Cause

  • | | | |

    Brazil jet thrust reverser ‘off’


    This photograph was produced by Agência Brasil, a public Brazilian news agency.Their website states: “O conteúdo deste site é publicado sob a licença Creative Commons Atribuição 2.5 Brasil”(This photo is published under the Creative Commons License Attribution 2.5 Brazil)

    The thrust reverser had been deactivated during maintenance checks, the airline confessed.

    The reverser is used to help jets slow down on landing.

    Tam Airlines insisted the deactivation was in accordance with proper procedures. However, nearly 200 people–passengers and crew–are dead.

    Yet this was in accordance with proper procedures?

    The airbus started to land at Sao Paulo’s Congonhas airport, and either aborted the landing or failed to slow down when the deactivated thrust reverser failed. The plane crossed the street, hit buildings and exploded.

    Tam Airlines said the right thrust reverser was “deactivated” at the time of the accident. To quote them specifically:
    “in conditions stipulated by the maintenance of the manufacturer Airbus and approved by [Brazil’s] National Civil Aviation Agency”.

    Brazil’s Globo TV televised that a problem with the right thrust reverser had emerged four days prior to the crash.

    The Airbus’s manual stipulates that ten days can lapse after a problem is first detected in an inspection and the plane can continue to operate in the meantime.

    sources: http://news.bbc.co.uk
    http://www.aviation.com/ap_070721_thrustreverser.html

  • |

    Pilot Error Down

    Blame it on better training.

    Blame what? The good news that mishaps due to pilots’ poor decision-making declined 71 percent 1983 and 2002.

    Thanks to Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health for doing the research that says that though the overall rate of airline accidents remained stable during that period, the proportion of mishaps involving overall pilot error has decreased 40 per cent.

    The study’s lead author, Susan P. Baker says, “A 40 percent decline in pilot error-related mishaps is very impressive. Pilot error has long been considered the most prominent contributor to aviation crashes. Trends indicate that great progress has been made to improve the decision-making of pilots and coordination between the aircraft’s crew members. However, the improvements have not led to an overall decline in mishaps. The increase in mishaps while aircraft are not moving may require special attention.”

    Read more about Baker’s study in Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine.

  • | | |

    Gol Goes On and On

    According to Brazil’s Defense Minister Nelson Jobim, critics are “playing politics” when they disparage the state of Brazil’s aviation industry, in which occured in the past year, the crash of a Gol jetliner over the Amazon in which 154 people died, and July’s disaster when an Airbus crashed into a warehouse in Sao Paulo killing 199 people.

    Nevertheless, during a seminar in the United States, the President of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers, Marc Baumgartner criticized the Brazilian Air Force which oversees Brazil’s air traffic control system for trying to punish the controllers. “The Brazilian Air Force invested lots of energy to arrest and prosecute its own workers but none to fix its (air traffic control) system.” He also said that “it’s a question of time before a new air accident happens again in Brazil.”

    So far, a military court has declined to indict five Brazilian air traffic controllers for the GOL crash. Two American pilots face charges in a civilian criminal court in connection with the same crash. A Congressional commission report supports the indictment of pilots Joseph Lepore and Jan Paladino.

  • | | |

    How the Airbus Brakes

    An A320 gets three devices to brake

    Interested in more about the Airbus? Airbus Flight Crew Training Manual.pdf

  • | | | |

    Pilot Error Suspected

    Sources Close to Probe Say Engine Wasn’t Idled

    Authorities believe pilot error caused the tragedy. If confirmed, it would cast doubt that poor runway conditions were to blame.

    Pilots had programmed the computerized engine controls — similar to a car’s cruise-control system — to maintain a speed of about 150 mph. When the plane was about 30 feet off the ground, the pilots correctly switched one of the engines to idle, but did not do so with the other engine. When the plane was braked, the second engine attempted to accelerate to maintain the preset speed.

    One of the airplane’s thrust reversers, a device used to slow the aircraft, was broken but the manufacturer claims plane is safe to fly with a disabled reverser.

    However, it has long been claimed that the short runway at Congonhas is unsafe in rainy conditions. The runway has been the site of problem landings before, and was even closed briefly this year, by court order.

    Air traffic controllers fear that government officials will use reports of pilot error to excuse themselves from making further improvements to the air safety system.

