|
B-738 Crash in Russia Rostov-on-Don
Airliner crashes on approach to Russian airport, officials say By Pierre Meilhan, CNN Updated 9:56 PM ET, Fri March 18, 2016 (CNN) — A Boeing 738 passenger jet crashed as it was landing at the Rostov-on-Don airport in southern Russia, the country's Southern Regional Emergency Center said Saturday. The plane, which had traveled from Dubai, had 55 people aboard, the Emergency Center said. It wasn't immediately clear if there were any survivors. Developing story - more to come |
Flydubai passenger Boeing from Dubai crashes in Rostov-on-Don Published time: 19 Mar, 2016 01:27 Edited time: 19 Mar, 2016 02:04 Flydubai flight FZ981 has crashed in the southern Russian city of Rostov-on-Don killing all 59 passengers and crew on board. The flight was en route from Dubai and crashed during a landing approach. Air-traffic control and local emergency services confirmed that the Boeing 737 jet crashed near the runway during a second approach in conditions of poor visibility. “According to preliminary data, the Boeing 737 crashed in poor visibility conditions, some 50-100 meters left of the runway,” the source said. All crew and passengers on board the plane were killed in the crash, according to the regional Emergencies Ministry. “During the landing approach a Boeing-737 crashed. It had 55 passengers on board. All of them died,” a regional spokesman told TASS. |
Flight radar route of #FZ981 that crashed on landing |
"unconfirmed" video of crash
|
Moderate to heavy showers, gusts up to 43 knots but VIS zero hard to believe
Like all Russian wx observers very generous with seeing CB clouds, the Metar history on site showing showers, quite some wind, but nothing extreme, no lightning recorded either.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cd4K_aDWIAAmWR6.jpg:large |
Appears to have conducted a missed approach before entering hold before landing attempt based on FlightRadar24
|
|
If the video posted at #4 is real, it looks like a steep fast descent into the ground.
Impact appears totally unsurvivable. |
Metars -
URRR 190030Z 24012G19MPS 6000 -SHRA SCT018 BKN036CB OVC100 06/04 Q0998 R22/290046 TEMPO 25017G25MPS 1000 SHRA BR SCT003 BKN020CB RMK QFE741/0988 URRR 190100Z 24014G22MPS 3800 -SHRA BKN014 BKN033CB OVC100 06/04 Q0997 R22/290046 TEMPO 25017G25MPS 1000 SHRA BR SCT003 BKN020CB RMK QFE740/0987 |
in the video I saw it appeared the aircraft was on fire before a high rate of decent impact. So sad for flydubai which has an excellent safety record.
https://mobile.twitter.com/khalidkha...290816/video/1 |
Wind down the runway as well. Small crosswind component.
|
Yeah the video appears very strange for a crash as a result of poor weather on landing, you would expect a controlled crash into terrain.
Also the video does appear to fit with come from the main road that runs parallel to the runway |
The time difference between both approaches was almost 2 hours!
C.A |
Jack,
How on earth can you tell that it 'appears to be a 60 degree decent angle'? C.A |
think thats the video of the one that crashed on go-around previously
|
Whatever the angle, it's way steeper than normal. Depending upon the sensitivity of the surveillance camera, what appears to be fire may just be heat in the infrared spectrum.
|
Based on google maps/street view the video matches up with being shot from pr . Sholokhov (пр. Шолохова) - thats a road btw
|
this is the actual weather reported at the time of accident
URRR 190300Z 25011G18MPS 3900 -SHRA BKN011 BKN030CB OVC100 06/04 Q0997 R22/290046 TEMPO 25017G25MPS 1000 SHRA BR SCT003 BKN020CB RMK QFE740/0987 URRR 190230Z 25011G16MPS 4700 -SHRA BKN013 BKN031CB OVC100 06/04 Q0997 RESHRA R22/290046 TEMPO 25017G25MPS 1000 SHRA BR SCT003 BKN020CB RMK QFE740/0987 URRR 190200Z 25011MPS 4600 1700SW SHRA BKN014 BKN032CB OVC100 06/04 Q0997 R22/290046 TEMPO 25017G25MPS 1000 SHRA BR SCT003 BKN020CB RMK QFE740/0987 |
Originally Posted by Contact Approach
(Post 9315074)
The time difference between both approaches was almost 2 hours!
C.A Or in other words, if the time difference between the two attempted approaches was 2 hours, and if they held for some time prior to the first, it's almost impossible to imagine they would have had fuel to reach the alternate. Also, what would their most likely alternate have been? |
Not sure if anyone is interested by this is my guess as to location the video came from
https://twitter.com/OFC_videos/statu...35535343505408 If it is correct is means the plane crashed very close to the start of the runway |
|
First Video from the crash scene, it appears the plane almost nose dived into the runway
|
Realizing that the radar shows ground speed and not airspeed, it still brings up the possibility of a stall. Someone with some more time tonight can probably calculate the final decent 's VVI.
|
If the video is real, looks very similar to that of the Tartastan accident at Kazan.
|
FDP limitations a reason for not diverting?!
If these guys would have diverted, they might have had to layover... You cannot make it back to DXB in one FDP with 3 sectors.
For sure if you are carrying enough fuel to hold for 2 hours, it means you don't want to divert! FZ and EK are known to push FDL to the limit! Poor sods... |
preliminary passenger list has been published
http://lifenews.ru/news/191188 google will translate https://translate.google.com.au/tran...Fnews%2F191188 |
Careful with those allegations that the aircraft "may have been on fire" judging from those seconds shown on the video.
