so called "spotter" as I were then I used to read a lot PBL used to write on the Risks list, and now RHS 737 EFIS I have to say my opinion of him hasn't changed one iota.

I suggest you review his previous literature going back perhaps 20 years before personally attacking the guy.

And flame me all you like.


Rainbowe said:
Charles and PBL, you won't take the hint! Stop this stupid speculation based on zero information. This is getting like the Kenyan thread. It takes trained investigators looking at scratches and gouges to work out what the aeroplane was doing. Analysing the post ground contact movements is not really at all productive, we are really after why the collision took place in the first place, not your musings. There seems to be a competition with every accident to be the first to come up with the cause- it's getting embarrassing. Why do you think people want to hear your idle, inexperienced speculation? Most experienced pilots will have a fairly good suspicion as to why and how the event took place, but until further details are released, better to hold their peace, as they are- leaving it to enthusiastic aviation fans with a computer and absolutely no training or experience (or understanding!) to bombard us with garbage!

So far, we have had verbal diarrhea from someone saying the accident looks survivable! Not to me Jose- I suppose really careless of the victims to succumb.

Can we please wait for news to be released, and any pertinent comments from someone who knows what they are talking about?

I saw that aircraft company last week
 

First of all,the MD83 has not a EGPWS but only a simple GPWS(without terrain clearance floor datas of registered airports) so if you are fully configured and in a normal rate of descent,you will have no warning despite you are offset centerline!
MD83 equipped with only conventional RDI(radio directional indicator) without any ND and MAP display.
the captain said he had the rwy in sight but still possibility of black whole if between you and the threshold you do not see the green lights of the start of the rwy.
Last week I saw this plane or another Atlasjet MD83 in Pristina.As we were waiting for the RVR improvement for T/O(2 and half hours in the plane with PAX on board),during this time that plane landed in front of me with a very low RVR and you need 800mPLUS ceiling of 300ft for the ILS 17 PRN which is the lowest min for PRN(special state case).then he took off just a while after with RVR much below the min requirement!!
SO I REALLY WONDER ABOUT ANY POSSIBLE SAFETY CULTURE in this company but again this purely speculation and wait for the investigation.Sad for all persons killed.

I have not yet seen any information on the flight path relative to the impact terrain and the pictures only show the immediate wreckage.

As Lomapaseo has noted:In contrast to those who have postulated a straight down impact or descending at a greater rate than the downslope (neither yet excluded), a more likely impact sequence is being pivoted by a wing impact followed by the upslope wingtip impacting the ground and the fuselage impacting sideways, caveat more complete information.

The energy absorption by the wing would explain the apparent integrity of the fuselage, but that does not count for much. Films of experimental crashes conducted by NASA on flood damaged Navahos show massive dynamic deformation of fuselages before they resume an apparently intact appearance.

Is EGPWS required on Turkish aircraft?
Atlas jet flies into Europe according to what I read.
I am almost sure Europeans require this, I know most Middle East and Asian countries do require it, upgrading is not all that difficult.

Can someone confirm the exact location of the crash site?

So far, I few contradicting indications have been given, and it is not even confirmed that the approach was for Runway 05

ibelieveicanfly wrote:


"First of all,the MD83 has not a EGPWS but only a simple GPWS..."
This aircraft has been flying charter flights from and to Europe this summer, including Scandinavia and if it not had EGPWS it would not been able to operate example from Finland, our so loved CAA is taking care of this. So there fore I would say that they did had an EGPWS installed.


You also wrote "MD83 equipped with only conventional RDI(radio directional indicator) without any ND and MAP display."


If you are referring with this line to ex Swiss MD83´s (You´re Swiss right?) you´re correct but if you do a search there is a lot of MD80´s out there with EFIS/ND/FMS/GPS/INS -installed... For example this aircraft used to fly with RenoAir and they did had EFIS/ND/FMS cockpit layout.


Your comment about Turkish pilots safety culture is absolutely correct. What I have seen they are negligent to everybody in this business! Latest stunt from their country men was few weeks ago in Finland when they almost hit ground vehicle because they decided to leave the holding and do the practise approach (ILS CAT I) with RVR less than 550m. Bad thing was that they did not informed anybody about this and they terminated their approach to VERY LOW. The airport did not had radar surveilance. Well the investigation is under way anyway...Way to go Turks:yuk:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hlight=Pegasus

Thanks Fin Pilot for the EGPWS requirement in Europe.

http://www.md80.net/yabbse/images/at...rta_pprune.jpg
Map layer from Navigraph

Here are the published procedures plus crash site according to information from news media.

What puzzles me is that the ATC transcript (post #24), if correctly relayed, states that the MD-83 reported "overhead VOR" at time 2318Z and the last communication "established inbound" was 18 minutes later - you hardly fly a D12 racetrack for that long?

