PPRuNe Forums - Indonesian aircraft missing off Jakarta

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)

- - Indonesian aircraft missing off Jakarta (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/614857-indonesian-aircraft-missing-off-jakarta.html)

Lion does have a history, though light on fatalities prior to this accident..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_A..._and_accidents

Quote:

Incidents and accidents

On 14 January 2002, Lion Air Flight 386, a Boeing 737-200 crashed after trying to take-off with an incorrect flap configuration at Sultan Syarif Kasim II International Airport. Everyone on board survived but the aircraft was written off
On 30 November 2004, Lion Air Flight 538, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, crashed in Surakarta with registration PK-LMN (c/n 49189); 25 people died.
On 4 March 2006, Lion Air Flight 8987, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, crashed after landing at Juanda International Airport. Reverse thrust was used during landing, although the left thrust reverser was stated to be out of service. This caused the aircraft to veer to the right and skid off the runway, coming to rest about 7,000 feet (2,100 m) from the approach end of the runway. There were no fatalities, but the aircraft was badly damaged and later written off.
On 24 December 2006, Lion Air Flight 792, a Boeing 737-400, landed with an incorrect flap configuration and was not aligned with the runway. The plane landed hard and skidded along the runway causing the right main landing gear to detach, the left gear to protrude through the wing and some of the aircraft fuselage to be wrinkled. There were no fatalities, but the aircraft was written off.
On 23 February 2009, Lion Air Flight 972, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82 landed without the nose gear at Hang Nadim International Airport, Batam.
On 9 March 2009, Lion Air Flight 793, a McDonnell Douglas MD-90-30 (registration PK-LIL) ran off the runway at Soekarno–Hatta International Airport. No-one was injured.
On 2 November 2010, Lion Air Flight 712, a Boeing 737-400 (registration PK-LIQ) overran the runway on landing at Supadio Airport, Pontianak, coming to rest on its belly and sustaining damage to its nose gear. All 174 passengers and crew evacuated by the emergency slides, with few injuries.
On 13 April 2013, Lion Air Flight 904, a Boeing 737-800 (registration PK-LKS; c/n 38728) from Bandung to Denpasar with 108 people on board, crashed into the water near Denpasar/Bali while attempting to land. The aircraft’s fuselage broke into two parts. While Indonesian officials reported the aircraft crashed short of the runway, reporters and photographers from Reuters and the Associated Press indicated that the plane overshot the runway. All passengers and crew were evacuated from the aircraft and there were no fatalities.
On 6 August 2013, Lion Air Flight 892, a Boeing 737-800 (registration PK-LKH; c/n 37297) from Makassar to Gorontalo with 117 passengers and crew on board, hit a cow while landing at Jalaluddin Airport and veered off the runway. There were no injuries.
On 1 February 2014, Lion Air Flight 361, a Boeing 737-900ER (registration PK-LFH; c/n 35710), from Balikpapan Sultan Aji Muhammad Sulaiman Airport to Ngurah Rai International Airport in Denpasar/Bali via Juanda International Airport in Surabaya, with 222 passengers and crew on board, landed hard and bounced four times on the runway, causing a tail strike and substantial damage to the plane. There were no fatalities, but two passengers were seriously injured and three others had minor injuries.
On 20 February 2016, Lion Air Flight 263 from Balikpapan Sultan Aji Muhammad Sulaiman Airport to Juanda International Airport in Surabaya overran the runway on landing, with no injuries. The National Transportation Safety Committee investigation into the incident found that failures in crew resource management led to improper landing procedures, and recommended that Indonesian airlines improve pilot training.
On 2 April 2017, about 300 litres of fuel spilled on the tarmac at Juanda International Airport in Surabaya. Pictures taken by passengers on board showed fuel pouring out of one of the aircraft's wings. Shortly after, all passengers were evacuated and the plane was grounded for further investigation. No casualties were reported. That same day a representative from Lion Air was summoned by the Indonesian Transport Ministry to clarify the incident. An early statement by a Lion Air representative said that the leak was caused by a non-functioning safety valve and overflow detector.
On 29 April 2018, Lion Air Flight 892, a 737-800 (registration PK-LOO), made a runway excursion at Jalaluddin Airport after landing under heavy rain conditions, resulting in the main nose gear to collapse. There were no fatalities.
On 29 October 2018, Lion Air Flight 610, a 737 MAX 8, crashed in the Java Sea 13 minutes after takeoff from Jakarta, with all 189 passengers and crew onboard missing, presumed dead.

