Iran accident
 

BBC reporting an air crash in Iran. > 100 pax on board. No further info on their web site yet.

link to the story here

BBC News - Iranian passenger plane 'crashes'

A French radio just informed that an Iranian airplane crashed in the North of Iran. About 150 passangers on board and about 50 escaped/survived.

The A/C is B727-200, EP-IRP
After go-around the aircraft hits to mountains around Oroumieh (NW of Iran)
105 people were on borad

casualties.
 

Associated Press report (here as used in the Independent, UK), reports 45 killed, 50 survivors.

45 people killed in Iranian plane crash - Middle East, World - The Independent

Accident time weather (source Ogimet home page ) :
OITR 091800Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016=
OITR 091750Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016=
OITR 091700Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016=
OITR 091650Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016=
OITR 091600Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016=
OITR 091550Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016=
OITR 091500Z 24006KT 0800 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1015=
OITR 091450Z 24006KT 0800 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1015=
OITR 091400Z 29004KT 0800 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1015=

The ILS procedure for runway 21 (elevation 4,274ft) has 800m RVR minima ...

Anyone whom has flown in the northern part of Iran in the wintertime (as I certainly have, with 4-engine heavy jet and large turbopropeller types...CATII approved as well) can tell you about some of the most adverse weather conditions you might imagine....:yuk:
Makes Europe look like childs play.

411A I operated to THR in late 70's with KAC on B707 320-C and do not recall weather in winter being any different to that in Europe and certainly not CAT11 then.

Missed Approach !
 

Crash Iran Air
B727 iranair EP-IRP after missed approach crash in uromiyeh :(( :(

Keep in mind that the IranAir B727's (many of them, anyway) are older than dirt, and...due to western sanctions, have little in the way of adequate spares support.
A causitive factor?
Just a thought, but...time will tell.

I got up close not so long ago to a few Iranian airliners and I can confirm that they don't appear to be in good condition. The Fokker's in particular seemed patched up and the jetpipe noise and visible exhaust gases seemed excessive to me.

The METAR for the time of the accident seems to indicate weather quite acceptable for a CAT I approach pending the light facilities at OITR.

Just because the MET Viz is 600 doesn't mean to say that the RVR isn't greater than that required for a CAT I!

fmgc;

Did you mean to say lower or did you beat me to it looking up the approach charts for OITR? Just had a quick look and the required visibility for the approach is 800m unless coming down on a LTS CAT I or with EVS which I much doubt was fitted to the airframe in question. I am well aware of the fact that the RVR value is usually higher than the reported met vis.

That is what I was saying in response to Kyprianos Biris who seemed to be implying that they made an approach below minimas, which isn't necessarily the case, we do not know what the RVR was which can often be greater then the met vis.

Oh, my apologies. I thought he highlighted the two METARs just to amplify the time of the accident. Sorry, I completely misunderstood your post. I thought you had a go at me for saying that the weather indicated it would be acceptable CAT I, but as it turned out, based on met vis alone it wouldn't be, not at 16:50 anyway.

Mehr News Agency reports:

Photos by Esfandiar Asgharkhani, Mehr News Agency

http://i337.photobucket.com/albums/n...Orumiyeh00.jpg


http://i337.photobucket.com/albums/n...Orumiyeh01.jpg

GobonaStick

In the US, there would not be a question of spares support, but there is in Iran. The embargoes are, no doubt, a factor, whether you or I agree with them. In Iran, there have been questions about airworthiness in past, far too many, crashes. So, yes, it is a legitimate question, if very speculative. But when has speculation not taken a backseat here at Pprune.

GF

OK - surely though if you can not maintain a 'plane or any vehicle for that matter to a suitable standard - you don't use it. To do so if that is not case is criminal irresponsibility. Sanctions or not.

