Challenger Crash Almaty
 

Jet Connection Challenger crashed on take-off here in the early hours, leaving runway 05 and hitting a fence and wall. Initial reports say one passenger killed and pilots and F/a in hospital. The aircraft was operated by Jet Connection (JCX826?) and was flying from HAJ-HKG. The airport was closed for a short time for runway inspection and due to the rescue services involvement. It has now re-opened.

Greetings Harrier46!

Are you ex RAF by an chance? And based in ALA?

Just heard about this incident, would appreciate any updates as we operate CL locally.

Thanks and all the best,

Indeed but not on Harriers! Aircraft arrived from HAJ for fuel stop at about 0030 local time, then accident was on departure. Apparently destroyed by the impact and subsequent fire.

was there a day or two ago. In GV
 

A HS from here is there today too.

Been monitoring WX for them, apart from a period of freezing fog, mostly OK.

I go to Kiev in a few days, and they also have been giving freezing fog.

RIP. There but for the grace of God, etc, etc.

Apart from my GPS parking me in the main terminal building, all systems were operational, and very efficient, QNH based ATC. a long direct approach being offered.

SSA

Kazakh news media report that Lars Windhorst, a famous German businessman, was on board. It seems he is survived, but a co-pilot was killed...

Latest news
 

Kazakhstan - A German-owned business jet exploded on Wednesday during take-off at Kazakhstan's Almaty airport, killing the sole passenger and injuring three crew, officials said.
"The plane left the runway and there was an explosion aboard. The reason for the crash is being investigated," said Jamilla Kaimoldina, spokesperson for the Emergency Situations Ministry.
The passenger, whose nationality was not identified, died.
The pilot and co-pilot, who were German, and the Turkish stewardess were hospitalised but their lives were not in danger, a Health Ministry spokesperson said.
The plane, a Canadair Bombardier Challenger bound for Hong Kong, belonged to German company Jet Connection Business Flight, the Emergencies Ministry said.

Looks like they had only one challenger.

http://www.charliebravo.de/sp/2006/fra0318/25.jpg



Very sad.

Yes. It is D-ANKE. Here is a pic of its wreckage with a dark blue tail:
http://www.vecher.kz/?S=4-200712251200

Last info - it is D-ARWE. This aircraft was recently purchased by Jet Connection
http://www.myaviation.net/search/sea...=&regnr=D-ARWE
General Prosecutor's Office of Kazakhstan confirms that on their website. D-ARWE had the same colour scheme...

according to a german newsticker bild.de passenger windhorst survived and one of the pilots died

Does the wreckage look like it's upside down? If so it may have gotten airborne

Short translation of the report of the Office of Prosecutor of Kazakhstan:
Immediately after take-off the aircraft banked right, the wing struck the ground. Then the aircraft deviated to the right, hit the concrete perimeter fence, crashed, broke up and caught fire.
____________________________________________________________ _
The last 4 Challenger CL-600/604 accidents since 2000 till now were on take-off. Cause all those events - stall immediately after take-off. There were icing at 2 of them and there were a wrong balance of the aircraft at 2 other.

Sad news, especially at Christmas.

I don't speculate about causes of accidents and I'm sure many will fill the gap over the next few days.

I do however have concerns about CL aircraft take-off accidents.

There have been enough to catch my attention including a fatal at Birminghm (BHX) a couple of years ago and one at Moscow last year(?)

Low temps seem to have been a factor in those. Regardless of the final outcome of investigations into this tragedy, could a positive from this thread be to spread the word to CL pilots about contamination from frost or ice, and the effect it has been shown to have on this model?

Hope the injured make full recoveries.

Sir George Cayley

The word has already been spread. This wing does not forgive even the slightest contaminant aboard. How many more accidents can it possibly take before pilots wake to this fact? Not saying that's what happened here, but the report plays like a broken record.

There have also been approach accidents (which didn't kill anyone) with this type. The wing is "hard", (for others, that means no leading-edge slats which bring the stall speed down and which sometimes render stall characteristics more gentle. FIRESYSOK is right -this hard-wing stalls swiftly - see the last report regarding the increase in Stall AOA with only slight contamination).