  • | |

    Radar Failure

    Radar failure over the Amazon is just one among a host of problems plaguing Brazil’s suffering aviation industry. The failure forced Brazilian and International flights to ground or to turn back. This from the country that sent a piece of the fuselage off thinking it was the flight recorder.

    The radar was out from midnight until 2:30 am, and caused by an electrical problem. Travellers found themselves trapped in airports, unable to catch flights home. There was mass confusion in spite of the president’s speech primishing safety measures.

    “Our aviation system, in spite of the investments we have made in expansion and modernization of almost all Brazilian airports, is passing through difficulties,” Silva said. “The security of our aviation system is compatible with all the international standards. We cannot lose sight of this.”

    A new airport location will be chosen within 90 days but will take five years to build and is not a high priority. Congonhas, the nation’s busiest airport, has a slick, short runway considered a likely factor in the crash of the TAM flight that killed nearly 200 people; and the planned repair and remediation does have priority. The crash was the country’s worst disaster until Tuesday’s accident and it exposed widespread problems with the country’s air traffic control system.

    Analysis of the recorded conversations should be available within a few weeks.

  • | | | |

    Premature and Unfortunate Conclusions in Brazil

    Local media tries to claim that pilot error was responsible for the airplane crash that killed nearly 200 people in Sao Paulo last week.

    The news magazine VEJA said that a short runway and a constricted area that gave little room for victims to escape contributed to the accident.

    The Brazilian air force said no conclusion had been reached.

    It labelled as “premature and unfortunate” any conclusion about the accident, “as long as the investigations are ongoing.”

    On July 17, a TAM airline Airbus 320 carrying 187 people overran the runway, crossed a road and slammed into an airport building.

    The left turbine was thrust in reverse and was helping the airplane slow down, the right one was accelerating.

    Key information has been obtained from the airplane’s black boxes.

    The runway, which had been closed has now reopened Friday.

  • |

    Radar Failure in Brazil

    A radar outage from 11:15 p.m. Friday to 2:30 a.m. Saturday, caused by an electrical problem, forced planes heading to Brazil to return to their points of origin and make unscheduled landings.

    The nation has had chronic problems with delays and cancellations on domestic flights over the past 10 months but this is the first radar outage.

    Sao Paulo’s Mayor Gilberto Kassab said that building a new airport could take between five and 10 years and is not a priority.

    Officials mistakenly sent part of the plane’s fuselage to the United States, thinking it was the flight recorder.

    The real flight recorder had been located and would be sent to Washington for analysis.

    The radar outage occurred when a short circuit cut off electricity during routine maintenance in the jungle city of Manaus. Power was restored by 1:30 a.m. Radar coverage was working again an hour later.

    The ailing industry has not recovered from months of work slowdowns by air traffic controllers protesting precarious working conditions. holes in the country’s radar coverage, antiquated equipment and flight controllers with only rudimentary knowledge of English.

  • | |

    Brazil’s TAM admits Brakes Not Working

    Brazilian airline TAM admitted one of the thrust reversers on the Airbus A320 that crashed at San Paulo was not operating.

    Its right braking system was deactivated in accordance with the Airbus manufacturer specifications approved by the Brazil’s National Civil Aviation Agency (Anac). There were problems with the brake days before the disaster.

    Brazil’s Air Force Accident Investigation and Prevention chief Jorge Kersul said any aircraft can land properly without using the reverse brake. The reverse brake is only an additional instrument to help the plane stop.

    Specialists said that if the airport’s runway is wet, it is difficult to land without using the reverse brake.

    The investigation will last some ten months.

  • |

    Brazil’s Aviation Crisis Continues

    Radar failure over the Amazon forced Brazil to turn back and ground international flights yesterday.

    Authorities mistook a piece of the fuselage from the accident for the flight recorder.

    The loss of radar from 11:15 p.m. Friday to 2:30 a.m. yesterday caused planes s to return to their points of origin or make unscheduled landings.

    A short circuit turned off electricity during routine maintenance. When power went out, 17 flights were within the coverage area. Nine planes continued to their destinations, and eight were rerouted. None were in danger.

    “This is total chaos. I have never seen anything like it, and it makes me feel very unsafe,”

    The radar problem prompted American Airlines to divert 13 Brazil-bound planes.

    Delta Airlines said six of its flights were also diverted.

