Cyprus-Forum.com

[runaway]

casualties until now: 3 pilots, 1 host, 1 Turkish passanger, 4 American passangers (2 of them working for Boeing)

[Kikapu]

Turkish pilots blame turbulence for plane crash
12 hours ago

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — A Turkish pilots' group claims turbulence from a large plane landing at Amsterdam airport may have caused the crash of a Turkish Airlines flight in which nine people died.

Turkey Airline Pilots' Association Secretary-General Savas Sen said late Friday that a large Boeing 757 had landed at Schiphol Airport two minutes earlier. Sen said that plane most likely created "wake turbulence" that hampered the Turkish aircraft's landing.

Wake turbulence forms behind an aircraft as it passes through the air.

Nine people, including three pilots and a flight attendamt, were killed when the flight from Istanbul to Amsterdam suddenly lost speed and crashed a mile short of the runway on Wednesday.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD96KF8382

It's about time that the Turkish official stopped making things up as they go along as to what happened to Flight TK 1951. From day one of the crash, it has been one misinformation after another, just to try and put the blame on anything but a possible pilot error. Pilots are very specially skilled individuals and I have the greatest respect for them, but please, they are also human and as humans, they also make mistakes. Any air crash is never down to one thing, but rather multiple of errors that result in a crash, unless the crash was intentional caused by others, which was not the case here.

Lets look at the silly assertions made by the Turkish Pilots' group that a air turbulence from a "larger" aircraft, a Boeing 757 which landed 2 minutes earlier may have caused the fate of TK 1951. I say, Hogwash.! First of all, Boeing 757 is only heavier than the B737-800 empty or fully loaded by about a 1/3rd more and the aircraft's dimensions by only several meters, length and width from each other. " minutes gap between landing is the norm at any major airport. At Heathrow, they land at 2 minutes apart all day long, from a small passenger jets to the very very large ones, all day long. Terminal 5 is purely for British Airways, which means, all BA flights land on the same runway that is the closets to the new terminal 5, which means all types of aircraft land one after the other 2 minutes apart. Air turbulence can be a problem if a very small and slow private aircraft get into the larger aircrafts wake, but that was not the case here.

I think I will post my theory as to what happened soon, which is way more probable than what these so called "experts" are saying.!

[denizaksulu]

Turkish pilots blame turbulence for plane crash
12 hours ago

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — A Turkish pilots' group claims turbulence from a large plane landing at Amsterdam airport may have caused the crash of a Turkish Airlines flight in which nine people died.

Turkey Airline Pilots' Association Secretary-General Savas Sen said late Friday that a large Boeing 757 had landed at Schiphol Airport two minutes earlier. Sen said that plane most likely created "wake turbulence" that hampered the Turkish aircraft's landing.

Wake turbulence forms behind an aircraft as it passes through the air.

Nine people, including three pilots and a flight attendamt, were killed when the flight from Istanbul to Amsterdam suddenly lost speed and crashed a mile short of the runway on Wednesday.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD96KF8382

It's about time that the Turkish official stopped making things up as they go along as to what happened to Flight TK 1951. From day one of the crash, it has been one misinformation after another, just to try and put the blame on anything but a possible pilot error. Pilots are very specially skilled individuals and I have the greatest respect for them, but please, they are also human and as humans, they also make mistakes. Any air crash is never down to one thing, but rather multiple of errors that result in a crash, unless the crash was intentional caused by others, which was not the case here.

Lets look at the silly assertions made by the Turkish Pilots' group that a air turbulence from a "larger" aircraft, a Boeing 757 which landed 2 minutes earlier may have caused the fate of TK 1951. I say, Hogwash.! First of all, Boeing 757 is only heavier than the B737-800 empty or fully loaded by about a 1/3rd more and the aircraft's dimensions by only several meters, length and width from each other. " minutes gap between landing is the norm at any major airport. At Heathrow, they land at 2 minutes apart all day long, from a small passenger jets to the very very large ones, all day long. Terminal 5 is purely for British Airways, which means, all BA flights land on the same runway that is the closets to the new terminal 5, which means all types of aircraft land one after the other 2 minutes apart. Air turbulence can be a problem if a very small and slow private aircraft get into the larger aircrafts wake, but that was not the case here.

I think I will post my theory as to what happened soon, which is way more probable than what these so called "experts" are saying.!

The mind boggles. Two minutes earlier another, larger plane lands; what are the Turkish ones made of? balsa wood?

[Kikapu]

Turkish pilots blame turbulence for plane crash
12 hours ago

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — A Turkish pilots' group claims turbulence from a large plane landing at Amsterdam airport may have caused the crash of a Turkish Airlines flight in which nine people died.