This thread may have some common elements with the Boston IB de-ice thread where the ethical and operational question was whether others should speak up or not regarding contaminated wings on another aircraft before its departure.

Montrose - NTSB PPT:
http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2006/Mont...rose, Colorado



China Eastern CRJ200:
http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safet...J200crash.html


Birmingham Airport, GB:
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/cms_resou...pdf_503172.pdf
FSF paper on Birmingham accident:
http://www.flightsafety.org/ap/ap_jan05.pdf


Fredericton Airport, New Brunswick, Canada:
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/...1/a97h0011.asp

The Actual at the approx time of accident
UAAA 251900z 31003mps 280v350 1100 R23/P2000n SN BR OVC013 M11/M12
Q1032 234/1032 Tempo 0600 SN FG RMK QFE717/0956=
Not a nice evening - Almaty is an evil place in the winter
My sympathies go to the family of the person who died
ACD

Flintstone;

Yes, I changed the word in the post from "will" to "may" with that in mind.

Re speculation, agree when facts are not known or one is not in a position to offer specialist knowledge or experience. The pattern/sequence of this accident is reported however, , so I think the notions expressed here are at least worth discussing because the pattern of the accident sequence reported has occurred at least four previous times with this type. That isn't speculation, that is fact but caution must be exercised that this remains a discussion and not a summary of the cause of this accident which is not known. The line is a fine one indeed.

Point taken PJ. I'm painfully aware of the attributes of this type what with living with it on a daily basis. What I'm hoping to avoid is the swathe of idiots that home in on these threads like flies round a cow's arse.

LOL!!
My Dad always said that any fool can speak up, and usually does....bless him, he understood human nature.

It is interesting to discuss "what is" in these matters. With some exceptions, I think that the thread on the Turkish MD82 accident was a good example of this kind of discussion even though there was some hot-behind-the-eyes contributions towards those who obviously were not knowledgeable. It isn't worth the blood pressure to try to correct or stop such entries; one can only control what oneself can and will do. The work done by earnest, informed and cautious contributors on that thread was good, readable stuff by and large. Those who's egos require an "early entry" to be seen either as prescient (a no-risk position to take), or as "part of the gang" don't understand the investigative process and that safety work is almost exclusively driven by "what", not "who".

I note that the empennage is upside down. Perhaps photos of the larger area will reveal more.

The actual weather was:
UAAA 252100Z 01003MPS 0900 R05/2000D SN BR OVC003 M14/M15 Q1038 054/1032 NOSIG RMK QBB110 QFE718/0957=
It was heavy snow fall

Interesting that the few photos available show the vertical stab upside down but the engines are "pointing" in the opposite direction to what one would expect given the position of the vert.stab.

Hi,
to be honest, it just sounds to me like icing.

I was twice in the last month in ALA and had to fight the weather.

One of the problems is pollution in ALA. ( Smog ) These little particles in the air are ideal condensation points for FZFG for example. No or almost no wind makes it even worse.
That is for example why you got these poor visibilities in ALA so often.

The other day I was surprised myself, I took over an airplane which just came in and at my walkaround I did not see any ice. Visibility was around 1200m and temperature slightly below zero, no percepitation. I think it was about M6. Then I inspected the wing from above and was very surprised to see so much frost accumulated right where the spoilers are. You could not see it from the front or any other place then from the window inside.

We did De-Ice and left the place.

Very dangerous weather in Almaty and a unforgiving wing at the challenger jet.

Also do not forget, it was at night time, a night flight for the 2-man crew and duty times coming to a limit. There was not a lot of time for De-Icing either.

HAJ-HKG is very long, especially with a refueling stop.

Just my 2 cents...

Engine3,
Good points........I was recently in Uralsk and Atyrau in Kazakhstan in atrocious weather.

I fly a 604 and in icing conditions it gives me the creeps.....not that we know yet the cause of this tragedy, we'll have to wait and see but I won't be surprised if icing is a factor.

Consider also that this aircraft had just done a long sector and therefore was cold soaked. Terrible event, deep sympathy for all involved :(

cold soaked?

