RJ85 (ex Cityjet EI-RJK) gone down in Brazil

maximum12 · 29-11-2016 07:58AM #1

Was carrying a Brazilian football team

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-38140981

Edit: crash site is in Colombia

PukkaStukka · 29-11-2016 10:26AM

Current mainstream media reports say only 6 survivors, so RIP to those who have tragically perished.

The same reports also say that the aircraft reported electrical failures, and one social media report (unsubstantiated and might just be the usual speculation) says it ran out of fuel.

Irrespective, it's just dreadful.

homerjay2005 · 29-11-2016 10:49AM

terrible news.

how long ago was it a Cityjet plane?

A Dub in Glasgo · 29-11-2016 10:53AM

Delivery date Airline Registration Remark
30/03/1999 Mesaba N523XJ Correct
20/09/2007 CityJet EI-RJK Named collanmore island - Stored 03/2011
16/10/2013 LAMIA P4-LOR Correct
08/02/2014 LAMIA YV2768 Correct
02/01/2015 LAMIA Bolivia CP-2933 Stored 09/2015

http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-bae146-2348.htm

robyntmorton · 29-11-2016 10:53AM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

terrible news.

how long ago was it a Cityjet plane?

Delivered to Cityjet 2007 (ex Mesaba/Northwest)
Stored 2011
Delivered LAMIA 2013
Transferred LAMIA Bolivia 01/2015

dubhoop · 29-11-2016 11:07AM

Is the range on that avro 1595nm and the distance between two airports was 1605nm either way it's truly tragic

duskyjoe · 29-11-2016 11:35AM

dubhoop wrote: »

Is the range on that avro 1595nm and the distance between two airports was 1605nm either way it's truly tragic

Other forums touching on the same angle. No Fire etc. An Elec issue won't take a plane out of the sky but lack of juice will. Let's see but this is truly an awful disaster for the good people of Brazil.

murphaph · 29-11-2016 12:38PM

dubhoop wrote: »

Is the range on that avro 1595nm and the distance between two airports was 1605nm either way it's truly tragic

Can the range be boosted with hold or under wing tanks on these or is that really the hard limit?

martinsvi · 29-11-2016 01:32PM

murphaph wrote: »

Can the range be boosted with hold or under wing tanks on these or is that really the hard limit?

EASA type certificate for RJ85 says you can add additional pannier tanks to each wing giving you about 2000lbs of extra fuel combined.. that is just 10% of the total and these tanks are normally visible from outside, they cause drag, and reduce maximum payload. I think it's very unlikely that they would have been installed, and even if they would have, the range increase would be relatively small and would only make sense for ferry operations

ohlordy · 29-11-2016 03:28PM

It didn't fly direct, stopped in Bolivia en route, thus range not a factor

kona · 29-11-2016 03:29PM

duskyjoe wrote: »

Other forums touching on the same angle. No Fire etc. An Elec issue won't take a plane out of the sky but lack of juice will. Let's see but this is truly an awful disaster for the good people of Brazil.

I think you'd find a electrical issue very much can take a aircraft out of the sky.

On the fuel issue perhaps they had a refuelling stop en route?

homerjay2005 · 29-11-2016 03:43PM

ohlordy wrote: »

It didn't fly direct, stopped in Bolivia en route, thus range not a factor

The aircraft was on a flight from the Bolivian city of Santa Cruz de la Sierra to Medellín in Colombia, carrying 72 passengers and 9 crew.[9] The distance between the two airports is 1,605 nautical miles (2,972 km), which exceeds the range of the Avro RJ85, which is 1,600 nautical miles (2,963 km)

^^^^

ohlordy · 29-11-2016 03:48PM

^^^^^^ oops, my bad, misread it^^^^^^^

ned14 · 29-11-2016 04:19PM

Flight was captured on FR24. Looks to have been holding outside Medellin just before it went down.

homerjay2005 · 29-11-2016 04:22PM

ned14 wrote: »

Flight was captured on FR24. Looks to have been holding outside Medellin just before it went down.

any idea what it was holding? and given the doubts about the fuel, i wonder if it was this hold that led to the potential fuel issue?

GBX · 29-11-2016 04:36PM

2 tweets showing info from FR24

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/803482522248167424

https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/803490617783418881

homerjay2005 · 29-11-2016 04:48PM

fuel seems to be the main topic of discussion in many places.

A Dub in Glasgo · 29-11-2016 05:01PM

Yeah the Daily Fail stating that the pilot circled to ditch fuel before attempting to crash land

homerjay2005 · 29-11-2016 05:03PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Yeah the Daily Fail stating that the pilot circled to ditch fuel before attempting to crash land

that plane doesnt have ability to dump fuel i think!

PukkaStukka · 29-11-2016 05:04PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Yeah the Daily Fail stating that the pilot circled to ditch fuel before attempting to crash land

How on earth does anyone take that thing seriously? :rolleyes:

A Dub in Glasgo · 29-11-2016 05:09PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

that plane doesnt have ability to dump fuel i think!

I did say it was from the Daily Fail

PukkaStukka · 29-11-2016 05:34PM

Oh dear, found this on Sky News

http://news.sky.com/story/plane-thought-to-be-carrying-a-brazilian-football-team-crashes-in-colombia-10676541

Sky News wrote:

The head of Colombia's civil aviation agency, Alfredo Bocanegra, said reported comments from a female flight attendant that the aircraft had run out of fuel were being evaluated.

GBX · 29-11-2016 05:43PM

Sly News and Daily fail are one and the same in how the produce inaccurate news.

duskyjoe · 29-11-2016 07:14PM

No scorch marks at surrounding impact area says to me zero fuel on board......crashed in a nose up attitude into terrain. God love them.

Boulevardier · 29-11-2016 07:18PM

I have read that there are anti-govt terrorists in Bolivia. Could they be involved in this?

JCX BXC · 29-11-2016 07:29PM

Boulevardier wrote: »

I have read that there are anti-govt terrorists in Bolivia. Could they be involved in this?

Hardly, the flight consisted of from what I've read, mostly Brazilians.

Why did the aircraft stop in Santa Cruz?

A Dub in Glasgo · 29-11-2016 08:03PM

JCX BXC wrote: »

Hardly, the flight consisted of from what I've read, mostly Brazilians.

Why did the aircraft stop in Santa Cruz?

I think to refuel

JCX BXC · 29-11-2016 08:05PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I think to refuel

Haven't heard much, but did read that it was coming from Sao Paulo, if true then Santa Cruz is a major deviation from the flight path to Medellin.

martinsvi · 29-11-2016 08:45PM

It's a Bolivian airline, it can't do direct flights from Brazil to Columbia, that would be considered a Cabotage under ICAO rules. If you have a Bolivian airline you can only operate in and out of Bolivia, thus a stop there ensures the rules have been met. EU/EEA airlines and some other countries have agreements which allows one airline to operate between other states, but I don't think any of the South American countries have such agreements

Furasta · 29-11-2016 08:51PM

Terrible news alright, as for what martinsvl was saying about the fact it was a Bolivian airline is correct that it would have had to transit through Bolivia. There was a pretty good youtube video here about those agreements:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thqbjA2DC-E

Gamebred · 29-11-2016 08:54PM

They were not allowed charter a direct flight I've read, I believe they flew a different plane for the first leg.

RJ85 (ex Cityjet EI-RJK) gone down in Brazil

Comments