Turkey Airline Pilots' Association Secretary-General Savas Sen said late Friday that a large Boeing 757 had landed at Schiphol Airport two minutes earlier. Sen said that plane most likely created "wake turbulence" that hampered the Turkish aircraft's landing.

Wake turbulence forms behind an aircraft as it passes through the air.

Nine people, including three pilots and a flight attendamt, were killed when the flight from Istanbul to Amsterdam suddenly lost speed and crashed a mile short of the runway on Wednesday.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD96KF8382

It's about time that the Turkish official stopped making things up as they go along as to what happened to Flight TK 1951. From day one of the crash, it has been one misinformation after another, just to try and put the blame on anything but a possible pilot error. Pilots are very specially skilled individuals and I have the greatest respect for them, but please, they are also human and as humans, they also make mistakes. Any air crash is never down to one thing, but rather multiple of errors that result in a crash, unless the crash was intentional caused by others, which was not the case here.

Lets look at the silly assertions made by the Turkish Pilots' group that a air turbulence from a "larger" aircraft, a Boeing 757 which landed 2 minutes earlier may have caused the fate of TK 1951. I say, Hogwash.! First of all, Boeing 757 is only heavier than the B737-800 empty or fully loaded by about a 1/3rd more and the aircraft's dimensions by only several meters, length and width from each other. 2 minutes gap between landing is the norm at any major airport. At Heathrow, they land at 2 minutes apart all day long, from a small passenger jets to the very very large ones, all day long. Terminal 5 is purely for British Airways, which means, all BA flights land on the same runway that is the closets to the new terminal 5, which means all types of aircraft land one after the other 2 minutes apart. Air turbulence can be a problem if a very small and slow private aircraft get into the larger aircrafts wake, but that was not the case here.

I think I will post my theory as to what happened soon, which is way more probable than what these so called "experts" are saying.!

The mind boggles. Two minutes earlier another, larger plane lands; what are the Turkish ones made of? balsa wood?

I like to know where the "student pilot" was sitting in the cockpit at the time of the crash. What if the inexperience pilot was at the controls as the next pilot sitting next to him was too busy reading the instrument panel and was not paying any attention what the young pilot was doing or not doing, because as reported, there was mist at the airport, so the visibility was poor to say the least. This aircraft had a altitude problem in relationship to where the runway was, so it is obvious, there was an error right there, and when they broke through the clouds or the mist, they were practically on the field where they crashed, and the fact that the tail hit first, tells me that an attempt was made to raise the nose of the aircraft, but in doing so at such a low speed prepared for landing, it caused the aircraft to stall and fall back to the field hitting the tail first and also why the plane did not travel to far along the field, because the forward momentum was greatly reduced the moment the aircraft stalled. Once the nose was raised to prevent hitting the ground and it began to lose lift, no amount of engine power added at that moment could have lifted the plane to safety. It was all too sudden, all to fast and all too late. It does not even matter who was at the controls, if the above scenario happened as I suspect from seeing the wreckage, even the captain could not do anything to save his plane if the ground was coming at him at 180 miles an hour with only few hundred feet between the ground and the plane. I do believe, that an attempt was made to lift the nose, but at 500 feet per minute decent rate for landing, few hundred feet would have been reached in no time.

[Kikapu]

Bad altimeter a factor in Netherlands plane crash

By TOBY STERLING, Associated Press

Writer Toby Sterling, Associated Press Writer – 9 mins ago

AMSTERDAM – Investigators said Wednesday a faulty altimeter played an important role in a Turkish Airlines crash that killed 9 people in the Netherlands.

The Dutch Safety Authority said the plane was being landed on automatic pilot and the problem with the altimeter, a device that measures altitude, led to a loss of airspeed before the crash.

The Boeing 737-800 carrying 135 passengers and crew went down in a muddy field one kilometer (less than a mile) short of the runway at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport shortly before it was due to land on Feb. 25.

Chief investigator Pieter van Vollenhoven said the airplane had twice before experienced problems with its altimeter. Boeing has been instructed to warn clients of the problem, he said.

At 1950 feet (around 700 meters) "the airplane's left radio altimeter suddenly registered a change in altitude" of negative 8 feet (about 2 meters). "It didn't only register it, but passed it on to the automatic steering system," Van Vollenhoven said.

Van Vollenhoven said it was not unusual to land a plane on autopilot.

According to conversation recorded between the plane's captain, first officer and an extra first officer on the flight, the pilots noticed the faulty altimeter but didn't consider it a problem and didn't react, Van Vollenhoven said.

