allardjd 1,853 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 No details yet. Apparently reported by the "state media" (read Pravda). It mentions that its a "Trans Asia Airways" plane. John EDIT: ATR-72, in the water off the end of the runway - 40 rescued so far. Take everything with a grain of salt - it's early times and some of this stuff is going to be wrong. JDA EDIT 2: Took off from RCSS Sunghsan - Tapei, Taiwan, crashed at another airport a few miles away. There's a photo sequence on PPRUNE showing it at very low level, in a near-90 degree bank, with the port wingtip already in contact with ground/water. Can't see what - it's masked by terrain. This was not a gentle arrival. JDA EDIT 3: From FlightRadar24: Maximum speed for #GE235 was 116 kts directly after take off. Maximum altitude was 1350 feet... I guess GE235 must be the flight number. Latest report is "...many survivors, ...10 still trapped...". JDA EDIT 4: Video of the initial impact here... http://instagram.com/p/yqpMdCn0hb/ JDA Link to post Share on other sites
britfrog 180 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Looks like a classic stall and wing drop.! not long after the ATR was certified the UK CAA and perhaps others, refused permission for these a/c to fly into known icing conditions , and that was not relinquished for some time, I do not know if mods were made or if it was the result of lobbying from the French. Some time later i posed this question to a friend of mine at Popham (a retired CAA test pilot) he simply said he didnt like the plane as it had all the stall qualities of a house brick, whatever, i think that taxi driver needed a change of underwear! and at least some were lucky enough to get out. Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted February 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Not icing - they're talking about engine problems. He maydayed an engine failure right after takeoff and never got to 2,000'. May have been failure to maintain Vmc after that or they had other problems - contaminated fuel maybe - that cost them some more power. The plane is less than a year old and the engines are P&Ws. More info coming all the time but a lot of it can't be trusted this early in the game. Agree with the stall. They were trying to reach the water, the only area nearby not built up, but apparently couldn't quite stretch the glide far enough. John Link to post Share on other sites
Christopher Low 63 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Based on that video, it looks like it was the left engine that failed. When the video is paused (just as the left wing makes contact with the side of the flyover) you can see that there appears to be "less rotational motion" in the left propellor.......unless that is an effect of the video itself. I am astonished that so many of the passengers and crew appear to have survived. Link to post Share on other sites
stu7708 244 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Made the same observation as you Christopher, based on the photos published here. https://twitter.com/guardian/status/562843009327595520/photo/1 The left side engine looks very much like it's not running based on the fairly sharp view of the propeller compared with the right side. And that could have ended way worse considering the built up areas they passed on the way down. Latest news in Swedish media is 15 casualties so far Edit: casualties are sadly raising. Now stated as "at least 21" Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Coffee 2,030 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Horrifying to see that video. Looks like the wing tip went right through the yellow van's windshield. As someone who drives for a living, and often to airports...yikes!!! My heart goes out to all the passengers who's hearts were no doubt all on Pause just before that impact...and the families of those who's hearts didn't return to Play afterwards. Link to post Share on other sites
hurricanemk1c 195 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Been one of two talking points at college - the other one being the unfortunate rail accident in New York. Interesting footage - suprised about the survivors to be honest. Looked like a real bad one Link to post Share on other sites
donnybalonny 46 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 To which degree are these AC handflown or computerflown when taking off? Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted February 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Don't know about hand-flying but if a flameout/engine failure occurred, I'm pretty sure the AP would disconnect automatically or be disconnected by the crew. It's looking a lot like a mis-managed engine failure at this point but a lot is still not known. There is some credible speculation going on that the affected engine was not feathered or the feathering mechanism failed, or even the possibility that the wrong engine was shut down. One possibility being suggested is that the engine was producing just enough power that the negative torque sensor did not trigger an auto-feather but not enough to make up for the high drag. What I'm reading is that an un-feathered turbo-prop that is not producing a lot of power, 30% or less, is a significant drag producer and, of course, in the case of a single-engine being affected, that drag is highly asymmetric. Even at flight idle, a turbo-prop creates a lot of drag. One scenario is that the engine was producing a little power and for that reason the crew incorrectly chose to