The technical note of a previous crew might be an important clue. It could be quite difficult to fly the attitude when "STS was also running to the wrong direction (suspected because of speed difference)".

Do the newer 737 do that funny thing with the trim soon after liftoff? I recall the 300's trim wheel would spin 3-4 times.

Quote:

With the Fr24 data available we can see the situation was serious very early in the flight,

Jesus, can WE see that? Some of you guys put way too much stock in what FR 24 shows.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Icarus2001 (Post 10296411)

Jesus, can WE see that? Some of you guys put way too much stock in what FR 24 shows.

Agreed. Some of the plots I've seen included the obvious data outliers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by StormyKnight (Post 10296228)

Yes Flightradar does predict the path of flights when the data stops in real time, but only for a minute or so, then the plane usually stops at that point, then a little while latter it disappears. The tracking line then reverts back to the actual data received & removes the estimated components.
When you view the flight later or download the raw flight data it is only the received data, there is no estimated flight data.

Ok, so the use of predictive algorithms affects what is displayed in real time, but doesn't have any effect on historical data sets. That would be what I would expect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Icarus2001 (Post 10296411)

Jesus, can WE see that? Some of you guys put way too much stock in what FR 24 shows.

The data shows the airplane descending almost 600 ft from about 2200 ft. on the initial climb. There are two possibilities: 1) the data accurately reflects the aircraft's trajectory. 2) The data does not accurately reflect the aircraft's trajectory. If 1 is true, then yes, we absolutely *do* know that "the situation was serious very early in the flight" If an airliner on initial climb pitches abruptly down and descends 600 feet, that is serious, something is going badly wrong. Apparently, you believe that 2 is true, that the FR24 data does not accurately reflect the aircraft's trajectory. So why? What is your basis for claiming that you know the FR24 data is in error? It's not an "outlier", the descent is reflected in numerous consecutive received data points. It's not predictive algorithms, as that only affects real time displays, not saved data. So what's your operative theory here? that the descent simply didn't happen? Do you have some plausible reason why those data points showing the pronounced descent are in error? I mean something a little more substantiative than; "I hate FlightRadar24"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Icarus2001 (Post 10295538)

So at least two people above have no grasp of critical angle and what a stall actually is. :rolleyes:

I think they have a better grasp than you. There is just no way you can stall a B737 at around 275kts IAS in a straight line at 5000 feet. Stop already.

+1 Hans.

If air-sensors data is suspect, what good are algorithms built on top of them? That MAY just well be the case of FR24 records.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyhigh85 (Post 10295829)

An aircraft can stall at any speed! It is the angle of attack which determines when stall (pitch angel) if they had flew at 350kt they would stall anyway if the nose was 40 degress nose up. A passenger airplane is is not designed nor have the trust required to do that, a rocket is a different thing.

i can’t remember exactly how it is but if your static or pitot ports are blocked (either one) your airspeed will increase with altitude. So if they put on the autopilot after take off the plane will pitch up and up to contain the airspeed increase and rather quickly put the aircraft in an unusal attitude, nose high low airspeed (actual airspeed). Autopilot will disconnect and stall warning alarms etc. If the pilots don’t react quicly and correct the airplane will stall. There might be a startle factor for the crew as well, which delay their reaction time. This only speculations from my side anyway. Tragic to see another fatal accident in Indonesia.

No, they would not stall at 350kts because the nose was 40 degrees up. the only reason for a stall is reaching critical angle of attack, and as long as you keep the nose pointing 40 degrees up and the speed at 350 kts and the wings level you will not stall. If you keep the nose at 40 degrees and you let the speed drop off, you might stall, but that didn't happen here, because if you start a fully loaded B737 at 5000' and 350 kts, and pull the nose up to 40 degrees with the power at idle, you will probably get to 10'000' before you get anywhere near stall speed, and the aircraft didn't climb. Also if you tried to get an accelerated stall st 300kts indicated you would rip off the wings before you stalled. In theory you can stall any wing at any speed as long as you pull enough, and EVERY pilot knows that, but most airplanes will break long before they stall if you pull hard at high speed. This aircraft probably had at least 300 kts IAS towards the end of the recording, making a stall the least of their worries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by .Scott (Post 10295949)

Va= 260 kias at sea level
and 306 kias at 31,000 feet

So, yes you could.

The plane everyone but you is talking about was flying at around 5000', not FL310

Quote:

Originally Posted by hans brinker (Post 10296455)

This aircraft probably had at least 300 kts IAS towards the end of the recording, making a stall the least of their worries.

That’s what I don’t get. The speed in which it sunk is off the charts. It’s extreme.

They have just fallen out of the sky. Literally.

Can you pull/push that severe that the tail or elevator rips off?

Quote:

Originally Posted by wheels_down (Post 10296466)

It looks a little like Rostov-on-Don, but the were fatigued, at night, in turbulence/wind-shear after T/O, I honestly have no idea how two 5K+ pilots in day VMC conditions would crash a plane only because the airspeed instruments were wrong. The only thing (and I don't fly the B737) that I see is, airspeed sensor was sensing low speed and keeps auto trimming nose down, thrust is high, pilots can't keep pulling and they dive down. Someone with more B737 smarts can probably tell me why I am wrong...

Eye witness report here, if this is not a repost:
https://japantoday.com/category/worl...e-off#comments

Quote: The Boeing 737 MAX 8 literally fell out of the sky near where the two men were fishing about 15 km (9 miles) off the coast, silently at first and then with a deafening crash as it smacked into the sea. "You could feel the explosion from the shockwave in the water," said Gauk, who goes by only one name, telling the pair's story from the beach in Karawang regency.

Quote:

Originally Posted by das Uber Soldat (Post 10296171)

This doesn't feel like vanilla unreliable speed to me. It may have been a contributing factor, but you don't lose control of a 737 doing over 300 knots in day vmc. You fly it level. Maybe you end up too slow and stall, but that clearly isn't what happened here. From the data it looks like a very high speed, extreme nose down attitude.

Either something mechanical has failed, or after a contributing factor, such as unreliable speed that has been mishandled, structural damage has occurred that has culminated in the final catastrophic dive.

Who says it was Day VMC? Fair weather at the airport does not mean there were no clouds in the area. They could have been IMC shortly after departure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem (Post 10296478)

Who says it was Day VMC? Fair weather at the airport does not mean there were no clouds in the area. They could have been IMC shortly after departure.

Yeah, but all the rescue images show a sunny day

The airport was to the left of them after the initial turn, If they had full control of the aircraft they were in a ideal position for a return to CGK but it looks to me like they were fighting the controls for 11 minutes.

I’m not sure if it’s been mentioned but it certainly reminds me of the SarAvia Antonov crash out of Moscow earlier his year. Obviously icing wasn’t a factor in this instance but that doesn’t mean unreliable airspeed can be ruled out.

Various news sites have shown images of an oil slick on the calm sea surface.

I was an ear-witness unfortunately. I heard the Captain's last exchanges with the departure director and arrival controller before JT610 went silent and the controller declared loss of radar contact.

While I see everyone commenting that the weather was VMC, if one has flown to/from Jakarta the past few months since before the Asian Games, you'd know that the conditions are hardly clear skies due to the haze.

I did remark to my FO that I suspect unreliable airspeed could be their issue and they should be climbing/holding and settle down and not come in for the approach hastily because of the visibility. This was all around 2325-2330UTC and until now I wish 2333UTC didn't occur. My thoughts and prayers to all affected.