    Jose dos Santos, a 43-year-old cafe owner, was aboard a cancelled flight when the crew announced Brazil was not letting airplanes enter its airspace because of the radar failure. “I was saying, ‘Oh, my God, my life is over!’ I was in a panic, all I could think about was the Gol jet that crashed in the Amazon last year,” Santos said,

    Four United Airlines flights were also canceled.

    The flight cancellations and diversions followed a nationally televised speech by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

    Authorities plan to build a new airport in Sao Paulo, where an Airbus A320 operated by TAM Airlines crashed Tuesday, killing 191 people.

  • | | |

    CA: Cessna Crash


    Pictured: A Cessna T210N Turbo Centurion
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Mick Bajcar

    What: Cessna T210N
    Where: 3 miles south of Dana Point, California
    When: November 19, 2005
    Who: Pilot and 3 passengers
    Why: The airplane impacted the ocean following a departure from controlled cruise flight, decelerating from 120 to 60 knots spiraling down corkscrew manner before impact. No pre-accident anomalies were noted with any systems examined, and no distress calls or communications preceded or followed the upset. The pilot had moderate to severe coronary artery disease with evidence of at least one prior small heart attack. The combination of coronary artery disease and LVH would have substantially increased the risk for sudden cardiac death in this pilot. Four died in the crash.

  • | | |

    Cessna Crash in Houston


    Pictured: A representative Cessna 501 Citation I/SP
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Jerry Search

    What: Cessna 500
    Where: Houston, TX
    When: November 05, 2005
    Who: pilot and passenger
    Why: The 4,100-hour commercial pilot lost directional control of the single-pilot twin-engine turbojet while taking off, and impacted the ground 3,750 feet from the point of departure. The airplane climbed to approximately 150 feet, rolled to the right, descended, and struck the ground inverted. The weather was day VFR and the wind was reported from 170 degrees at 10 knots. The wreckage revealed that none of the main-entry door latching pins were in fully locked position. The accident occurred on its first test flight out of maintenance. Neither pilot nor passenger survived.

  • | | | |


    Pictured: A Piper PA-46-310P Malibu
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Lindsay Hockey

    What: Piper PA-46-310P Crash
    Where: Houston TX
    When: Sept 17 2005
    Who: 2 fatalities
    Why: The 641-hour private pilot and passenger were departing on a 155-nautical mile night cross-country flight. The tower controller heard a weak transmission that she could not completely understand, but did hear the words “engine” and “power.” The controller asked the pilot to “say again”, but there was no response. She again asked, “say again” and the pilot transmitted, ” I’m going down.” There were no further communications from the pilot. impacting the ground, the airplane cartwheeled. 50 feet wide. Witness reports of the airplane’s flight path along with the wreckage distribution path were consistent with the pilot’s attempt to return to the airport. A post-impact fire consumed the fuselageThe reason for loss of engine power could not be determined.

  • | | | |

    Helios Boeing Crash


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Savvas Petoussis

    What: Helios Airlines Boeing 737-300 en route from Larnaka Airport to Ruzyn? International Airport
    Where: Marathon, Greece
    When: August 14, 2005
    Who: 115 passengers and 6 crew
    Why: Before take-off the crew failed to set the pressurisation system to “Auto,” which is contrary to standard Boeing procedures. Minutes after take-off the cabin altitude horn activated as a result of pressurization. It was, however, misidentified by the crew as a take-off configuration warning, On August 14, 2005, a Helios Airline Boeing 737-300, registered in Cyprus as 5B-DBY crashed into rolling terrain north northeast of Eleftherios Venizelos International Airport (LGAV), Athens, Greece. The nearest town to the crash site was Gramitikos, Greece. The aircraft had departed Larnaka Airport, Cyprus, two hours and 57 minutes prior to the accident.

    The NTSB team joined investigators from the Greek Air Accident Investigation and Aviation Safety Board, the Boeing Company, and CFM, the aircraft’s engine manufacturer. The crash was caused by pilot incapacitation due to hypoxia brought about by depressurization, leading to fuel starvation. 121 died in the crash.