Could anybody familiar with Turkish ATC procedures enlighten what the guys might have done during that time? Could the flight originally have come DCT IPT VOR at high altitude with handoff from Antalya radar for descent to published procedure at 8,000 ft over the VOR? MSA is 11,500 ft in the area.

In what direction is the wreckage pointing?

to FINpilot
 

ok good but it is the first time hear an 83 has an EFIS maybe you confuse with the 87.
if the acft would have been equipped with EGPWS(unless it was u/s) and not a simple GPWS,an alert would have come automatically to the pilot if not flown in rose mode,isn'it?who knows?

dear "IbelieveIcanfly".

I feel that your post is probably what we will find to be true, My only complaint is that it is not "black whole", but it is "black hole".

As this is a giant nothing, I apologize for even mentioning it.

Over 40 years ago, responsible people asked for ILS approaches at all jet served airports.

its that simple.

shortcuts at night near mountains are an accident waiting to happen.

I don't discount an improperly set radio nav receiver, HSI course selector incorrectly set or the like.

In what direction is the wreckage pointing?

-no pilot speaking-
from the video cnn-turk and the picture http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/30/europe/plane.php (Herald Tribune)
looks like the hill gets down to the west, and if the picture is from this morning it would point to NW. But searching for more pictures or description would be indicated.

flash8,

thanks for the kind words.

lomapaseo,

glad you are engaging. I don't buy your dynamics yet. Let's stay on it.

RatherBeFlying,

I don't buy your dynamics either.

PBL

"looks like a slow speed impact, maybe stall due to engine out while on final or some kind of trouble close to the ground."

Like they used to say about the Cub, flies fast enough to just kill you.

Unfortunately there are a couple of people here who think they are investigators and can determine the probable cause of an accident by a picture or two of part of the wreck. Its not worth arguing. Just stick to the facts like any professional safety expert would. More info will probably come out.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/...php?Country=TC

True, but the worst offenders tend to join for one accident that affects them, then bugger off after the investigation and thread has run its course. I've been variously lurking and hopefully contributing stuff of some use for a few years now and I'd miss this place were I no longer admitted.

TwoOneFour;

Could not agree more strongly. PBL has an enormous amount to offer those who set aside an unfounded prejudice against "academics" in favour of an open mind. PBL has never claimed to know it all but instead contributes from his expertise as we all do.

PJ2

He's also a very friendly,courteous character as well, and tenacious in the face of getting to the bottom of safety issues, even if it means re-evaluating his initial opinions.

This place would be significantly poorer for lack of his presence.

When an incident... or an accident happens...
 

It seems that the first priority, for some, is to broadcast the fact on Pprune. It is a contest to be the first... Then of course, we get two, three, a dozen of statements that repeat essentially the same thing... Obviously, if the BBC says so.. clearly, Radio Deutches Welle or RAI will do as well. No need to cite each separate reference...
xxx
Then from threads nº 10 through nº 50, we get the early expert reports of why the accident happened. Occasionally, an intelligent assesment appears, but gets lost in the flood of expert "reports".
xxx
Personally, if something unfortunately happens to an airplane, I like to know about it, but I do not expect to know about the likely reason or circumstances, until many days or weeks later. What I like to know, is to which airplane it did happened to, such as registry, manufacturer's s/n, maybe know which airline operated that aircraft previously, some might know what was the standard equipment of that airplane then... I also appreciate those who are, like here, publishing the applicable approach procedure of the airport (or the departure if a take-off or climb incident/accident) as well as the MET reports at the time of the event. That is it... Nice to know also if the plane just came out of a "C" check, or that the RH engine got changed the day before.
xxx
I called upon the MD-80 fleet manager of my airline this morning, to ask him if he had anything already transpiring from official sources. He told me nothing had already been published. What was his idea of what happened, he said "very likely to be a CFIT situation" as a likely reason after he probably read the news, he just asked me "there are mountains there in Turkey, is it...?"
xxx
Then in a few weeks, probably the voice recorder and flight recorder findings will be published. I will read through them, and if applicable, will make a note if mentioning something of benefit for out pilots, and if necessary, to our MD-80 troops. That is about it... That will be thread nº 300 or so... most of the rest will be rubbish. So... non-glass cockpits are source of disorientation of pilots...? Well, I clean the fingerprints of previous crews from my instruments with Windex spray, and can perfectly read my FD and HSI, as well as the DME counter. At my age, glass cockpits do confuse me.
xxx
As I would speculate that it is a scenario of CFIT, airplane possibly off its course, or not, I am certain that the operations and training management of that Turkish air carrier are already thinking of it as well, and issuing notes to all their pilots with recommendations of minimum sector altitudes to be maintained, or reviews of approach procedures for that particular airport, or similar places, which abound in that part of the world.
xxx
I appreciate the value of "educated discussions" among aviation people and the education value of these discussions. But do not expect my own criticism, at this stage, of what could be done to improve flight safety in similar circumstances. to which all of us flight crews, could benefit. Maybe in 3 months, in classrooms, I will mention the "Turkish MD-83 accident" and suggest some reviews of procedures.
xxx
I will however, mention one thing. As a pilot, I will never descend "as soon as I can", based on MEA or radar MSA for approaches, as I see many pilots do. I descend at the latest possible point, as cleared or able to do, but, instead, based on the distance to be flown to touchdown, which is for most jet planes, to be at 10,000 feet AGL if 30 NM away, 6,000 AGL if 20 NM, 3,000 if at 10 NM, and 1,000 AGL about 3 NM from the deck. Agreed...? Altitude often implies safety. I dont need to be at 3,000 feet AGL 20 NM away, at Vref and configured for landing unless ATC instruct me and requires me to do so, especially at night, with a "black hole" in front of us.
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