not feather it. Transport category turboprop twins are certified to fly and even climb (modestly) at MTOW on one engine but that assumes the other is properly feathered, and maintaining Vmc is THE most important requirement on the aircrew. Below Vmc, the AC will roll inverted and drop its nose because there's not enough rudder authority to prevent it. That may be exactly what happened at the end of the video sequences, when the left wing dropped dramatically. John Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted February 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/taiwan/11388935/TransAsia-plane-crashes-into-river-in-Taiwan-latest-updates.html "The latest so far is the claims that the captain, Liao Jiangzhong, complained of “engine abnormalities” and requested an urgent inspection of the plane shortly before its final take-off but was rebuffed. Liao Jiangzhong, the plane’s former air force pilot, is among 32 people so far confirmed to have died when the aircraft crashed into a river shortly after taking off from Taipei’s Songshan airport on Wednesday morning. An unnamed “whistleblower” told Taiwan’s Liberty Times newspaper that Mr Liao requested a thorough inspection of the plane after noticing “engine abnormalities” during its previous flight. The pilot registered the problem on a flight log, the newspaper added." Link to post Share on other sites
donnybalonny 46 Posted February 6, 2015 Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 That last news is scary. And if its true, the company should be grounded I think i'd feel more safe in one of Buffalo airways old DC3 than i one of these modern, narrow wing computer controled AC. To this add poor economy and stress. Yeeeks. Link to post Share on other sites
hurricanemk1c 195 Posted February 6, 2015 Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 FDR data (works even without a Facebook account) https://www.facebook.com/flightradar24/photos/pcb.844984902207601/844965772209514/?type=1&theater Link to post Share on other sites
stu7708 244 Posted February 6, 2015 Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 Looks awfully much like they shut down the wrong engine, and that seems to be what the news sources are reporting too... If I read the data correctly engine 2 reported a Flame Out roughly 30 seconds into the flight, and 30-45 seconds later the fuel to engine 1 was cut, and the fuel flow valve remained shut for about 1 minute... Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted February 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 Ugh - how unnecessarily tragic. John Link to post Share on other sites
hurricanemk1c 195 Posted February 6, 2015 Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 Reminds me of Kegworth 1988 Link to post Share on other sites
britfrog 180 Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 "piss poor training , makes piss poor pilots" this is a phrase that is drummed into one from day one when you start commercial training in this case they forgot to also notice "dead leg means dead engine" this refers to what rudder pedal you are pushing to keep the plane straight, This is something you learn the first time you fly a multi engine a/c if they had noticed this they would not have cut the good engine, mind you this isnt the first time this has happened, the 737 that crashed on the motorway some years ago when on short final to EGNX did exactly the same thing. here is a copy of what has been officially released so far On Feb 6th 2015 Taiwan's ASC reported that the investigation so far determined from flight data and cockpit voice recorders: the aircraft received takeoff clearance at 10:51L, in the initial climb the aircraft was handed off to departure at 10:52:33L. At 10:52:38L at about 1200 feet MSL, 37 seconds after becoming airborne, a master warning activated related to the failure of the right hand engine, at 10:52:43L the left hand engine was throttled back and at 10:53:00L the crew began to discuss engine #1 had stalled. At 10:53:06L the right hand engine (engine #2) auto-feathered. At 10:53:12L a first stall warning occured and ceased at 10:53:18L. At 10:53:19L the crew discussed that engine #1 had already feathered, the fuel supply had already been cut to the engine and decided to attempt a restart of engine #1. Two seconds later another stall warning activated. At 10:53:34L the crew radioed "Mayday! Mayday! Engine flame out!", multiple attempts to restart the engines followed to no avail. At 10:54:34L a second master warning activated, 0.4 seconds later both recorders stopped recording.Later the day Feb 6th 2015 the ASC also released an English version of the initial release detailing further that when the first master warning activated associated with the right hand engine the crew "called it out", then the left hand engine thrust lever was progressively retarded to flight idle. At 10:53:24L the condition lever was set to fuel shut off position resulting in the shut down of the left hand engine. Following several call outs to restart the left hand engine the parameters suggest the left hand engine was restarted at 10:54:20L, however, at 10:54:34L another master warning sounded, the CVR recorded unidentified sounds and both recorders stopped. On Feb 7th 2015 the airline reported, that all 71 flight crew are to undergo additional assessment and training by Taiwan's Civil Aviation Authority over the next 4 days resulting in flight cancellations. Its a bit late for that !!!!! a sad day for flying. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now