Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Plane down near Moscow

«13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 113 ✭✭LeakRate


    Reports of a mid air collision with a helicopter.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Miike


    LeakRate wrote: »
    Reports of a mid air collision with a helicopter.

    Later retracted by all but one Russian News agency :o


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,560 ✭✭✭porsche boy


    The speed graph on flightradar is odd to say the least. If its accurate it could suggest engine issues or if not suggests sensor issues.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,201 ✭✭✭Doltanian


    It was weird even last night I was think we are well overdue a plane crash, 2017 was statistically the safest year on record for Aviation ever.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 644 ✭✭✭faoiarvok


    The speed graph on flightradar is odd to say the least. If its accurate it could suggest engine issues or if not suggests sensor issues.

    FR24 data should be taken with quite a few grains of salt, especially if trying to look into fine details

    Edit: although from the screenshot in the tweet above, I’m not sure I see anything crazy in it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭PukkaStukka


    I caught a quick glimpse of footage from the accident site on BBC news. The aircraft fragments were quite small and scattered. There didn't seem to be any large pieces of fuselage


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,296 ✭✭✭CPTM


    In 2013, the same plane had to shut down it's right engine within 15 minutes of take off and return to the airport.

    https://www.aeroinside.com/item/2861/rossiya-a148-at-st-petersburg-on-jul-28th-2013-engine-shut-down-in-flight

    Since September 2017, 3 AN-148s have suffered engine problems which required an engine shut down and a return to the airport or prompt diversion to a local airport within 20 minutes of take off.

    It's not enough to draw conclusions obviously, since engine shut downs do happen for different reasons and planes should have the capacity to land with one engine working. But seems to be a lot since September alone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭ninebeanrows


    The captain chose not to de ice before take off.


  • Registered Users Posts: 341 ✭✭lfc200


    The captain chose not to de ice before take off.

    If plane hadn't been de-iced and ice was the issue would they have made it 20km from the airport?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭PukkaStukka


    Captain Fintan Ryan was on Morning Ireland discussing this awful event. He seemed careful not to speculate on likely causes but did note available data indicated wild fluctuations in airspeed before the crash. He also appeared to cast doubt on reports of the aircraft being on fire prior to the crash as the cloud base was very low.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    I would like to point out that the raw ADS-B output for this aircraft type (unlike most western jets) does not include speed information. The speed you are seeing on the FR24 graph is an interpretation and can be widely inaccurate


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,296 ✭✭✭CPTM


    Investigators are thinking that there was ice on the speed sensors and that caused the crash. Would de-icing the plane before take-off have covered the sensors too? Or does de-icing cover the wings only?

    www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-43048921


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,063 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    CPTM wrote: »
    Investigators are thinking that there was ice on the speed sensors and that caused the crash. Would de-icing the plane before take-off have covered the sensors too? Or does de-icing cover the wings only?

    www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-43048921

    Pitot tubes have heaters in them on even vaguely modern Western aircraft; I'd hope its the case in this as its not a particularly antiquated design.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    CPTM wrote: »
    Investigators are thinking that there was ice on the speed sensors and that caused the crash. Would de-icing the plane before take-off have covered the sensors too? Or does de-icing cover the wings only?

    www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-43048921

    I would be very surprised if the actual investigators would participate in any sort of speculation at any stage during the investigation. More than likely that train of thought is not coming from anyone reliable.

    To answer your question - the airspeed is measured by sensing a pressure in a tube. Typical de-icing shower would not de-ice the inside of the tube. If the tube was blocked they would have no speed indication during takeoff run and would have rejected the take off early.

    these tubes generally have heaters in them to keep the ice away. It is also worth remembering that there are 4 of these tubes for redundancy purposes, so even if one or two of them fail, this shouldn't lead to a complete loss of airspeed information


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    L1011 wrote: »
    Pitot tubes have heaters in them on even vaguely modern Western aircraft; I'd hope its the case in this as its not a particularly antiquated design.

    Not going to dig out the CS/FAR 25 design docs now to quote the exact requirement, but generally you can't certify an aircraft for IFR/known icing condition flight if you don't have a heated pitot..


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭PukkaStukka


    From AVHerald with my emphasis in bold
    AVHerald wrote:
    On Feb 13th 2018 the MAK reported that the flight data recorder needed to be torn down, the memory modules were removed from the FDR and inserted in a new electronics. Thereafter it was possible to read out all data which consist of 16 flights including the accident flight. The work to decode the data has started. The media of the voice recorder are currently being prepared for download.

    In the afternoon of Feb 13th 2018 the MAK reported, that decoding of the FDR data has been completed. Preliminary analysis shows, that the pitot heatings for all three pitot probes were off while the pitot heatings had been turned on prior to departure on the previous 15 flights. About 2:30 minutes after becoming airborne a special situation developed at about 1300 meters of height and a speed of 465-470 kph (250 KIAS) when a disagreement between the speed readings #1 and #3 developed with the speed reading #2 not registering, #1 was showing about 30kph (15 knots) more than #3, an according message was issued. No significant altitude deviations between the pitot systems were noticed. At about 2000 meters height speed reading #1 began to reduce while #3 increased, another speed disagree message was issued. The crew disconnected the autopilot and continued in manual control. Speed readings from #3 reached 540-560 kph (290-300 KIAS), #1 speed readings continued to decrease. 50 seconds after the autopilot was disconnected the aircraft experienced vertical loads between 0.5 and 1.5G, the #1 speed reading reached 0, the #3 began to decrease reaching 200 kph (108 KIAS), the aircraft pitched down to about 30-35 degrees below horizont, the vertical load was 0G. Before collision with the ground #3 speed readings began to rapidly increase reaching 800 kph (432 KIAS) just before impact, #1 speed readings remained at 0. The pitch angle remained at 30 degrees below horizont until impact, 5 seconds prior to impact a right bank of 25 degrees developed.

