A320 down in Pakistan
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
My assertion that they ran out of fuel is probably correct - but not because there was no fuel in the tanks but because the fuel pumps had stopped working.
I wonder if they initially fell into the trap the Air France A320 pilot fell into at that Mulhouse air show in 1988?
If the engine driven fuel pumps had been damaged by the scrape, surely they would have struggled to get to TOGA power initally? (BTW, i'm assuming fuel pumps are in fact driven of the eng Aux g/bx and not otherwise furnished) I rather suspect that the"minor" scrape actually simply damage lubrication systems, and the Aux g/bx ran ok for a bit, then siezed, leading to engines either shutting down or operating at reduced rpm? Main bearings are i think rolling element, so these should keep going round with little to no oil for a bit, although the oil is used for bearing cooling down the hot end, so a turbine bearing failure is not impossible, but given the energy in the turbine disc, that might lead to a much more obvious failure event?I wonder if they initially fell into the trap the Air France A320 pilot fell into at that Mulhouse air show in 1988?
We know the RAT was out and running, so clearly hydraulics or electrical feeds had been significantly distrupted, but i don't know what actually drives the engine feed pumps on these A/C?
Max_Torque said:
Eric Mc said:
My assertion that they ran out of fuel is probably correct - but not because there was no fuel in the tanks but because the fuel pumps had stopped working.
I wonder if they initially fell into the trap the Air France A320 pilot fell into at that Mulhouse air show in 1988?
If the engine driven fuel pumps had been damaged by the scrape, surely they would have struggled to get to TOGA power initally? (BTW, i'm assuming fuel pumps are in fact driven of the eng Aux g/bx and not otherwise furnished) I rather suspect that the"minor" scrape actually simply damage lubrication systems, and the Aux g/bx ran ok for a bit, then siezed, leading to engines either shutting down or operating at reduced rpm? Main bearings are i think rolling element, so these should keep going round with little to no oil for a bit, although the oil is used for bearing cooling down the hot end, so a turbine bearing failure is not impossible, but given the energy in the turbine disc, that might lead to a much more obvious failure event?I wonder if they initially fell into the trap the Air France A320 pilot fell into at that Mulhouse air show in 1988?
We know the RAT was out and running, so clearly hydraulics or electrical feeds had been significantly distrupted, but i don't know what actually drives the engine feed pumps on these A/C?
aeropilot said:
Hub said:
aeropilot said:
So, it does look like they executed a go-around and have taken off wheels-up after 3 or 4 secs of grinding their way along the runway on the engine nacelles...... 
What on earth made them think that would end well........!
One of the survivors didn't seem to notice, if that was the case (unless he was only talking about the second attempt)What on earth made them think that would end well........!
"Mr Zubair, who suffered only minor injuries, said the plane attempted one landing and then crashed 10-15 minutes later.
"No-one was aware that the plane was about to crash; they were flying the plane in a smooth manner," he said."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-52780289
MarkwG said:
Eric Mc said:
There definitely WAS air traffic control in the 1930s. Granted, it wasn't as sophisticated as today but it did exist. By 1939 many American airports and major European airports had direct voice radio communication with aircraft and, of course, they all had visual control towers.
Vigilant air traffic controllers keeping their eyes on what is happening outside the window can always make a difference.
The one thing working against them, up until Covid 19 of course, would be workload - especially at busy airports.
To see how well visual control can work, just watch and listen to the controllers at Oshkosh work during their massive fly-in.
Not ATC in the form we have it now, by any stretch of the imagination, & that's really not the point at issue: vigilance isn't the issue, either, it's the practicalities of what you can see from the tower. Agreed, workload can sometimes be an issue too, & as Aeropilot says, if the reports of their profile are correct, that would certainly have their attention, but whether that means they could see the state of the undercarriage, who knows, & I doubt was of any significance to the outcome.Vigilant air traffic controllers keeping their eyes on what is happening outside the window can always make a difference.
The one thing working against them, up until Covid 19 of course, would be workload - especially at busy airports.
To see how well visual control can work, just watch and listen to the controllers at Oshkosh work during their massive fly-in.
Eric Mc said:
MarkwG said:
Eric Mc said:
There definitely WAS air traffic control in the 1930s. Granted, it wasn't as sophisticated as today but it did exist. By 1939 many American airports and major European airports had direct voice radio communication with aircraft and, of course, they all had visual control towers.
Vigilant air traffic controllers keeping their eyes on what is happening outside the window can always make a difference.
The one thing working against them, up until Covid 19 of course, would be workload - especially at busy airports.
To see how well visual control can work, just watch and listen to the controllers at Oshkosh work during their massive fly-in.
Not ATC in the form we have it now, by any stretch of the imagination, & that's really not the point at issue: vigilance isn't the issue, either, it's the practicalities of what you can see from the tower. Agreed, workload can sometimes be an issue too, & as Aeropilot says, if the reports of their profile are correct, that would certainly have their attention, but whether that means they could see the state of the undercarriage, who knows, & I doubt was of any significance to the outcome.Vigilant air traffic controllers keeping their eyes on what is happening outside the window can always make a difference.