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/71...scription.html

-quote-
The physics behind the frosting phenomenon is well known. After a certain length of flight time at cruising altitudes, wing tank fuel temperature can reach -40 degrees F. When the wing fuel reaches such low temperatures it is commonly referred to as "cold soaked". For reasons of aerodynamic stability, relatively warm "belly" fuel on an aircraft is typically burned first. This often leaves the "cold soaked" fuel undisturbed in the wings during short duration flights. This "cold soaked" fuel, when remaining in contact with the wing surface, can result in non-environmental frosting upon landing. This is particularly problematic, if a particular airline route or schedule of flights should involve a number of short hops to pick up addition passengers or cargo. Often these stops are required to be of short duration for economic reasons. The non-environmental frosting can prevent an aircraft from maintaining a quick turnabout on these short hops and may cut into the benefits or gains that may otherwise be realized.

The desire for a quick turnabout from landing to takeoff can conflict with the necessities of dealing with such non-environmental frosting occurring after landing. Although an airline may allot only fifteen or twenty minutes for a given stop, a heavy coat of frost and ice may rapidly form on the top surface of the wings after only five or ten minutes on the ground. FAA regulations may then require the captain of the airplane to either wait for ambient airport weather conditions to eliminate the frost and ice formations or actively have the wings de-iced. Each of these solutions requires a penalty of time and money to implement. Many de-icing procedures can carry with them environmental concerns as well. Therefore, current approaches towards the removal of non-environmental icing often are not compatible with the airline industries goals involving scheduling, cost savings, and time management.

-unquote-

Sad someone died. Looking at the pictures, seems a miracle anyone survived that.

@Armchair..

Excellent post. Our SOP in icing conditions are, to put the cold fuel during turnaround out of the wings into center and refuel with "warm" fuel to melt possible wing icing.

Maybe it has nothing to do with this tragic accident.

are we forgetting the Colorado Springs (USA) crash of a similiar plane? Head of NBC TV sports onboard...son killed while taking off on a shortish runway and ice covered wing...plane got airborn briefly and crashed.

sevenstrokeroll;
No it has not been missed. I posted the link to an NTSB PPT presentation on post #15. There is plenty on the web including this link to the Montrose accident report.

Very sad case indeed.

Yes I am aware the accident report is not yet out on this one.

However the CL wing does seem a very unforgiving and particularly vicious wing when contaminated near the stall. What a great shame the manufacturers and authorities are unable to come up with a realistic test to see how an a/c performs at Vr+ with contaminated wings. In actual fact, any pilot of any a/c, who attempts to get airborne with contaminated flying surfaces becomes part of the test flight program.

Cl&== Crash In Almaty
 

Hi all, partly living in Almaty and being in the de-icing/anti-icing business for a long time, I am reading all your comments very carefully and also the weather report. Some things are not really fitting:

1. SN in the weather report means "moderate snowfall". If it would be "heavy snow" (SN+), the aeroplane would be not certified for take-off in anyway.

2. The aeroplane received no de-icing/anti-icing treatment. What had been the reason not to treat the aeroplane ? I am training a lot of ground crew & pilots and unfortunately I must say that companies operating business jets or private persons flying them, very often do not spend a single USD in the information and training of their flight crews.

3. I am attending all the international conferences and being member in SAE and so on. Never see business jet operators at such happenings.

4. ALA is in winter not worse than other airports. Basically it would a have a long runwy to gain extra speed. The de-icing/anti-icing service had been audited very short ago and found compatible with EASA, AEA and FAA requirements.

5. The accident seems to be a copy of the one in Moscow-Vnukovo on Feb. 11th this year. Aircraft type, weather and so on are very close to each other. Difference: aeroplane in Moscow had been treated, but the whoel de-icing/anti-icing process is not in good shape at this airport.

Hope that all survivors will recover soon and feel sorry for the family of the killed one.