There were over 10,000 exceptions to the U.S sanctions against Iran (With U.S. consent, companies skirt sanctions on Iran, others - The Denver Post) & I guess whilst aircraft parts would not be excepted it would be valid to find out if the sanctions in place would restrict Iran from obtaining parts necessary for the safe flight of civilian aircraft. i.e. Are they told they can not have or do they not ask?

Snctions or not, no outside entity forces Iran to operate whatever aircraft they have in whatever condition Iran chooses to fly it's aircraft. Iran has many Russian aircraft with plenty of Russian spare parts available, yet Iran crashes many Russian aircraft. Iran has access to some European built aircraft and spares as well. The U.S. over the past 30 years, in an effort to improve aviation safety of Iranian civil aviation has supplied/sold the Iranian regime with some spare parts for it's aircraft.

Reading all the comments re embargo and lack of spares etc, I can't help wondering about another aspect of all this. What about crew training, licensing, etc ? Are the Iranian crews still allowed to train at US and European training facilities and have the Internationally recognised licenses ?, who checks these guys out ?

in time of cholera are there any rules? as long as the local caa signs off they are fit to fly and hence the ban as of 6 July 2010 flying to the EU

I am probably best to answer the questions of sanctions on aircraft maintenance (I am of course not implying that this accident had anything to do with it) I finished working in an airworthines/QA role for an Iranian large airline last April having spent over a year there. The main problem I encountered was not a lack of spares (we flew Fokker 50s and 100s) though they did take alot of time clearing customs in Tehran no, the main issue I found was total lacking in basic aeronautical knowledge and trying to implement a part 145 ethos coupled with safety management and QA the nepotism is staggering inexperience people put in management because someone is married to the engineering directors daughter this guy (great guy personally) had no aeronautical training and had in fact failed the fokker 50 course prior to being appointed to mangement level in the engineering department. One thing I found that I could not get through to them was the ADs we once overflew and emergency AD I immediately put a plan together to ground and inspect the fleet, this was overuled and they continued to fly with an EAD that was out of date. There are many more instances of safety breach and blatant disregard of safety standards. I was at one point asked to instruct the Iranian CAA on 145 and continued airworthiness but whether it made and difference who knows??

I was overflying Iran yesterday , and i got to tell you that i was feeling sorry for the guys doing domestic runs there yesterday. i did not know bout the crash at that time .Since we were overflying over some high terrain , i was constantly checking en route alternates and i had little to choose from as most ATIS were reporting snow and VOR approaches in use. In fact one was using a VOR approach circle to land in 2000m in heavy snow.
My condolence to all concerned .No crew wants to end up like this, what ever the reason.

Foolish priorities.
 

The Iranian government would be better advised to invest some of its loot in a decent aviation safety culture for the state airline, instead of unnecessary nuclear power/weapons development. The above contributors make it abundantly clear that the airline is incompetently and dangerously run.

I also feel for the pilots who have to work in the environment described so articulately above. Iran is a hostile country both in terms of weather and terrain. The pilots need all the technology and training support they can get.

There is no excuse for poor nav systems on a 727, with GPS readily available. And aircraft parts can be sourced throughout the Middle East, as well as decent maintenance. No excuses on the sanctions front. The country is wealthy enough, but chooses to spend its money on other things. Dare I say Iran has something of a medieval outlook on its expenditure?

allowing for accuracy of the media in reporting this unfortunate accident in the BBC's report they mention that there was no explosion or fire. Unusual for an aircraft crash not to involve a fire, unless of course there was nothing onboard to catch light?

Jackx123;

I believe that ban is only valid for the Boeing fleet, they are still allowed to operate their A300s to the EU. I saw one of them at LHR just weeks ago.

Not that unusual in a survivable breakup on snow or water.

Quote:

An Iran Air Boeing 727-200, registration EP-IRP performing flight IR-277 from Tehran Mehrabad to Uromiyeh (Iran) with 94 passengers and 12 crew, was on final ILS approach to Uromiyeh's Urmia Airport runway 21 in fog and snowfall around 19:45L (16:15Z). The crew went around but the airplane impacted mountaineous terrain at Terman village about 5 miles southeast of the airport and broke up in six major parts. 73 occupants are confirmed dead, thereof 18 bodies were recovered, 33 occupants were hospitalised with a number in critical condition.