The one thing working against them, up until Covid 19 of course, would be workload - especially at busy airports.
To see how well visual control can work, just watch and listen to the controllers at Oshkosh work during their massive fly-in.
A chap in a tower with a pair of binoculars could see exactly the same things then as they can now - and vice versa.
And airports did have control towers from the late 1920s onwards. Obviously, up until the early 1930s looking for whether an aircraft was trying to land with a retracted undercarriage was a bit pointless as most airliners had their wheels permanently fixed down in those days.
And airports did have control towers from the late 1920s onwards. Obviously, up until the early 1930s looking for whether an aircraft was trying to land with a retracted undercarriage was a bit pointless as most airliners had their wheels permanently fixed down in those days.
Eric Mc said:
A chap in a tower with a pair of binoculars could see exactly the same things then as they can now - and vice versa.
And airports did have control towers from the late 1920s onwards. Obviously, up until the early 1930s looking for whether an aircraft was trying to land with a retracted undercarriage was a bit pointless as most airliners had their wheels permanently fixed down in those days.
Well, I'll have to bow to your superior knowledge, then - I wasn't working in the 1920s, but I do understand the realities of modern ATC, which you patently don't.And airports did have control towers from the late 1920s onwards. Obviously, up until the early 1930s looking for whether an aircraft was trying to land with a retracted undercarriage was a bit pointless as most airliners had their wheels permanently fixed down in those days.
Suggestions from some pilots that the pilots may have put the gear down but their speed was too high so the aircraft did not lower the gear to save over speeding the gear.
Various ECAM and other warnings would have been present. However if they only checked the physical gear lever before landing it would have infant been down. Just the gear was still up.
The flight profile was very very steep apparently and their approach was way too fast. Even ATC advised them that they needed to take an orbit before getting onto final but they decided to continue. It’s probable that they were then going over the gear speed so the safety system kicked in. Their work load may have been so high (probably hand flying) that they some how ignored the various warnings this would have kicked out.
Various ECAM and other warnings would have been present. However if they only checked the physical gear lever before landing it would have infant been down. Just the gear was still up.
The flight profile was very very steep apparently and their approach was way too fast. Even ATC advised them that they needed to take an orbit before getting onto final but they decided to continue. It’s probable that they were then going over the gear speed so the safety system kicked in. Their work load may have been so high (probably hand flying) that they some how ignored the various warnings this would have kicked out.
ash73 said:
Sounds like a string of pilot errors, but the shocking thing for me is they stacked it in a residential area when they had time to plan an alternative.
Some contrast with the instinctive talent of pilots like Sully.
Different scenario: they didn't have lots of time (neither did Sully, but he had energy & altitude in his favour), & I doubt they chose where it ended up. From the moment it left the runway again, they'd used up most of the options to land safely anywhere.Some contrast with the instinctive talent of pilots like Sully.
aeropilot said:
ash73 said:
Sounds like a string of pilot errors
There's a rumour that flight deck crew were both Captains.....which throws up a lot of possibilities given current low level of ops etc.....Munter said:
aeropilot said:
ash73 said:
Sounds like a string of pilot errors
There's a rumour that flight deck crew were both Captains.....which throws up a lot of possibilities given current low level of ops etc.....ash73 said:
Is it a bit dusty in here?
The view seems to be that they never had the gear down on the first landing.
The data shown so far indicates that the aircraft never transmitted any weight on the wheels data, which it would have done if it had bounced on landing with the gear down, so the feeling is they forgot/ignored putting the gear down in the added pressure of trying to recover an approach that should have been binned miles out, as suggested by ATC.
The data shown so far indicates that the aircraft never transmitted any weight on the wheels data, which it would have done if it had bounced on landing with the gear down, so the feeling is they forgot/ignored putting the gear down in the added pressure of trying to recover an approach that should have been binned miles out, as suggested by ATC.
aeropilot said:
The view seems to be that they never had the gear down on the first landing.
The data shown so far indicates that the aircraft never transmitted any weight on the wheels data, which it would have done if it had bounced on landing with the gear down, so the feeling is they forgot/ignored putting the gear down in the added pressure of trying to recover an approach that should have been binned miles out, as suggested by ATC.
I see, thanks. I was on a Malaysian Airlines flight into KL in January 2002 and it clearly had no gear down - nothing heard either from the mechanics or the noise from the airstream. It aborted and went round before approaching again, deploying the landing gear with all the noises you'd expect, and landing normally. It's surprising that alarms aren't sounding if the altitude drops below a particular point and no gear is out.The data shown so far indicates that the aircraft never transmitted any weight on the wheels data, which it would have done if it had bounced on landing with the gear down, so the feeling is they forgot/ignored putting the gear down in the added pressure of trying to recover an approach that should have been binned miles out, as suggested by ATC.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff