On Jan 25, 2013, a Ural Airlines Airbus A321-211 with 220 aboard was en route from Sharm el-Sheikh to Kazan Russia.
On approach to Kazan in poor visibility at 3:40 am local time, the first landing approach was aborted, and the rear fuselage of the plane struck an antenna. There is also a mention of an on board system failure.
Pilots made a safe landing on the next approach in spite of damage the rear fuselage contact area and brake line. We have heard of no reported injuries.
The investigation is underway.
The official report is below. Please pardon the translation.
Information on the incident at the international airport “Kazan”
As reported in “Ural Airlines”, January 25, 2013 in “Ural Airlines” incident occurred. Performing flight U6-3045, Sharm el-Sheikh on the Kazan aircraft A321, during the approach to landing in bad weather in the automatic mode (the height of the clouds 30 meters visibility – 800 meters) at the exit from the clouds of the crew determined neposadochnoe position of the aircraft. The pilots decided to execute a missed approach. When a missed approach was touching the fuselage antenna localizer radio beacon. Re-entry is made without comment, the crew and passengers were not injured.
To investigate the causes of the incident, a commission. For the flight U6-3046 Kazan-Sharm El-Sheikh directed backup aircraft.
According to the press service of the airport “Kazan”, in connection with an event, delayed departure flight U6-3046 airline “Ural Airlines” Kazan-Sharm El-Sheikh. Passengers (203) have been registered and are in the sterile area of ??departure. They provided food and refreshments. Reserve board arrived in Yekaterinburg at 09:24 Moscow time. After preparing the aircraft for flight, aircraft will fly to destination, estimated it will happen at 10:15 MSK 25.01.2013.
Delta airlines flight 284 had to make an unscheduled landing at Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport in Anchorage, Alaska, on the morning of March 4.
According to the airline, the Boeing 777-200LR was diverted “in response to a customer medical situation on board”. The flight was heading from Narita International Airport, Japan, to Los Angeles at the time.
Delta confirmed in a statement, “The flight landed without incident and paramedics met the aircraft on arrival.”
The plane later took off again and landed in Los Angeles with a 2-hour delay.
To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
Jet Airways flight 9W 354 had to make an emergency landing at Mumbai airport in India, on March 3rd.
According to the airline, “Jet Airways flight 9W 354 on landing in Mumbai reported a technical fault with the main landing gear.” It is believed that the plane’s main landing gear collapsed upon landing, also causing damage to the right wing.
All 127 people aboard the plane remained uninjured.
To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
Elements of this image are furnished by NASA
Egyptair Flight MS804 (AKA EgyptAir Flight 804) was a Paris to Cairo flight that ended in the Mediterranean on May 19, 2016. Sixty-six people lost their lives: three security crew, fifty-six passengers, seven crew.
Egyptian authorities published a progress report on 28/06/16 that the BEA repaired the recorders. On 17/06 that the Technical Investigation Committee of the A320 accident studied FDR data as well as performing time correlation between FDR and CVR data and cockpit voice recordings before the occurrence of the accident where the existence of a “fire” was mentioned. That report did not determine the reason or location where that fire occurred. Smoke was reported during the flight in the bathroom and the avionics bay.
The investigation has been fraught with controversy. On 22 May, 2016, M6 (French TV) reported that a pilot told Cairo air traffic control about smoke in the cabin, and the pilot consequently made an emergency descent.
On May 20th 2016 The Aviation Herald received information from three independent channels, that ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System) messages with following content were received from the aircraft:
00:26Z 3044 ANTI ICE R WINDOW
00:26Z 561200 R SLIDING WINDOW SENSOR
00:26Z 2600 SMOKE LAVATORY SMOKE
00:27Z 2600 AVIONICS SMOKE
00:28Z 561100 R FIXED WINDOW SENSOR
00:29Z 2200 AUTO FLT FCU 2 FAULT
00:29Z 2700 F/CTL SEC 3 FAULT
no further ACARS messages were received.
No sooner did the report come out that the Egyptian Civil Aviation Ministry dismissed it as false.
One truism I have found in accident investigation is that it takes time to find the truth. Another is that facts can be misleading. Reportage from official sources moves slowly; reportage from commercial, so-called “news,” or social sources is frequently speculative, unsourced, or purely imaginary. Sometimes it is actually correct. It is difficult to tell the difference. Contradictions are a frequent finding, such as this:
Le Figaro reported that no explosives were found on Egyptair flight MS804 French victims’ bodies. The flight crashed in the Mediterranean in 2016.
On Dec 15th 2016 Egypt’s Civil Aviation Authority announced that forensic examination on behalf of the Accident Investigation Commission found traces of explosives with some of the human remains recovered. In accordance with Egypt law, the states prosecutor was informed, and a technical commission formed by the prosecution office opened their investigation into the crime.
How does a close reader respond to a statement that “traces of explosives were found WITH human remains?” A close reader finds more questions. With the remains is not ON the remains. But it could be either way since we are dealing with languages. In English, WITH the remains could mean a bomb was floating in the water near the bodies, or ashes, or gasoline or TNT residue. And what constitutes near? Inches? Miles? It all is relative. Or if the original report is loosely translated, did the original document use a preposition such as ON the remains? And then, there are the forensic questions. Were explosive remains washed off of bodies that were submerged in the ocean?
If the case goes to court, the court will want to know if something failed on the plane, and if so, what it was. Manufacturers of failed components are considered responsible parties. No matter what the cause, international treaty determines carrier responsibility to the victims of the crash.
The determination of failed components provides additional responsible parties. The discovery of a bomb would make airport security one of the potential responsible parties. In addition, international treaty provides guidelines for what carriers owe to the families. (Which treaty is involved depends on which treaty/treaties the involved country/countries are signatory to. If it sounds like it can get complicated, you are correct.)
It has been nearly a year since the accident, and though some things may be believed in the court of public opinion to be one way or another, questions remain unanswered. How grievous and how difficult for the families that must wait so long to find out what brought about this tragedy that took their loved ones.
To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
What: Southern Air Transport Boeing 747-200 freighter en route from Charleston,SC to Liege Belgium Where: Liege When: Dec 11th 2011 Who: 5 crew Why: On approach to Liege, the pilots encountered issues with the hydraulic systems.
The flight made a safe landing in Liege.
After allowing the Southern Air Transport flight to land, the Liege airport shut down, forcing in bound traffic to divert to other airports.
To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
Scandinavian Airlines flight SK-1049 made an emergency landing in Lulea, Sweden, on September 28th.
Jet Airways flight 9W 354 had to make an emergency landing at Mumbai airport in India, on March 3rd.
Shaheen Air flight NL-766 had to return and make an emergency landing in Lahore, Pakistan, on August 16th.