Brand new Etihad A340-600 damaged in Toulouse; several wounded
 

An Airbus A340-600, ready for delivery, ''escaped'' during a ground test and crashed in a wall alongside the engine test area in Toulouse today

the aircraft involved is (F-WWCJ c/n856) third A346 HGW version for Etihad Airways

it would ... be registered A6-EHG (?) Seen here performing a go-around at the end of its first flight...

no link in english right now I'm afraid

http://www.archive-host2.com/membres...600_MSN856.jpg

in english...



http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i...U31BAD8SU8OU80

From Airbus,

Picture:
http://s.tf1.fr/mmdia/i/40/6/acciden...se-2419406.jpg
/ATDB

It's three wounded !

A short video coming from the french television evening news. They said it's probably a w/o

http://www.crash-aerien.com/forum/vi...?p=22354#22354

Another pre-delivery mishap in Toulouse. I remember sitting in a CDG bar in the summer of 1994 and hearing of the A-330 crash...

not just the flight deck on the other side..
http://i19.servimg.com/u/f19/11/30/85/75/346110.jpg
/A

When you think you have already seen everything in life...
Oh boy.. this is weird. :ugh:

Fortunately no fatalities..

I always thought engine runs were performed with the aircraft firmly chained down to concrete blocks, not only chocks.

BF


PS. On side note, please note the engines worked as advertised :}

There are reports elsewhere from some Toulouse locals that one of them was still running tonight due to 'technical difficulties' in shutting it down.

Reuters now reporting 10 people injured, three of them seriously.
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/world...88716920071115

No Broomstick they are not chained down, neither do the chocks touch the wheels. Parking brake only is all that stops them !

Someone will be in for tea and biccies!!
Wouldn't want to be filling out that insurance form or paying the excess!!,
Glad no-one was killed in what was a very nasty accident.
I take it Etihad don't want it now!

M.

Can't you just feel the feeling as it jumped the chocks/brakes and raced away? An awful sight to see a spanking new machine in that state. Considering the state of the nose section, the injuries must have been serious- I hope they all make it.
Even I can't quite see this one being repaired! That is one seriously stressed fuselage, going through a concrete wall like that, and ending up in that state.

Don't know about the 340 but on the small bus we are obliged to hold the aircraft on the brakes during high powered runs and to have the park brake selected off.
My thoughts are with those injured :(

IF the 340 is the same as other Airbus' from what I remember the park brake is a lower pressure than the foot brakes. When carrying out high power engine runs one person has to stand on the pegs for the duration. :suspect:
"There for the grace of......" :sad:





Edited to say.. Must type faster, you beat me to it Fargoo.

If it had gone straight into the wall then I would have agreed but it seems to have ridden up the ramp and over the wall but I'm not a structural engineer. I am however a trained bean counter and would take a bit of convincing that $135m+ of damage has been done here assuming a sale price of $180m.

Putting that aside it must have been a scary moment for all those on board or in the general area, I hope they all make a full and speedy recovery.

Dont forget that airbus will value the aircraft at cost so there needs to be less dammage for it to be considered a write off;

Its not just the value of the damage, there are liability issues that will be taken into account, I'd say that would most definitely rank as 'severe damage' Remember what happend to Japan Airlines who were flying a repaired 747?

Plus I'd have to ask the question who would want to buy an A340 with that kind of history, especially one that hasnt even been delivered yet. Looking at the pics I can't see that one flying again.

I'd also wager that Ethiad will have something pretty unsympathetic to say about this given that the bent aircraft has their name all over it!

Yeh, the last thing you need is an unlucky aircraft.



I remember looking at an ATR down at the factory. It was just ready for delivery and got seriously twisted after a heavy landing. I just would not have wanted it after that.

I would imagine their insurers are beginning to look askance at their practices. Having said this, I don't know just how much whoomf they were giving it, but it must have been a serious amount to lose control like that.

Does anyone know how many engines were opened up at one time?

In any event, I feel that any such power run should be done in wide open spaces. Edit to say that I realize that it was a test area, but nevertheless I wouldn't like to be in charge of something like that on full chat in a confined space.

"der spiegel" says that 7 out of 9 onboard were etihad employees.

When doing something like this why not point the aeroplane at somewhere that there is no scenery to collide with? This would allow time to close the throttles.

I'm interested in the time duration to duplicate this accident vs the sequence of failures.

I assume that at the initiation point that the aircraft is sitting on its brakes at near full thrust. then something happens to the brakes and it starts rolling. Why can't you just chop the engines in 5 secs or so and that would be enough to keep it from going that far over a barrier in front of you. And that brings up another point, why is there a barrier in front instead of behind to deflect the thrust?

I really don't have any idea how they do these tests vs what could go wrong to explain the level of accident that resulted here.:confused:

What a shame, beautiful new jet meets its demise without ever entering service. Hopefully nobody seriously hurt. Looking at the picture of the front section it is a miracle no deaths !!

Even Rainboe says this one is a goner.

Did they say MSN 856? That would suggest 855 similar tests on that type alone where this didn't happen, and we don't even know what happened yet. Its a bit daft offering solutions when we don't know what the exact problem was.

A 340 Toulouse
 

Not unprecedented. In 1994 a Thai Airways MD11 doing engine run ups jumped the chocks and totaled an A300-600 (also Thai Airways) at the old Don Muang Airport.

The MD11 was repaired and returned to service.

The 340-500/600 is probably the only aircraft that has the potential to drag an aircraft with brakes on! It is a seriously over powered machine compared to its little brother a under powered 340-300. Engine running 340 new gens at max thrust is a scary job.

Doesnt need to be an airbus to drag along on the brakes,years ago at hatfield we had a new hawker 800 do a similar thing.It dragged along on its brakes for a considerable distance before mounting a grass bank ripping the noseleg back crushing the fuselage like a coke can,braking the wing mounts.Basically it was a cold damp day(loads of thrust, wet ground) low fuel load,there were 2 engineers one up the rear bay adjusting engine computers for throttle stagger & one in the cockpit doing the runs.The guy in the cockpit was watching closely the gauges & became fixated with them & didn,t even realise the aircraft was moving & gaining speed till it climbed the bank.
Problem afterwards was both engines were running at 100% & they couldn,t shut them down using the conventional methods.
Yes he was asked to leave by the company.The aircraft was totalled.
So not the first time this sort of thing has happened!!

Fly by Wire Brakes
 

The park brake handle is a switch. So are the toe brake pedals. Computer logic decides how much pressure goes to the brake system, whether you keep the park brake switch on or stand on the pegs. Today's machines have a way of fooling us that we are in control when all we are doing is managing the computers. And when they decide to revolt, you end up with this.

After 855 times, on a whim, George decided he would let BSCU release the brake pressure and at the same time let FADEC go TOGA, overriding the brake switches and thrust lever switches, just to see who actually is in control.

I have control..., I have control..., l have...:E:E

That is certainly consistent with popular opinion concerning the build quality of Mad Dogs and Airbuses. Like a lot of us here, I've flown both.

Continental had a mishap at EWR where a 727 plowed into the terminal on an engine run. An earlier shift had positioned the throttles forward to work on one of the pilot seats. What was supposed to be an idle engine turn became a serious accident and one of the mechs was badly injured.

When I was last involved with Airbus deliveries, Airbus used to invite the customer's delivery team to participate in all the acceptance tests including engine run ups. The aircraft were taxied from the delivery centre to the run up area and back and the customer's ground crew even got to try their hand at taxying which may have something new for many of them. So the question perhaps should be who's hand was on the throttles (and feet on the brakes)?
All the jet aircraft I worked on could be held quite satisfactorily on the park brake. Park brake pressure is usually a lot less than than max. The brake pressure required to prevent stationary disc's from rotating is a lot less than that required to slow rotating disc's down. For instance, I seem to recall the DC8 only applied 700psi with the park brake set pressure whereas max brake pressure was 2,000psi.

I did several engine run up on DC8 and we were doing it on a taxiway with plenty of space in front of us SO if something happen you have plenty of room to stop the beast

I wouldn't runup all 4 engines simultaneousley at full thrust during a static test; it is not necessary to do that, two engines at a time will be sufficient, especially when the airplane is empty. :ugh:

Airbus Spokesman in French media this morning : first investigation made , cannot explain what happened, need more time. Never hapenned before , we deliver 500 a/c a year and do this 2 or 3 times a day, etc...
Need to do this in a walled box (instead as in empty space ) because of noise .
Confirmed a/c is a complete write off .
No news on the injured , mostly Etihad employees.

I'm not familiar with the layout of Toulouse but in all the engine-run pens I've ever used over the years you parked the aircraft tail-in rather that nose-in as appears in this case.

By backing in if anything does go wrong you have a clear pan in front of you to try and correct the problem.

Would they have had to accelerate for some distance to cause that much damage? Doesn't look like a low speed impact. No room to turn or no steering?

Edit: Now that I think for an extra 5 seconds I guess parking it against a wall might be the best option if they can't stop it.

No need to stand on the brakes when doing a high power EGR on the A340, just have them covered. Done an A346 aircraft acceptance EGR at high power in that very bay. Only had about 20T of fuel on so trying to read the Eng parameters at max chat was interesting. There was part of the acceptance that requiered to have all 4 at high power at the same time, but can't remember why.
As for not pointing it at the wall, high by-pass engines when being run at high power with the aircraft stationary need to be pointed into wind to prevent surging. Wind speed & direction can be quiet limiting, there is a chart in the Maint Manual with the limits and directions. Also min of 2 engines required at high power to prevent an asymetric thrust situation.
Specualtion I know, but I wonder if someone reached for the camera switch and released the parking brake instead, after all it appears to have been done the other way round on landing by China Eastern I think.
Hope the injured are OK.

NO Etihad employees were on board.

Or into flight mode???
 

Hard to say what hapened at this point...

But a few years ago we had a similar accident in YVR (that's Vancouver, Canada) when doind a ground run on an A310. They only put in Line Mtce chocks during the run... (AIRBUS has special Ground Run Chocks, that can't be jumped. (I'd guess they didn't use 'em here either...). The coneheads (avionics mechanics) were messing with CB's during run and pulled a breaker that put the aircraft into flight mode...

Presto! Engines to flight idle, no reverse thrust, no brakes & no steering... It jumped the chocks so fast the mechanics in the left and right seats didn't even know what happened (they didn't even know the coney's were messing around with the CB's) They are busy trying to steer, brake, reverse -- ANYTHING... Uncontrolled taxi -- right into a ground equipment building -- hard enough to shear off 6" steel I-beams.

Over $1 million CDN damage...

If I was a betting man, I'd guess something similar happened here...

Damn! I hope those mech's/ground crew are okay...

7 Etihad employees on board.

A daylight shot...