FlyDubai 737-800 down in Russia

FlyDubai 737-800 down in Russia

Author
Discussion

Trevatanus

Original Poster:

11,109 posts

149 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Reports that a FlyDubai 737-800 has crashed in Rostov-On-don in Russia killing (all?) 55 on board. Sounds like he may have had difficulties landing in bad weather frown

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35850167

Edited by Trevatanus on Saturday 19th March 04:21

karona

1,918 posts

185 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
http://avherald.com/h?article=495997e2&opt=0

A Flydubai Boeing 737-800, registration A6-FDN performing flight FZ-981 from Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to Rostov on Don (Russia) with 55 passengers and 7 crew, had aborted the approach to Rostov's runway 22 at 01:41L (22:41Z) due to weather and entered a hold initially at 8000 feet, after 30 minutes at 8000 feet the aircraft climbed to FL150. After about 2 hours of holding the aircraft commenced another approach to Rostov's runway 22, winds from 240 degrees at 27 knots (14 m/s) gusting 42 knots (22 m/s), but struck a wing onto the runway at about 3:43 (00:43Z), broke up, came to a rest near the end and to the right of the runway and burst into flames. There are no survivors.

The aircraft carried fuel for trip, contingency, alternate, final fuel reserve (30 minutes) and additional holding for about 2:30 hours, total fuel for an endurance of about 8.5 hours. The aircraft had been airborne until time of impact for 06:02 hours.

Russia's Ministry of Emergencies reported that more than 700 people and more than 100 vehicles have been deployed to the crash scene for search and recovery operations following the aircraft crash. The aircraft struck a wing onto the runway on touch down and broke up.

Russia's MAK (Interstate Aviation Committee, Accident Investigation Board) reported the aircraft broke up and burst into flames upon touching ground, debris is spread over a large area.

The airline confirmed the aircraft crashed on landing in Rostov, there were fatalities.

Radar data suggest the aircraft on final approach was to the left of the localizer and just to the left of the left runway edge and corrected to the right while over the runway bringing the aircraft just within the runway edges during the flare.

TheLordJohn

5,746 posts

145 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Saw this myself, must be a terrible way to die frown
Apparently the majority of the passengers were from Rostov-on-Don, where it attempted to land.
See,s it must the runway; landed short of the runway and to the left in very poor visibility.

bobbo89

5,151 posts

144 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Looks to come down quite fast at pretty much a 45 degree angle!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-cJvtFO_-Y

Leptons

5,113 posts

175 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Bad news. It makes you wonder if the weather was so bad and they'd held for so long why they didn't attempt to land elsewhere?

RIP

hornetrider

63,161 posts

204 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
bobbo89 said:
Looks to come down quite fast at pretty much a 45 degree angle!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-cJvtFO_-Y
That's horrific frown

Doesn't seem like a simple 'went round and missed the runway'.

TheLordJohn

5,746 posts

145 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
bobbo89 said:
Looks to come down quite fast at pretty much a 45 degree angle!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-cJvtFO_-Y
It does look a pretty severe attempt at 'landing' from the CCTV footage, I hadn't seen that until you'd posted.
Is it worth say the 'T' word, yet...?
Surely in an emergency landing onto a flat surface at around 90/100 MPH at least a small percentage of passengers would stand some chance of survival?

Crush

15,077 posts

168 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
TheLordJohn said:
It does look a pretty severe attempt at 'landing' from the CCTV footage, I hadn't seen that until you'd posted.
Is it worth say the 'T' word, yet...?
Surely in an emergency landing onto a flat surface at around 90/100 MPH at least a small percentage of passengers would stand some chance of survival?
I had read that the weather was bad which had caused a few flights to divert and that this flight had circled for two hours.

Another link here

https://www.rt.com/news/336185-boeing-crash-dubai-...

"Flight FZ981 from Dubai arrived in Rostov-on-Don at about 1:30am, but due to harsh weather conditions, strong side winds gusting at 25-30 meters per second, it spent the next two hours in the air, picking its moment to land."

Very sad frown

saaby93

32,038 posts

177 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
bobbo89 said:
Looks to come down quite fast at pretty much a 45 degree angle!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-cJvtFO_-Y
It's the camera angle - it's heading away from the camera
frown

What happened to the idea of hovering airports so that planes didnt need to come down to ground

Pennyroyal Tea

26,140 posts

213 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
hornetrider said:
bobbo89 said:
Looks to come down quite fast at pretty much a 45 degree angle!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-cJvtFO_-Y
That's horrific frown

Doesn't seem like a simple 'went round and missed the runway'.
WTF?! That's not a 'landing'; that's throwing the thing into the ground.

From the distance of the camera to the runway, the plane's speed looks to be well in excess of what you'd ever be able to land at. That combined with the angle etc of descent. What could possibly have gone wrong that the pilot(s) intentionally tried to execute a touch-down like that?

Not that I mean to don the tinfoil hat, but if that footage is genuine, then something just doesn't add up with the news reports. Not even close.

MitchT

15,788 posts

208 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Possibly attempted to go around again but stalled.

RIP to all.

Slagathore

5,808 posts

191 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Surely it would be cheaper to just land elsewhere and charter a coach to get the passengers back to where it should have landed?

How much fuel would it use circling for 2 hours? Is that standard, to just circle for hours until you think it might be safe to land? Sounds incredibly stupid.

Really tragic, because it seems it could have so easily been avoided.


Crush

15,077 posts

168 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Slagathore said:
Surely it would be cheaper to just land elsewhere and charter a coach to get the passengers back to where it should have landed?

How much fuel would it use circling for 2 hours? Is that standard, to just circle for hours until you think it might be safe to land? Sounds incredibly stupid.

Really tragic, because it seems it could have so easily been avoided.
The tragic thing is that some other aircraft had diverted to an airport only twenty minutes away frown

MitchT

15,788 posts

208 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
This is interesting ...

https://aviation-safety.net/photos/displayphoto.ph...

Retracted flaps and/or slats instead of landing gear during a second go-around maybe?

Slagathore

5,808 posts

191 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Crush said:
The tragic thing is that some other aircraft had diverted to an airport only twenty minutes away frown
I had thought maybe it was such a remote location that they thought it was worth spending 2 hours circling, but if it's only 20 minutes away, then there's some serious explaining to do!!

Pennyroyal Tea

26,140 posts

213 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Crush said:
The tragic thing is that some other aircraft had diverted to an airport only twenty minutes away frown
That's what doesn't make sense! Why fk about in the sky for TWO HOURS, only to it off the deck??!

Pennyroyal Tea

26,140 posts

213 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
MitchT said:
This is interesting ...

https://aviation-safety.net/photos/displayphoto.ph...

Retracted flaps and/or slats instead of landing gear during a second go-around maybe?
And just LOOK at that approach angle!! What. The. Actual. fk?!

The Moose

22,821 posts

208 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
Pennyroyal Tea said:
MitchT said:
This is interesting ...

https://aviation-safety.net/photos/displayphoto.ph...

Retracted flaps and/or slats instead of landing gear during a second go-around maybe?
And just LOOK at that approach angle!! What. The. Actual. fk?!
fk me sideways at that approach yikes

FourWheelDrift

88,375 posts

283 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
That's almost like an aborted landing followed by extreme wind shear.

Pennyroyal Tea

26,140 posts

213 months

Saturday 19th March 2016
quotequote all
FourWheelDrift said:
That's almost like an aborted landing followed by extreme wind shear.
Which would all be tragically feasible in an an old 727, but this was a 5yr old 737-800 with all the technology imaginable. It just doesn't compute.