Turkish Airliner Crash Amsterdam

aripointer


Joined: 01/07/2008
Posts: 189

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 00:20

A malfunctioning altimeter played a role in the crash of a Turkish Airlines flight last week at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport said Dutch officials who have issued a warning to the planes makers Boeing. The head of Dutch Safety Authority Pieter van Vollenhoven presented his preliminary results stating.....The aircraft was flying about 1,950 feet. The planes left radio altitude meter indicated the Boeing 737-800 was flying at minus 8 feet, prompting the automatic pilot to shut down the engines. It was not until the aircraft was at 450 feet the plane was about to stall that the warning systems alerted the pilots. The pilots gave the engines full power but came too late to recover the aircraft. According to the report the pilots were aware of the faulty altimeter but did not consider it a problem as the aircraft was on autopilot/autoland and did not react. A warning has been issued to Boeing about possible faults on the plane. All the above data was recovered from the flights black boxes.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 00:34

It seems that the pilots were aware of this problem but they did not take it seriously and they did not even report it. How could they ignore it if the autolanding system took notice of this faulty reading and shut off the engines?



I listened to the main news this evening on Channel D, Turkish tv and the well respected commentator M. Ali Birand made a scathing attack on Turkish Airlines management and also on Turkish Pilots Association for speaking up without any facts and praised the Dutch authorities for not speaking too soon without the facts.

ismet

McSteviet



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1089

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 00:36

That's a big problem then.



Is it just 737-800's affected do we know?



Mc

jurgen


Joined: 20/12/2008
Posts: 77

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 12:22

I 've read the article in dutch and I can't tranlate it properly but , it's a general problem with boeing , the warning system is not like the systems in Airbus ( type of siren , loud ) Boeing use a system in the sturing handle (more a sort of trembling system)

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 13:39

Elko: "...the well respected commentator M. Ali Birand made a scathing attack on Turkish Airlines management and also on Turkish Pilots Association for speaking up without any facts and praised the Dutch authorities for not speaking too soon without the facts..."



This is a cultural issue for Turkey. Chaotic administration and democracy problems give the rulers carte blanche to treat the public to whom they are accountable with utter contempt. And that is linked to why some EU members don't want Turkey in Europe.

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 13:54

Macha



Surely that would make Turkey eminently suitable as a EU member!

Coachie



Joined: 29/07/2008
Posts: 2135

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 13:55

Altimeters should be set to the Q>F>E> for the airfild they are landing at.this so when the aicraft lands the altimeter shows zero.If the wrong qfe is set the signals being sent to theauto land system will be incorrect there fore the

systym adjust the power settings accordingly to prevent the plane from stalling.In this case the auto land system received a signal to say it was landed and shut the engines down to idle and the plane stalled before any action could be taken to recover.This amazes me because most pilots like to land the aircraft on manual to keep their touch soto speak.All aircraft are fitted with the stick shaking and audible stall alarms.Obviously some one wasnot paying attention,especially witha trainee pilot in the second seat.Pilot error comes to mind here..

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 14:17

The fact that the aircraft landed tail first surely indicates the Pilot/s reacted to the instrument error, trying to gain height/airspeed in poor visibility, but sady too late.



We all rely on technology nowadays, not with the 'seat of our pants'.



My heart goes out to all those involved.

aripointer


Joined: 01/07/2008
Posts: 189

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 14:24

Both Airbus and Boeing have warning systems to prevent the aircraft stalling.

In Boeing aircraft it is called a Stick Shaker and on Airbus and Fokker aircraft it is called Alpha Floor Protection. Both do the same job. Some pilots prefer either one or the other. I do feel their is now a danger of pilots forgetting their basic flying skills as a result of relying on sophistcated electronics that control airliners through most of their flights....including landings.

Coachie. (On a previous thread)

Some observers are now compairing the crash with the Staines/Slough crash although one aircraft was landing.... the other taking off.

All in all flying is still the safest way of transport?

Coachie



Joined: 29/07/2008
Posts: 2135

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:26

Aripointer.. still the same out come. the plane stalled when it should not have.Before 9/11 I used to go on the flight decks regularly and Having been an Aircraft Instrument engineer I used to like to see how things have change over the years.To me "glass" cockpits are all verywell but I think there is too much info appearing on one piece of equipment and this can lead to mistakes as we have all witnessed over the years.I think too much responsibility has been put onto the pilots.Getting rid of flight engineers was a big mistake in my opinion,especially on the larger a/c.The stick shaker only tells the pilot he is approaching stalling speed,and he has to deal with it himself.The Airbus has computers that will not allow that to happen.You get nearstalling with an Airbus and the computers take over and rectify the problem.Boeing for years only fitted shakers to the pilots side and the co-pilots side if the customer required it.Now it is compulsory on both sides.Like to see final report..