    The MAK wrote: "A preliminary analysis of the recorded information, as well as an analysis of similar cases that occurred in the past, suggest that the development of a special situation in the flight could be caused by incorrect data on the flight speed on the pilots indicators, which in turn was apparently due to icing of the pitot probes when the heating systems are off."


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    you're joking me... cowboys don't read checklists I guess..


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭PukkaStukka


    martinsvi wrote: »
    you're joking me... cowboys don't read checklists I guess..

    Wha is doesn't say is whether the heating was off due to oversight or equipment failure. We can't jump to conclusions


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    Wha is doesn't say is whether the heating was off due to oversight or equipment failure. We can't jump to conclusions

    quite true, having thought about it, most modern jets wouldn't have a manual switch for heating, would they? Manual switch seems to be a turbo prop thing


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭PukkaStukka


    martinsvi wrote: »
    quite true, having thought about it, most modern jets wouldn't have a manual switch for heating, would they? Manual switch seems to be a turbo prop thing

    It could be a number of things alright. Being an aircraft that isn't of mainstream design means it could have weird quirks like manual switching alright. In which case is there not some kind of secondary warning to alert the crew that the heating was off.

    Or perhaps a breaker(s) could've tripped due to a fault taking out the heaters. Could there have been a maintenance issue that left the heaters inoperative.

    Or, chillingly, crew oversight with work factors / pressures also at play.

    Whatever, it's dreadful.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭PukkaStukka


    This from RTE but a tad wide of the mark perhaps?

    http://www.rte.ie/news/world/2018/0213/940413-russia-plane-crash/


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,338 ✭✭✭Negative_G


    An awful tragedy.

    I know it's primarily driven by human nature but aviation must be the worst profession for armchair experts to appear and speculate after an accident or incident.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,133 ✭✭✭View Profile


    Yes I've the benefit of sitting in my armchair. However, pitch and power lads! If the situation looks and feels wrong - revert to the basics and you can't go far wrong.

    RIP to the victims.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,338 ✭✭✭Negative_G


    Yes I've the benefit of sitting in my armchair. However, pitch and power lads! If the situation looks and feels wrong - revert to the basics and you can't go far wrong.

    RIP to the victims.

    And if the PF is experiencing somatogravic illusion? Will power and pitch help then? Maybe it would, equally it could exacerbate the problem.

    I'm not having a good pop at you, just purely playing devils advocate. I agree with your sentiment generally though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    Negative_G wrote: »
    And if the PF is experiencing somatogravic illusion? Will power and pitch help then? Maybe it would, equally it could exacerbate the problem.

    I'm not having a good pop at you, just purely playing devils advocate. I agree with your sentiment generally though.

    looking back at my training - power and pitch is something that's mentioned a lot but never really was drilled in to me unlike the stall recovery - not until CPL and especially JOC training anyway .. until then when you see the speed dropping, push the nose down, power up. That was the anthem!


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,003 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    I believe that the industry started introducing power/pitch/attitude (Unreliable Airspeed) charts/data following this accident.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birgenair_Flight_301

    I find it strange that a glass cockpit aircraft "might not" have a CAS (Warning/Caution) message about Pitot heat status.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭duskyjoe


    There is no way a certified transport aircraft would not have a master warning , master caution alert system re pitot heat turned off prior to take off. Me thinks orange lights, bells, whistles are a given in that part of the world and that the MEL is an excuse to depart document as against can we go document. Madness.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    duskyjoe wrote: »
    There is no way a certified transport aircraft would not have a master warning , master caution alert system re pitot heat turned off prior to take off. Me thinks orange lights, bells, whistles are a given in that part of the world and that the MEL is an excuse to depart document as against can we go document. Madness.

    this is the "ECAM" for AN-148, or as they like to call it "KISS"
    basically the way it apparently works is that if the Pitot heat is off, you will see the first 3 messages you see on the screen - ППД1(2,3) НЕТ ОБОГРЕВА literally means Pitot Tube 1(2,3) No Heating.

    Once you turn on the heating, the message disappears unless there is a fault - in that case, the message comes back and on the button itself one would see ОТКАЗ (literally translates as "failure") light illuminated

    441692.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 531 ✭✭✭Candamir


    Negative_G wrote: »
    And if the PF is experiencing somatogravic illusion? Will power and pitch help then? Maybe it would, equally it could exacerbate the problem.

    I'm not having a good pop at you, just purely playing devils advocate. I agree with your sentiment generally though.

    Absolutely would. That’s why pilots learn instrument flying. I would assume most transport catagory aircraft have pitch and power settings in case of unreliable airspeed. Eg after T/O 15degrees and TOGA power.


Advertisement