  • | | | | | | |

    Hendrick Motor Sports


    Pictured: A Beech 200 Super King Air
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Carlos Barbosa

    What: Hendrick Motorsports Beechcraft Super King Air 200
    Where: Bull Mountain, seven miles from Blue Ridge Airport,
    When: October 24 2004
    Who: 2 pilots 10 passengers
    Why: On October 24 2004, en route to theNextel Cup Series, a Beechcraft Super King Air 200 owned by Hendrick Motorsports crashed in fog into Bull Mountain, seven miles from Blue Ridge Airport, carrying two pilots and ten passengers. Fatalities included Jon Hendrick and his twin daughters,and Ricky Hendrick. The plane missed its first landing attempt before veering off course and crashing; and the plane had not climbed to its temporarily assigned altitude of 2,600 feet; it instead descended to 1,800 feet before crashing. The cause was ruled failure to use an instrument approach and pilot error

    George’s Point of View

  • | | | |

    Argentina: INCAIR Cessna


    Pictured: A Cessna T210J Turbo Centurion
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Mick Bajcar

    What: INCAIR Cessna T210J en route from alvador de Jujuy to Tucuman
    Where: Rosario, Argentina
    When: May 17, 2004
    Who: pilot and 3 passengers
    Why: On May 17, 2004, a Cessna T210J single-engine, Argentine # LV-JPB from Salvador de Jujuy to Tucuman was destroyed under impact with terrain following a loss of control near Rosario de la Frontera, Province of Salta, Argentina. The pilot and 3 passengers were fatally injured. The airplane, serial number T210-0453, was owned/operated by INCAIR S.R.L., of Tocuman, Argentina. Dark night visual meteorological conditions prevailed.?An instrument flight rules flight plan was filed. The pilot lost control while in cruise at 16,000 feet. The 1969-model airplane was not equipped with supplemental oxygen.

    George’s Point of View

  • | | |

    Osteen Florida: Piper Malibu Crash


    Pictured: A Piper PA-46-310P Malibu
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Patric Borg

    What: Piper PA-46-310P
    Where: Osteen Florida
    When: June 14, 2002
    Who: 3 fatalities
    Why: The pilot asked to deviate because he saw “a hole” in the weather. Radar showed a cluster of thunderstorms, level three to four were present in the vicinity of N9143B’s position. N9143B started an uncontrolled descent from FL260 (about 27,500 feet msl). Witnesses reported hearing the engine make a winding noise.?The airplane come out of the clouds about 300 feet above the ground, in a nose low spiral, and the right wing was missing. The ilot’s inadequate weather evaluation resulted in in-flight separation of the right wing and right horizontal stabilizer and the subsequent loss of control and crash.

  • | | | |

    American Airlines flight 587


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact Photographer Gerard Helmer

    What: American Airlines flight 587, an Airbus Industrie A300-605R en route from JFK to Las Americas International Airport, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
    Where: Belle Harbor, New York,
    When: November 12, 2001
    Who: 2 flight crewmembers, 7 flight attendants, and 251 passengers
    Why: The airplane’s vertical stabilizer and rudder separated in flight.

    NTSB report has been added to this incident:

    NTSB Identification: DCA02MA001.
    The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact Records Management Division
    Scheduled 14 CFR AMERICAN AIRLINES INC
    Accident occurred Monday, November 12, 2001 in Belle Harbor, NY
    Probable Cause Approval Date: 4/14/2005
    Aircraft: Airbus Industrie A300B4-605R, registration: N14053
    Injuries: 265 Fatal.
    The Board’s full report is available at http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/publictn.htm.

    On November 12, 2001, about 0916:15 eastern standard time, American Airlines flight 587, an Airbus Industrie A300-605R, N14053, crashed into a residential area of Belle Harbor, New York, shortly after takeoff from John F. Kennedy International Airport, Jamaica, New York. Flight 587 was a regularly scheduled passenger flight to Las Americas International Airport, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, with 2 flight crewmembers, 7 flight attendants, and 251 passengers aboard the airplane. The airplane’s vertical stabilizer and rudder separated in flight and were found in Jamaica Bay, about 1 mile north of the main wreckage site. The airplane’s engines subsequently separated in flight and were found several blocks north and east of the main wreckage site. All 260 people aboard the airplane and 5 people on the ground were killed, and the airplane was destroyed by impact forces and a postcrash fire. Flight 587 was operating under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 on an instrument flight rules flight plan. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident.
    The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
    the in-flight separation of the vertical stabilizer as a result of the loads beyond ultimate design that were created by the first officer’s unnecessary and excessive rudder pedal inputs. Contributing to these rudder pedal inputs were characteristics of the Airbus A300-600 rudder system design and elements of the American Airlines Advanced Aircraft Maneuvering Program.