The Vice governor of West Azerbaijan province of Iran said, that the airplane was on short final when the crew declared emergency due to a technical problem explaining they could not land at Urmia in these circumstances and requested to return to Tehran. During the go-around the aircraft lost height for unknown reasons and impacted terrain.

Iran's Transport Ministry said, that there was no emergency. According to tower tapes the pilot aborted the approach when he could not establish visual contact with the runway at decision height and went around indicating they wanted to return to Tehran. 33 people have been taken to hospitals, 73 have perished.

Uromiyeh's Airport features a runway 03/21 of 3250 meters length, there are instrument approaches only to runway 21 (ILS, VOR/DME, VOR, NDB).

Metars:
OITR 091800Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091750Z 29004KT 0500 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091700Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091650Z 33004KT 0600 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091600Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091550Z 26004KT 0800 SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1016
OITR 091500Z 24006KT 0800 +SN SCT015 SCT020 OVC060 00/00 Q1015

Re, training IR pilots and access to Sims abroad, incidentally the only functioning sim Iran Air has running in THR is a B727 sim.( I have been having some nostalgic sessions on it a year ago).
Re CAT 2 ops, if the aircraft that crashed had the same cockpit avionics as the sim, there is no flight director, no FMS and no integrated GPS. Just a basic and simple good old 727-200.
Spares is a huge problem. They get them at inflated prices and not always 100% tracable. Technical problems are one of their main problems and I would not be surprised if technical issues forced the go around.

The IR 727s are normally not used, just like their 2 747SPs ,only as Stand by spares I was told. On their published schedule the flights to that destination are (normally) all operated by F100 and A320s.

Avenger:

http://tinyurl.com/4kq3xya

"The crew went around but the airplane impacted mountaineous terrain at Terman village about 5 miles southeast of the airport..."

Ugh. The highest terrain is almost all west of the airport (there being a huge lake to the east) - but there is a isolated area of high ground (marked by 6414' on that VOR chart) along the lake shore. A left turn from 210° to avoid the really high stuff could take one right into it.

Too right, pattern_is_full, I used to operate to that airport many years ago, and the terrain, coupled with the nasty winter weather that is present, adds up to a dicey situation if one is not very careful.
Lots of destroyed aircraft found in that part on Iran.

Too fast ?
 

Some statements made from non-aviators to the Media and Press are pure speculation and not sustainable at all as long as the FDR is not analyzed.

....sadly to say that it does not need a sanction to run short of quality spare parts.

Atepster, you may wish to refer to Avherald's website, and there "Iran Air B722 near Uromiyeh on Jan 9th 2011, impacted terrain during go-around" for current information.

RegDep:
I suppose Jepp could be wrong in showing a current VOR to RWY 3, but less likely than any media publication.

I just recommend that you look at their editorial principles and follow the site for a while, before you discount it off hand.

I have nothing invested in it, just observing it.

Edit to say that I find an Iranian chart on an Iranian airport from 2009 more likely to be correct than a Jeppesen chart from 2007. Just a personal view :O.

Sorry aterpster, my point was made in an indirect way, hence the excursion to validity of Jeppesens:

My point was why argue against one line the previous post of Avenger #32 with an instrument approach to runway 03 while it is known (see some lines up on said post) that the approach was to runway 21. The actual approach has not, to my knowledge, been disputed so far.

With best regards,

Reg

RegDep:

I wasn't arguing. I was correcting a factual error in the post he made from AvHearld. Although it likely had no bearing on the accident it is pertinent to know there are IAPs in both directions. At least it is to me; too many years looking at this stuff, I guess. Further, the reader of Aviation Heard might draw an incorrect inference from their report, for whatever reason.
:)