And you won't likely, either.
The competant bizjet owner/operators have already attended NBAA conferances/training...surprised this was not known
And then we have this...
The author may like to contact the manufacturer to see just how they tested their aeroplane.
All the necessary was done, and the flying characteristics of the particular model in question are very well known.
In fact, as part of the regular maintenance program, these aircraft undergo a mandated wing leading edge polishing from time to time.
Before posting, some might actually like to become familiar with the facts...:}

So,

1. Weather conducive to icing
2. Wing very sensitive to contamination
3. Previous accidents which are similar phenomenologically (wing drop shortly after TO)

If the AC was not deiced before takeoff, there has to be a suspicion that this is at least partly due to icing.

The problem with determining wing icing to be a (the) cause is that direct physical evidence is absent. So, given that the phenomenology as reported by some is consistent with asymmetric lift, icing would be an explanation whose strength derives directly from the weakness of evidence for alternative explanations. It is, logically, an explanation by default, and therefore subject to all the difficulties of explaining by default, such as the effectiveness of the search for other explanations. If something else physical is amongst the causes, then finding evidence for that is dependent on how carefully the burnt-out wreckage is investigated.

Kazahkstan is a participant in the Interstate Aviation Committee, which includes the Russian Federation, so I presume the MAK will be investigating.

PBL

Right! The "SN" in METAR means moderate snowfall. My opinion, it was heavy snowfall (my home place is about 9 nm from ALA airport). I made some photos through window about midnight (it was 3 hours before crash). It was terrible weather conditions near my place.
http://i030.radikal.ru/0712/09/ee77984a2a92.jpg
The RW was covered with dry snow with depth up to 10 mm and braking action was .32 (METAR) The snow looked dry but my sat dish (the tilt about 70) is covered with snow now (it is in 2 days after snow fall).
Normally taxi to RW05 takes 5 min (not more), but if another a/c has landed and is back tracking, it can take up to 20 -25 min.

De Iced
 

Hi
as to my information, the Crew de-iced the Aircraft before Depature, but I don't know what Fluid and Mix.

I agree that a lot of US biz operators are going to NBAA. But two things:
- This had been a German registered aeroplane and I talk about the situation under EASA rules.
- The NBAA I am also attending, but the quality of meetings, for my opinion, do not reach SAE level.

The de-icing/anti-icing agent in ALA is the airport. They have a 70:30 T1 mix (heated) available as well as concentrated T2 fluid. Both from the same manufacturer from Europe.

The F/O was the PF and under supervision, since new to the aircraft. I've known him for years as a good and professional colleague. The PIC, who survived (as did the CA and the sole PAX), is under shock and does not remember much apart from grabbing the checklist after liftoff and then seeing 90° bank to the right.
Very sad story. He was so happy for his new job...
Let's hope we find out what the cause was and that something can be done to avoid this from happening again.

Was at an airport just South of this one yesterday in much the same conditions minus the snow, but with freezing fog. Vis was at mins and not a nice day. The whole area was bad WX.

The Challenger wing is not tolerant of anything on it. Sorry to see another one go down and my thoughts and prayers go out to everyone onboard.

CD

Many years ago the B737-200 had the odd incident of undemanded roll immediately after take off. Boeing introduced various measures to address this issue but I recall that in almost every case the rate of rotation was much higher than the (then) recommended rate of 3 degrees per second.

I just wondered what the recommended rotation rate is for the Challenger and whether this had significantly been exceeded on the previous accidents?

It certainly was with the accident in Kansas with manufacturer test pilots on board.
Each manufacturer publishes the recomendations as to rotation rate, yet I have noticed (in training/line flying, actual airlpane) rotation rates commonly exceeded. When a new First officer attempts this with yours truly in Command, they are told right then and there that if this is attempted again, they would be returned to the sim for 'additional training'.

I learned a very long time ago that excessive rotation rates are a recipe for disaster, especially with the older jet transports and during takeoff in heavy rain/snow.

Think I'm wrong?
Find yourself an old B707 and find out, firsthand.:E

Boy, do you have that right. I fly with so many newbees who want to yank the CRJ right off the ground like a C172. If trimmed correctly, a jet will fly itself off the runway with very little help. Add in Flap 20 takeoff, heavy weight, engine and wing anti-ice on... And I'm fed up with seeing the continuous ignition status message post as a result of overly aggressive rotation technique (or lack thereof).