    FULL REPORT

    DCA02MA001

    The Board’s full report is available at http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/publictn.htm.

    On November 12, 2001, about 0916:15 eastern standard time, American Airlines flight 587, an Airbus Industrie A300-605R, N14053, crashed into a residential area of Belle Harbor, New York, shortly after takeoff from John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), Jamaica, New York. Flight 587 was a regularly scheduled passenger flight to Las Americas International Airport, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, with 2 flight crewmembers, 7 flight attendants, and 251 passengers aboard the airplane. The airplane’s vertical stabilizer and rudder separated in flight and were found in Jamaica Bay, about 1 mile north of the main wreckage site. The airplane’s engines subsequently separated in flight and were found several blocks north and east of the main wreckage site. All 260 people aboard the airplane and 5 people on the ground were killed, and the airplane was destroyed by impact forces and a postcrash fire. Flight 587 was operating under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 121 on an instrument flight rules flight plan. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident.

    The accident airplane arrived at JFK about 2231 on the night before the accident. The airplane had been flown from San Jose, Costa Rica, to JFK with an intermediate stop in Miami International Airport, Miami, Florida. During postaccident interviews, the pilots of the flight leg from MIA to JFK indicated that the flight was smooth and uneventful.

    Flight 587 was the first leg of a 1-day roundtrip sequence for the flight crew. American Airlines records indicated that the captain checked in for the flight about 0614 and that the first officer checked in about 0630. The gate agent working the flight arrived at the departure gate about 0645. She stated that the flight attendants were already aboard the airplane at that time and that the captain and the first officer arrived at the gate about 0700.

    About 0710, the airplane fueling process began. The airplane fueler indicated that, during the fueling process, he saw one of the pilots perform an exterior inspection of the airplane. He finished the fueling process about 0745 and stated that he saw nothing unusual regarding the airplane.

    Statements provided to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Police Department by American Airlines maintenance and avionics personnel indicated that, sometime between 0730 and 0800, the captain reported that the number 2 pitch trim and yaw damper system would not engage. Two avionics technicians were sent to the airplane to investigate the problem. They performed an auto flight system (AFS) check, which indicated a fault with the number 2 flight augmentation computer. The circuit breaker was then reset, another AFS check was performed, and no fault was detected. In addition, an autoland system check was performed, and that test also did not detect a fault. The avionics technicians estimated that they were in the cockpit for 5 to 7 minutes.

    The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) recording began about 0845:35. The CVR indicated that, about 0859:58, the airplane was cleared to push back from the gate. About 0901:33, the ground controller provided the flight crew with taxi instructions to runway 31L, and the first officer acknowledged these instructions. About 0902:05, the captain told the first officer, “your leg, you check the rudders.” (The first officer was the flying pilot, and the captain was the nonflying pilot.) Data from the flight data recorder (FDR) showed that, about 0902:07, the rudder pedal check began. The FDR data also showed that a maximum right rudder pedal deflection of about 3.7 inches was recorded about 0902:11 and that a maximum left rudder pedal deflection of 3.6 inches was recorded about 0902:19. About 0902:23, the first officer responded, “rudders check.” The FDR data showed that the rudder pedals returned to their neutral position about 0902:25.

    About 0906:53, the ground controller provided the pilots of Japan Air Lines flight 47, a Boeing 747-400, with taxi instructions to runway 31L. About 0908:01, the ground controller instructed the Japan Air Lines pilots to contact the local (tower) controller. About 0908:58, the ground controller instructed the flight 587 pilots to follow the Japan Air Lines airplane and to contact the local controller. The first officer acknowledged this instruction.

    About 0911:08, the local controller cleared the Japan Air Lines airplane for takeoff. About 0911:36, the local controller cautioned the flight 587 pilots about wake turbulence and instructed the pilots to taxi into position and hold for runway 31L. The first officer acknowledged the instruction. About 0913:05, the local controller instructed the Japan Air Lines pilots to fly the bridge climb and to contact the departure controller at the New York Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON). About 0913:21, the flight 587 captain said to the first officer, “you have the airplane.”

    About 0913:28, the local controller cleared flight 587 for takeoff, and the captain acknowledged the clearance. About 0913:35, the first officer asked the captain, “you happy with that [separation] distance?” About 3 seconds later, the captain replied, “we’ll be all right once we get rollin’. He’s supposed to be five miles by the time we’re airborne, that’s the idea.” About 0913:46, the first officer said, “so you’re happy.”