PBL says: I am reminded of videos of the A-10 crash as Paris LBG in June 1977. Tail struck the ground first and was immediately disabled (bent upwards) - the remainder of the the ship skidded straight to a stop. (I lost a former student, Howard "Sam" Nelson, that day.)

Applying this scenario to the MD83 case, if he recognized rising terrain and pitched up, we might see a similar outcome - skidding uphill.

Ibelieveicanfly: not just -87....MD-82/83 were delivered with EFIS as standard after about 1988...about the time the green paint in the cockpit turned grey. FMS (loran-based) was optional. Dual FMS (INS-based) came later. RNO jets had EFIS and FMS. The chaotic cockpit has the displays partly hidden behind the control column, leading to the sub-conscious 'leaning scan'.

I agree with 411A here - how on earth did we ever find our way in the 1011?;) No ND....terrible....

Here's my stoking the rumours time:

All I can see from the photos is:

Leading edge slats are deployed inboard (look like 'land' position, but impact could have jolted the actuators downwards)

The stab has considerable nose-up trim (there's a single screw jack in there -unlikely to jolt); don't know where the 50 pax were seated...ie don't know likely trim setting for light aircraft...

If you look carefully at the blown up photo of the tail, you can just make out the leading edge of the elevator sticking up ...from behind the stab hinge line. I looked at this because if there was a slow-speed condition, the MD-80 series has a hyd stick pusher actuator that pushes the elevator (not the entire tailplane) nose down at 3000psi - ie: leading edge up. Doesn't mean impact couldn't have jolted it there, either....the elevators free float otherwise, but they are mass-balanced...

The fuel tanks look like they are ripped completely open beneath the overwing heater blankets - you can see the lower inspection panels in one of the pics, from inside the wing...

There, that's sure to cause flamethrowers...no opinions, just observations...what's wrong with that with on PPRUNE? Incoming...

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=77499
Some very interesting reading from the THY crash in 2003

Very sad event, indeed. We learn very slowly: http://aviation-safety.net/database/...?id=19811201-1

The insider testimonies from MD-80 drivers with bankruptcy-ridden World Focus, who operated the AtlasJet flight on wetlease, are not that encouraging:

http://www.md80.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=1765.0

Delayed salary payments, recruitment problems, whole business grounded March to May 2007, frequent search for new capital plus new owners, sub-standard technical conditions of the aircraft, full elec power blackouts, engine fires, get the money where you can get at least some, get the spares where you can get them, frequent short-time ops in Iran, Eritrea...

Over at MD-80 Forum we are starting getting these scary "stick-shakers" about how airlines operating ageing cheap airliners are run - you hear these signals 6 to 12 months in advance, and you can start betting they are going to crash soon.

Specific Isparta followup here:

http://www.md80.net/yabbse/index.php...=4007.msg12552

Okay, fine, dynamics:

In the East Granby, CT incident, mentioned above, an MD-83 cut a trough eight feet deep and 290 feet long in the forest two and a half miles from the threshold. In addition to losing both engines, there was damage to various aircraft parts, including the horizontal stabilizer, and leading edges of the wings, and scrapes/punctures to the fuselage. No damage was reported forward of the front wing spar.
So a descending MD-83 could very well strike tail-first. And the Uruguayan Fairchild CFIT hit wing first, which sheared off the tail.
As for no signs of slide, we don't have a photograph clearly showing the wreckage according to the direction of travel, and what photos we do have, suggest that it did slide to that position. The IHT photograph shows the wings and attached fuselage having come to a rest at a 45 degree right angle to the direction of travel (right-to-left in the photograph). To the right you can see a tree that has been knocked over, and you can see the black streak going off to the left where the forward half of the fuselage continued traveling and disintegrating.