Gas to the engines was reduced and the plane lost speed, decelerating until, at a height of 450 feet (150 meters) the plane was about to stall, and warning systems alerted the pilots.

"From the "black box" (data recorders) it appears that then the pilots immediately gave gas, full gas, however it was too late to recover," Van Vollenhoven said.

He said that the pilots had been unable to see the runway at the time the plane began its descent due to weather conditions — cloudy with a light rain.

The plane fell into a freshly plowed field, striking the ground tail first and breaking into three pieces.

Those killed in the crash included five Turks and four Americans.

Turkish Airlines said the dead included the pilots.The American dead included three Boeing employees on a business trip unrelated to the flight.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090304/ap_ ... lane_crash

[Kikapu]

This was the report that I wrote few days ago but did not post it, to be respectful for those who died, but it turns out from today's official news release on this flight TK 1951, that I had similar ideas as to what had happened. For me the altitude was the main factor in relationship to the runway, and in such weather conditions, the altimeter was going to be the main culprit, as the main focus is on today.!



So, what do you think went wrong with this flight, TK 1951.?

The fact that 3 pilots in the cockpit died, gives me a clue as to what may happened, since there were only few deaths from the rest of the plane. In all survivable accidents, the pilots are in better position to survive an accident then the rest of the passengers, but not in this case, considering the fact that the pilots have a 5-way safety straps that keep them in their seats, and the passengers, only 2-way strap around their waist. I believe, it was this extra security that kept the pilots in their seats that caused their deaths, because their bodies remained in their seats as their heads were thrown forward with great force, that would have created great pressure on their necks. I say all this, because the cockpit was in one piece still, which only the nose cone got ripped off, therefore, with no extensive damage to the cockpit, the last thing I would have expected, was to have all 3 pilots die in this crash. So what happened.?

First of all, I will rule out the plane running out of fuel. Only idiots run out of fuel, whether they are flying or driving a car. Last thing I expect from seasoned pilots, is to run out of fuel.

Secondly, engine trouble/failure. Again, I will rule this out also, despite what they are speculating that being the case. Had that happened, the pilot would have automatically put the plane on a "glide slope" as the case was with British airways Boeing 777 at Heathrow last year, who just landed inside the airport perimeter on the grass just short of the runway, and the pilot who just landed his plane on the Hudson River in New York. Several years ago, due to fuel leak, another passenger plane without power glided almost 40+ miles to a military airport in the Azores from about 35,000 feet. Again, this plane did not do that, because there was no engine trouble, or else, the three pilot would not have died, had they did a "controlled emergency landing".

No, what I think it happened, was that there was an error made with the planes altitude. It is possible, that wrong barometric pressure information was fed into the planes altimeter instrument, which would give the planes height from the ground. It is important to get this pressure information correct, specially on the day of this accident, there were mist and low cloud cover. It is obvious, that the pilots were on final approach with only a mile to go to reach the runway, but due to the weather conditions, they would have had to maker an instrument landing, since they did not have a visual of the runway. As the plane descended at the usual rate of about 500 feet per minute, and the pilot in command flying instrument without any visuals, they were basically flying "blind" at this point.

When they broke through the clouds and the mist, they were practically on the field where they crashed, except, the pilot tried pull on the yoke to raise the nose without even having had the chance to add more power. At almost 160 MPH landing speed and so close to the runway, the planes speed would have been a little higher than the landing speed, which is also know as a “controlled stall speed”, so, suddenly changing the planes attitude at this point by trying to climb, would have meant a immediate stall of the plane, hence the shaking of the plane before crashing as it was reported. My guess is, once the plane stalled and very close to the ground, if fell to the ground tail first before the front section slamming to the ground where the nose would have acted as a brake against the ground all awhile, the rest of the fuselage wanting to go forward, hence the break up in the middle by the wings, where the middle part of the fuselage tried to climb on top of the cockpit section after it broke off. It is this slamming of the nose after the tail hit the ground first, that cause the death of the three pilots, since going from 160MPH to ZERO in a very short time.

[Oracle]

It's all very sad, but a thankfully lucky escape for many.

Nine people may die in a motorway pile up, and you would not hear about it in a neighbouring country even; but plane crashes always become a global catastrophe, and so they affect the emotions of everyone.

Condolences to the families of all those who lost loved ones.