    The National Transportation Safety Board’s airplane performance study for this accident0 determined that flight 587 started its takeoff roll about 0913:51 and lifted off about 0914:29, which was about 1 minute 40 seconds after the Japan Air Lines airplane. About 0914:43, the local controller instructed the flight 587 pilots to turn left, fly the bridge climb, and contact the New York TRACON departure controller. About 5 seconds later, the captain acknowledged this instruction. Radar data indicated that the airplane climbed to 500 feet above mean sea level (msl) and then entered a climbing left turn to a heading of 220º. About 0915:00, the captain made initial contact with the departure controller, informing him that the airplane was at 1,300 feet msl and climbing to 5,000 feet msl. About 0915:05, the departure controller instructed flight 587 to climb to and maintain 13,000 feet msl, and the captain acknowledged this instruction about 5 seconds later. About 0915:29, the CVR recorded the captain’s statement “clean machine,” indicating that the gear, flaps, and slats had all been retracted.

    About 0915:35, flight 587 was climbing through 1,700 feet msl with its wings approximately level. About 1 second later, the departure controller instructed flight 587 to turn left and proceed direct to the WAVEY navigation intersection (located about 30 miles southeast of JFK). About 0915:41, the captain acknowledged the instruction. The controller did not receive any further transmissions from flight 587.

    FDR data indicated that, about 0915:36, the airplane experienced a 0.04 G drop in longitudinal load factor, a 0.07 G shift to the left in lateral load factor, and about a 0.3 G drop in normal (vertical) load factor. The airplane performance study found that these excursions were consistent with a wake turbulence encounter. Between 0915:36 and 0915:41, the FDR recorded movement of the control column, control wheel, and rudder pedals. Specifically, the control column moved from approximately 0º (neutral) to 2º nose up, 2º nose down, and back to 0º; the control wheel moved a total of seven times, with peaks at 18º right, 30º left, 37º right, 34º left, 5º left, 21º left, and 23º right, before moving to between 5º and 6º left; and the rudder pedals moved from about 0.1 inch left (the starting point for the pedals) to about 0.1 inch right and 0.2 inch left before moving to 0.1 inch left. The airplane performance study indicated that, during this time, the rudder moved from 0º (neutral) to about 2º left, about 0.6º right, and back to 0º.

    During the wake turbulence encounter, the airplane’s pitch angle increased from 9º to 11.5º, decreased to about 10º, and increased again to 11º. The airplane’s bank angle moved from 0º (wings level) to 17º left wing down, which was consistent with the turn to
    the WAVEY navigation intersection.

    At 0915:44.7, the captain stated, “little wake turbulence, huh?” to which the first officer replied, at 0915:45.6, “yeah.” At 0915:48.2, the first officer indicated that he wanted the airspeed set to 250 knots, which was the maximum speed for flight below 10,000 feet msl. At that point, the airplane was at an altitude of about 2,300 feet msl.

    FDR data indicated that, about 0915:51, the load factors began excursions that were similar to those that occurred about 0915:36: the longitudinal load factor dropped from 0.20 to 0.14 G, the lateral load factor shifted 0.05 G to the left, and the normal load factor dropped from 1.0 to 0.6 G. The airplane performance study found that these excursions were also consistent with a wake turbulence encounter. According to the FDR, the airplane’s bank angle moved from 23º to 25º left wing down at 0915:51.5, the control wheel moved to 64º right at 0915:51.5, and the rudder pedals moved to 1.7 inches right at 0915:51.9.

    At 0915:51.8, 0915:52.3, and 0915:52.9, the CVR recorded the sound of a thump, a click, and two thumps, respectively. At 0915:54.2, the first officer stated, in a strained voice, “max power.” At that point, the airplane was traveling at 240 knots. About 0915:55, the captain asked, “you all right?” to which the first officer replied, “yeah, I’m fine.” One second later, the captain stated, “hang onto it. Hang onto it.” The CVR recorded the sound of a snap at 0915:56.6, the first officer’s statement “let’s go for power please” at 0915:57.5, and the sound of a loud thump at 0915:57.7. According to the airplane performance study, the vertical stabilizer’s right rear main attachment fitting fractured at 0915:58.4, and the vertical stabilizer separated from the airplane immediately afterward. At 0915:58.5, the CVR recorded the sound of a loud bang. At that time, the airplane was traveling at an airspeed of about 251 knots.