Once metal hits terrain, all kinds of complicated dynamics take place, and even to make an educated guess, we'd need at least some larger view of the terrain and direction of travel. But I don't think we can say that the evidence points to a "low-speed" impact.

http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/sh...5&page=4&pp=25
Here is a link from another site with some more pics, shows what someone thinks is the initial impact point in relation to the wreckage.
These are originally from a Turkish newspaper.

I believe "md80forum" is on to a much more interesting track, at this stage anyway.
Problem here is that in some of the "eastern european" countries, and also Middle east, Northern Africa/Turkey, the safety culture is just not the same as in EU/US, GENERALLY speaking... A friend of mine got his "lucky break" and landed his first airline job in turkey. He left six months later, not because he did not like staying in Turkey, he actually quite enjoyed it, but because he was scared. Yes, scared. If even half of his stories are true, then Im afraid there are more accidents/incidents to come.
As md80 rightly states there are clear signs months, sometimes years, before something happens. Most of the time cash, or rather the lack of cash, is the root of the problem. Safety costs money, lost of money, simple as that. EU can help improving the safety standard in surrounding countries by being more proactive in auditing and setting clear standards for airlines wanting to operate in and out of EU. This will force airlines to develop and improve safety. We have a responsibility here as well.....
/CP

to captainprop:
I agree with you.
I flew many years MD80 serie and this a very reliable acft but of course it must be in a good condition like any acft

ibelieveicanfly,

No I´m not confusing to MD-87... For example take a look:

http://www.groundspeedrecords.com/re...3%20603kts.htm

I have personally flown everything from "old" instrument (HSI/RMI only) to "latest" EFIS/ND/GPS/INS/FMS/HUD/DIGITAL ENGINE INSTRUMENTS/ALL YOU CAN GET WITH MONEY -MD83´s and all kind of mix between...It´s no big secret that your situational awareness is greater with the EFIS plane but it´s not either a big secret that somebody can CFIT the plane with EFIS´s...ND is only showing you what you have selected, as we all know

Culture
 

MD80 Forum indicates my fears (somewhat timidly expressed)may have a basis. It is so often culture - not just national but company - The signs were all there for Helios but nobody did anything.

According to the Turkish media, the plane had EGPWS.
They are saying the captain has failed the simulator training and was not promoted to captain at his former job and resigned from there. He was promoted at World Focus airlines.

The first officer was a former air force pilot who has flown f-4's and f-16's
The news stories claim the captain wanted to take a short cut and he was not familiar with the airport. He approached from the opposite direction and hit the terrain.
I don't have the time to translate all the news stories, but friends who have done landings at that airport are saying that it looks like a pilot error, and the shortcut speculation is most likely to be true.

We spend a lot of time slagging journalists off, but in this case it appears that the Turkish press are accurately relecting the private opinions of the Turkish aviation community on this tragic event.

Why is the First Officer who was an ex Military something General now a martyr. If they really had a CFIT ( probably YES ) they are fully responsible for the death of more than 50 people. This is ridiculous.

I flew couple years in Turkey and the attitude of many of the ex military guys is very dangerous.

Very sad again for Turkey. And unfortunately they wont learn.

I feel so sorry for the PAX and Cabin Crew.

Safe landings to everybody

These small charter companies in Turkey leave a lot to be desired.
Onur Air is another one that is just an accident waiting on a place to happen.
They were previously banned from the EU.
Back in 2003 they touched down in Medina KSA with the gear up, a few days later another one taxied into a light pole all on the Saudia contract.
I think the Turkish people are getting fed up with these low cost airlines and the accidents that have happened, most due to pilot error.
It is surprising to read these things from there own media as they are really proud people, shows that things are changing.
Some of these companies are really slow to pay the crews, many times no salary for weeks or months, the crews then push things so the company can make a profit in the hopes that they will collect there salary.
I have heard many Turkish pilots state this.
The one a few years ago with THY a major airline that tried to land with zero vis and no ILS.
I think 5 pax survived that one.
Just makes you wonder what is going on there?

should we really say "pilot error"?

sorry, it is the entire way we train, supervise, test, and corporate philosophy that should be blamed.

Make it corporate philosophy to give a bonus for each well flown instrument approach and every pilot will fly the full instrument approach. Give a bonus to save money and you will end up on the side of the mountain.

Don't make it corporate philosophy to save fuel (see continental)

I guess you get my drift by now.

too many times, short cuts, looking out the window and abandoning the full IFR procedures leads to an untimely event.

How many more people are going to die before the authorities make use of modern technology? For a few hundred quid you can buy a gps pda that knows all the terrain in the direction you're going, not just underneath you, and will display it as red if you're about to hit it. Loony regulations and tight management prevent such basic aids from saving life. People have got to wake up to the fact that low-cost and third-world growth means the old model of highly professional pilots has got to be adjusted. It's no use whingeing on - we need to stick more safety equipment on planes and in control towers.