[Kikapu]

Deaths on plane crashes, specially on airliners, is "very special" than any other catastrophe. It is very special because you have people from all walks of life and countries, young and old, all converge onto one location to get on one plane to go to one destination before all going to different ways. We have all been there ourselves, and to this date, all our plans went accordingly. But when things go very wrong and people die, it is very sad to think, that this moment of their lives was meant to be this way and there was nothing they could have done about it to change the outcome, and to many of those who may have escaped death or injury to such accidents, are only alive because of luck. To die along with many people you have never met in your life at almost at the same time is what makes air accidents as being a "very special" catastrophe, is the reason why people around the world take notice and extend their condolences to the lost souls and their families, because we too put ourselves in the same situation each time we fly, therefore we can all relate to the fact, that we too could have been on a flight that had an accident, or that we may be one in the future.! If it's written, it is beyond our control to prevent it. There are no guarantees in life, only options, and even then, you will never know if you will make the correct choice each time.! One of great mysterious of life and death.!

[dinos]

Bad altimeter a factor in Netherlands plane crash

By TOBY STERLING, Associated Press

Writer Toby Sterling, Associated Press Writer – 9 mins ago

AMSTERDAM – Investigators said Wednesday a faulty altimeter played an important role in a Turkish Airlines crash that killed 9 people in the Netherlands.

The Dutch Safety Authority said the plane was being landed on automatic pilot and the problem with the altimeter, a device that measures altitude, led to a loss of airspeed before the crash.

Kikapu, I'm not a pilot or anything, but why would anyone try to land a plane on auto-pilot - especially in bad weather? The pilots I knew way back when always landed manually to avoid inaccuracies in their instruments.

Hindsight is always 20-20 and there's probably little chance they had to reverse their plight. Just wondering your perspective on this...

[Kikapu]

Bad altimeter a factor in Netherlands plane crash

By TOBY STERLING, Associated Press

Writer Toby Sterling, Associated Press Writer – 9 mins ago

AMSTERDAM – Investigators said Wednesday a faulty altimeter played an important role in a Turkish Airlines crash that killed 9 people in the Netherlands.

The Dutch Safety Authority said the plane was being landed on automatic pilot and the problem with the altimeter, a device that measures altitude, led to a loss of airspeed before the crash.

Kikapu, I'm not a pilot or anything, but why would anyone try to land a plane on auto-pilot - especially in bad weather? The pilots I knew way back when always landed manually to avoid inaccuracies in their instruments.

Hindsight is always 20-20 and there's probably little chance they had to reverse their plight. Just wondering your perspective on this...

Hi Dinos,

Auto-pilot landings are designed for the conditions where visibility is very poor, as the case was in Amsterdam. Modern jets and most major airports are equipped for Auto-instrument landing. I landed in London once on a Boeing 747 coming from the states almost 15-20 years ago in bad weather where the pilot told us after landing, that the plane made a full auto landing. It was one of the smoothers landings I've had.!

In aviation, pilots tend to put a lot of trust in their equipment, and they really do not have very many options, but to trust what the instruments are telling them, specially in conditions where you have no visibility, either close to the ground in a fog or in the clouds high above. The brain can't even tell which way is up or down most of the time when you can't see the horizon or other heavenly bodies. But what I don't understand is, why didn't the pilot take action when they noticed the altimeter give a false reading all of a sudden.? By the time they realised the dangers of it, because the information from the altimeter is fed to the auto-pilot, it was all to late, since the plane made a few hundred feet drop in no time, because as far as the auto pilot was concerned, they were just above the runway, therefore it reduced power to set the plane down, which is about the same speed as having a "controlled stall" to reduce lift on the wings.

Well, once the pilots saw the field and not the runway in the last seconds, first they had to disengage the auto pilot and then "gun" the engines at full power, but the plane was already sinking and losing lift due to already loss of power instructed by the auto pilot. As soon as the nose was lifted by the pilot to avoid hitting the ground, the stall became even more irreversible and the engines had zero effect and fell to the ground hitting the tail first. This is what saved most of the passengers, that the plane was travelling slow and pointing up as the tail hit the ground first, although it was also reported, that one of the engines (No 1-left) may have also truck the motorway, because the No 2-right engine can be seen in the picture just forward of the right wing, which also gives the indication, that the wing slammed downward at relatively low forward moving speed forcing the engine to tear off the wing and be thrown forward, since most of the engine is mounted forward of the wing to begin with.

Perhaps "BigOz" who claims to be a pilot and an instructor on passenger planes can give us more information on what happened. Perhaps "skyvet" and "Paphitis" can also weigh in on this. The whole thing is a tragic. Just like sailboats, the biggest danger to planes is LAND. In order to make any kind of recovery from a mistake, a plane needs a lot of altitude, just as a sailboat needs a lot of water between itself and land in a storm or in loss of steering.!