    According to the FDR, the rudder pedals moved from 1.7 inches right to 1.7 inches left, 1.7 inches right, 2.0 inches right, 2.4 inches left, and 1.3 inches right between 0915:52 and 0915:58.5. Also, the FDR showed that the control wheel moved 64º to the right at 0915:51.5, 78º (full) to the left at 0915:53.5, 64º to the right at 0915:55.5, and 78º to the left at 0915:56.5.

    The airplane performance study estimated that, at 0915:53.2, the rudder was deflected 11º to the left, and the sideslip angle at the airplane’s center of gravity (cg) was about 4º to the left (after peaking temporarily at 5º to the left).21 At 0915:56.8, the rudder was deflected 10.2º to the left, and the sideslip angle was about 7º to the left. At 0915:58.4 (the time that the right rear main attachment fitting fractured), the rudder was deflected between 10º and 11º to the right, the sideslip angle was between 11º and 12º to the right, and the airplane experienced a 0.2 G shift to the right in lateral load factor.

    The CVR recorded, at 0916:00.0, a sound similar to a grunt and, 1 second later, the first officer’s statement, “holy [expletive].” At 0916:04.4, the CVR recorded a sound similar to a stall warning repetitive chime, which lasted for 1.9 seconds. At 0916:07.5, the first officer stated, “what the hell are we into…we’re stuck in it.” At 0916:12.8, the captain stated, “get out of it, get out of it.” The CVR recording ended 2 seconds later. The airplane was located at 40º 34′ 37.59″ north latitude and 73º 51′ 01.31″ west longitude. The accident occurred during the hours of daylight.

    For more information, look here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587
    http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAR0404.pdf
    http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20011130X02321&key=1

  • | | |

    Airbourne Charter Gulfstream, 18 lost


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Andreas Dürr

    What: Airbourne Charter, Inc Gulfstream III en route from Los Angeles to Aspen, Colorado
    Where: Aspen, Colorado
    When: March 29, 2001
    Who: 2 pilots, 1 flight attendant, and 15 passengers
    Why: On March 29, 2001, about 1901:57 mountain standard time, a Gulfstream III, N303GA, owned by Airbourne Charter, Inc., and operated by Avjet Corporation of Burbank, California, crashed while on final approach to runway 15 at Aspen-Pitkin County Airport (ASE), Aspen, Colorado. The charter flight had departed Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) about 1711 with 2 pilots, 1 flight attendant, and 15 passengers. The airplane crashed into sloping terrain about 2,400 feet short of the runway threshold. All of the passengers and crewmembers were killed, and the airplane was destroyed.

  • | | | | |

    Singapore Airlines Tragedy at Taiwan


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Johan Knijn

    What: Singapore Airlines Boeing 747-400
    Where: Taiwan
    When: October 31, 2000,
    Who: 179 people aboard, 83 fatalities, 44 injuries
    Why: On October 31, 2000, approximately 2317 Taiwan time (1517 UTC), Singapore Airlines Flight SQ006 Boeing 747-400 airplane entered the incorrect runway at Chiang- KaiShek (CKS) Airport, Taiwan. Heavy rain and strong winds from typhoon “Xiang Sane” prevailed at the time of the accident. The airplane, during the take-off roll, was destroyed by its collision with the runway construction equipment and by post impact fire. There were a total of 179 people on board with 159 passengers, 3 flight crewmembers and 17 cabin attendants. There were a total of 83 fatalities (including 4 cabin crewmembers), and 44 people injured.

  • | | | |

    Airbus: The Gulf Air Tragedy


    Gulf Air A4O-EH .The one in the crash was A40-EK
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Gerard Helmer

    What: Gulf Air Airbus A320-212 en route from Cairo
    Where: Muharraq, Bahrain
    When: August 23, 2000
    Who: 2 pilots, 6 flight attendants, and 135 passengers
    Why: On August 23, 2000, Gulf Air flight 72, Airbus A320-212 crashed in the Arabian Gulf near Muharraq, Bahrain. Flight 72 departed from Cairo International Airport, with 2 pilots, 6 flight attendants, and 135 passengers on board. Cleared to land on runway 12 at Bahrain International Airport, Muharraq, Bahrain, it crashed during a go-around. destroyed by impact forces. All aboard were fatalities. The flight exceeded flap overspeed limits while climbing during the go-around followed by a pitch down and several alerts from the Ground Proximity Warning System before the airplane impacted the water. Cause: pilot error, spatial disorientation

  • | | | |

    Egypt Air Crashes Into Atlantic Ocean


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Frank C. Duarte Jr.