Aircraft are known to show landing lights during approach; those are a perfectly good explanation for the lights seen and according to Occams Razor much more probable than an inflight fire. I suggest that respect for the colleagues and their passengers on board dictates a cautious approach to speculating. |
FR24 Observations
16.29 Fairly close to airport at 11K ft.
16.42 On approach then began to climb and increase speed so did a missed approach from an altitude of 1750ft 16.50 climbed out to 8K ft. southwest and from there into a circle towards the northeast 17.15 After circling to the northeast of the airport, increased altitude to 15K ft to fly to holding pattern southeast of runway 17.27 Enter holding pattern southeast of airport at altitude of 15K ft. 18.24 On the 9th circuit of the hold, began decent and approach to airport 18.36 Turned into runway heading on approach at 2750ft 18.38 Began decent from 2750ft to airport ------Approached looks normal, speeds mirror first approach (105-115Kts) until seemingly almost the same point on the approach where they aborted the first time. 18.40 Speed increases and altitude increases from a low point of 1550ft so a second missed approach seems to be happening 18.41 Speed at 185Kts and altitude at 3975ft but next to last data point 18.42 Last data point. Speed up to 197Kts but altitude has fallen to 925ft So from missed approach at ~16.42 until beginning second approach at ~18.24, pilots obviously troubleshooting or waiting for weather for about one hour and 42 minutes. Approach looks fine before it all went south with the time from the 2nd missed approach to the crash only being around 2 minutes. The final decent seems to be at high speed and high angle of decent (3K feet decent in less than a minute at almost 200Kts). Speeds don't decay low enough to indicate a stall...but that can depend on a lot of other things (AoA, configuration of the flaps, etc.) we don't have yet so could have happened. Fuel starvation (complete) is highly doubtful because they managed to increase speed and altitude which means they had power. |
Looked at another flight tracker. Looks like they got slow on second miss. About 40 knots GS below what their approach speed was on the second attempt. (Which was 129)
:( |
Local (Rostov) people confirm that the weather was really bad that night: rain and strong wind. But the visibility was not that bad. It was reported on TV that shortly before that tragic crash two Russian planes (one from Moscow, another from St-Petersburg) decided not to land and diverted to Krasnodar, which is just 20 min to the south. Though their crews of course knew the Rostov airport quite well. One more Aeroflot plane managed to land after 2-3 attempts. Why the Dubai plane did not go to another airport???
|
ATC Comms
|
Based on ATC comms above:
Their worry seamed defiantly to be wind/windshear not visibility. Also noted a few issue with accent and also altitude in meters. Also confirmation they were in a go around before the crash, sounded very normal and causal reporting of 'skydubai 981 going around' - no issue at that time. |
Just a couple of points:
- does not matter if they was qualified for ALL WX, as the airport was only a Cat 1 airport 2). It is possible that they were tankering fuel, (due cost), if not carrying round trip fuel. Quite possibly plenty of holding fuel and still enough for a diversion. |
CNN reported that the aircraft's tail "clipped the runway" ?
Flydubai airliner crashes in Russia; 62 dead - CNN.com I heard the ATC recordings as well and unless they declared a go around (verbal comms) and then only went around (action), maybe they then had a tailstrike? They did sound very calm and collected as well in the recordings, unlike a crew having a low fuel scenario. Inclined to believe they tankered anyway. |
From avherald.com
The aircraft carried fuel for trip, contingency, alternate, final fuel reserve (30 minutes) and additional holding for about 2:30 hours, total fuel for an endurance of about 8.5 hours. The aircraft had been airborne until time of impact for 06:02 hours. After about 2 hours of holding the aircraft commenced another approach to Rostov's runway 22, winds from 240 degrees at 27 knots (14 m/s) gusting 42 knots (22 m/s), but struck a wing onto the runway at about 3:43 (00:43Z), broke up, came to a rest near the end and to the right of the runway and burst into flames. We are aware of the video but for now have dismissed this video (which appears to be in contradiction to available radar data and official announcements, e.g. by MAK) |
Security video
Room for misreporting and poor translation, Ministry of Emergenciencies says that the "tail hit the ground".
Airliner crashes in Russia; 61 aboard reported dead http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/18/europe/russia-plane-crash/index.html Re the video: Using the passing car as a reference, the security camera is sensitive to the IR emitting in Nav, landing lights and flame. There appears to be two distinct targets (lights) descending that do not alter their relative position on descent. The online video looks to have been recorded off a screen. This would explain the curious framing for a security camera. The original recording should have more detail. Mickjoebill |
but struck a wing onto the runway at about 3:43 (00:43Z), broke up, came to a rest near the end and to the right of the runway and burst into flames. |
Originally Posted by swish266
(Post 9315184)
Unless we get a time print with the transcript, I would say the "going around" phrase could be from the first G/A...
|
but struck a wing onto the runway at about 3:43 (00:43Z), broke up, came to a rest near the end and to the right of the runway and burst into flames. This point i feel doesn't make sence to me - all the wreckage (from life news) appears to be very small, more like a crash from altitude, where as this would suggest damage more like the Fedex crash in Toyko Not saying that's the case, of course. |
Holy smokes, watch the video again. Those are lights on the Aircraft, a bright Landing light a flashing strobe and maybe a Nav light.......it was a steep impact......
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:37. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.