Quantcast

Another airliner missing

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,519
Location
Fresno, California
Without my going back to the transcripts, I'll ask if they conclusively show that the good engine was shut down by the pilots or could it also have failed of its own accord. It occurs to me that fuel contamination could cause both failures at separate times.

I am also open to the remote possibility that this plane may have come from the maintenance hangar and maintenance crews could have crosswired engine controls leading to misidentification or misaction, though I think that would have revealed itself during the taxi or startup.
 

StarJar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
1,723
Location
El Centro, California, USA
Do airline pilots not train for a failure of all engines? There's been more than one airliner that has landed successfully with all engines inoperative. Even if both engines failed the aircraft should not have stalled seconds later if the pilots reacted correctly. A gliding plane covers a lot more distance for a given altitude than a stalled one.
I think it was gliding, untill it got down, near the buildings. At that point, they probably raised the nose to avoid hitting a building broadside.
 

Georden

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
154
Location
Calgary, AB Canada
Without my going back to the transcripts, I'll ask if they conclusively show that the good engine was shut down by the pilots or could it also have failed of its own accord. It occurs to me that fuel contamination could cause both failures at separate times.
Flight data recorder shows crew shut down good engine.


I think it was gliding, untill it got down, near the buildings. At that point, they probably raised the nose to avoid hitting a building broadside.
The aircraft stalled 6 seconds after the first engine failed, and another video from a rooftop shows it falling in a nose high attitude before passing the buildings.
 

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,519
Location
Fresno, California
another video from a rooftop shows it falling in a nose high attitude before passing the buildings.
I would like a link to that if you have it. All of the videos I've seen only show it as it clears the buildings without enough precursor to tell if it was in a nose high descent or simply being pulled up at the last second to clear the buildings.
 

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
13,797
Location
Port Townsend WA
That looked like the total angle of attack was about 25°.
Estimated wing incidence 5°
Nose up attitude 5°
angle of glide. 15°

25° total
 

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,894
Location
Evansville, Indiana
Dangerzone said:
Yes, I am aware of this possibility (and probability) but it will be up to the official investigation team to see whether the debris was ingested at the time of crash as a consequence of crash or before the crash as a reason why one engine would not operate normally.
Given that trees don't generally just suddenly jump into the path of airliners and cause crashes, I'm pretty sure that comment just lowered the collective average IQ of this forum by at least a couple of points. If you're wrong, just come out and say "I screwed up." You'll erode what respect people have for you much less than by trying to weasel out of it.

Dangerzone said:
If there were certainty in a cause and consequence logic of the 222 Flight then the investigation could have been over by now.
If there were a clear cut mechanical cause, it would be more likely to be a quick investigation. Contrary to what we see with the NTSB and the "Oh well, pilot error..." approach to GA investigations, a predominantly human factors cause will more likely result in a longer investigation.

Dangerzone said:
It seems discussions here start to become personal at some point for no reason.
Generally, that only when happens when someone blunders into an area where their ego exceeds their knowledge. I've been on the receiving end of that a few time thanks to Autoreply, BJC, Turd, et al and I am a wiser person for the experience.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,292
Location
Upper midwest in a house
My post relies highly on logic that a rational and trained pilot would not shut down an operational engine if the other is out.
Reality check on TransAsia: In 20 yrs, they have crashed 5 ATR's. That represents 30% of all ATR crashes. They are a one airline wrecking crew. They crashed this airplane due to a plain and simple screwup and there was a check airman on the flight deck in the jumpseat.

Facts from the CVR/FDR data (this is not speculation): Right engine failed, autoshutdown functions worked as advertised. A few seconds later, the crew reduced power on the left engine, which was still running normally, then shut it down. Now they have zero engines running and a discussion ensues about restarting the engine they just inadvertently shut down. They run through the checklist and actually get a light off but they run out of speed and altitude, and stall the plane in the river. Another ~10 seconds and they might have pulled it off. Makes you wonder how many times they "almost" crash? Scary stuff. I will give them credit for getting through the checklist and getting a restart. That was a phenomenal accomplishment under the circumstances. However, in this country we have a saying - don't create your own emergencies, which is what they did.
 

DangerZone

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
2,110
Location
Zagreb HR
Given that trees don't generally just suddenly jump into the path of airliners and cause crashes, I'm pretty sure that comment just lowered the collective average IQ of this forum by at least a couple of points. If you're wrong, just come out and say "I screwed up." You'll erode what respect people have for you much less than by trying to weasel out of it.

If there were a clear cut mechanical cause, it would be more likely to be a quick investigation. Contrary to what we see with the NTSB and the "Oh well, pilot error..." approach to GA investigations, a predominantly human factors cause will more likely result in a longer investigation.

Generally, that only when happens when someone blunders into an area where their ego exceeds their knowledge. I've been on the receiving end of that a few time thanks to Autoreply, BJC, Turd, et al and I am a wiser person for the experience.
Sorry about your egos. However, it seems better not to further discuss with you because there is risk you might first drag me down to your level of 'wiseness' and then beat me down with experience. Thank you for this lesson that there are people who believe themselves wiser just because they form a pack and prevail with mediocre numbers instead of reason. It's good to learn this because it might help avoiding such in the future.
 

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,894
Location
Evansville, Indiana
Sorry about your egos. However, it seems better not to further discuss with you because there is risk you might first drag me down to your level of 'wiseness' and then beat me down with experience. Thank you for this lesson that there are people who believe themselves wiser just because they form a pack and prevail with mediocre numbers instead of reason. It's good to learn this because it might help avoiding such in the future.
Seeing as I am a scientist, I deal strictly with reason. I simply pointed out that your "reason" is flawed and doesn't stand up when compared to reality. A good example is "My post relies highly on logic that a rational and trained pilot would not shut down an operational engine if the other is out". It has happened quite a few times. Go read about the Kegworth 737 crash or the 2013 Glasgow police helicopter crash as those are the two most high profile circumstances of it that jump to mind. I'm also aware of at least three cases in light twin aircraft over the past fifteen years here in the US.

No reason to be sorry about my ego. I'm secure enough in myself and in my knowledge to recognize its limits that I don't view being corrected as a personal insult but rather as simply what mature people do because none of us know everything. Maybe you should try it some time...
 
Last edited:

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,817
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
The pilots of the airline’s ATR turboprops who failed the test, which was conducted orally, will be suspended pending further training in handling emergency situations, the aviation authority said. It said an additional 19 pilots still had not taken the test and could not fly until they had passed.

[Apparently the question was: If an engine fails in flight, which engine do you shut down? - BJC]


 
Top