    What: EgyptAir Boeing 767-366ER en route from New York to Cairo
    Where: Atlantic Ocean
    When: October 31, 1999
    Who: 4 flight crewmembers, 10 flight attendants, and 203 passengers
    Why: On October 31, 1999, the EgyptAir Boeing 767-366ER crashed into the Atlantic Ocean 60 miles south of Nantucket. It was en route from New York, to Cairo International Airport, Cairo, Egypt. The flight departed JFK about 0120, with 4 flight crewmembers, 10 flight attendants, and 203 passengers. All 217 people on board were killed.?Visual meteorological conditions prevailed , which operated on an instrument flight rules flight plan. NTSB determined probable cause to be the airplane’s departure from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean as a result of the relief first officer’s flight control inputs. The reason for his actions was not determined.

  • | | | |

    Tokyo: China Airlines Typhoon Crash


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer J.Laporte

    What: China Airlines McDonnell Douglas MD-11 en route from Bangkok to Hong Kong
    Where: Hong Kong
    When: August 23, 1999
    Who: 3 fatalities, 208 uninjured; 44 serious, 164 minor
    Why: Summary: On August 23, 1999 at approximately 1840 local time (+12 hours), a China Airlines flight 642 # B-150 McDonnell Douglas MD-11 crashed during a landing approach to the Hong Kong Chek Lap Kok airport. The plane, which was landing during a typhoon, touched down hard, flipped over and caught fire. The right wing struck the ground first, and the landing gear and wing separated as the aircraft rolled inverted. 200 of the 317 passengers were injured and the aircraft was destroyed by impact.

  • | | | | |

    Korean Air Crashes in Pohang


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Gerard Helmer

    What: Korean Air McDonnell Douglas MD-83 en route from Seoul to Pohang
    Where: Pohang
    When: March 15, 1999
    Who: 6 crew and 150 passengers
    Why: On March 15, a Korean Air Flight 1533 (McDonnell Douglas MD-83 #HL7570) from Seoul to Pohang departed for Pohang. Weather at Pohang was poor with degraded visibility and gusty 25 knot winds. The pilot failed at the first attempt to land. After the second approach the plane touched down, but overran the runway. The aircraft skidded through 10 antennas, a reinforced barbed wire fence and came to rest against an embankment. The landing snapped the fuselage in half. Damage– Complete destruction of air frame, Injuries– multiple. 6 crew and 150 passengers, no deaths.

  • | | |

    Propair Flight 420

    Propair Flight 420, chartered by General Electric to transport their workers to their facility in Lachine, Quebec and Peterborough, Ontario, took off from Dorval. The left brakes overheated during take-off leading to a fire in the left wing which ruptured pipelines. The crew made an emergency landing. All 11 passengers and crew on board were killed. As a result of this accident, an overheat warning system inside the wheel-wells of every Metroliner was required. The pilot was Captain Jean Provencher. The co-pilot was Walter Stricker.

    The official summary:

    The aircraft, a Fairchild-Swearingen Metro II (SA226-TC), registration C-GQAL, serial number TC 233, took off as Propair 420 from Dorval / Montréal International Airport, Quebec, around 0701 eastern daylight time bound for Peterborough Airport, Ontario. On board were nine passengers and two pilots. About 12 minutes after take-off, at an altitude of 12 500 feet above sea level (asl), the crew advised air traffic control (ATC) that they had a hydraulic problem and requested clearance to return to Dorval. ATC granted this request. Around 0719, at 8600 feet asl, the crew advised ATC that the left engine had been shut down because it was on fire. Around 0720, the crew decided to proceed to Mirabel / Montréal International Airport, Quebec. At 0723, the crew advised ATC that the engine fire was out. On final for Runway 24, the crew advised ATC that the left engine was again on fire. The landing gear was extended on short final, and when the aircraft was over the runway, the left wing broke upwards. The fuselage pivoted more than 90? to the left around the longitudinal axis of the aircraft and struck the ground. All 11 occupants were fatally injured.