Plane slips off runway in Madrid

[cjp]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7572643.stm

I expected to find more background information on this forum, but apparently it happened just a few minutes or hours ago.

 

[jedidia]

you guys go on posting every single accident with an airplane somewhere in the world and you'll have me scared of flying!! :blink:

 

[Whatu]

Then we better not post every car accident somewhere in the world or you will be more scared of cars

Wonder what happened to the plane..

 

[cjp]

:blink::blink:
It seems to be a real disaster

 

[pete.dakota]

Up to 150 feared dead, it would seem. Emergency services saying that only 25 people have survived. Witnesses say one of the engines caught fire before take off and caused the plane to swerve.

Possibly a broken fan blade, or bird strike.

 

[Urwumpe]

Possibly a broken fan blade, or bird strike.

Or foreign object debris. That is usually much more likely as bird strike during a take-off run.

 

[simonpro]

The plane had a rejected takeoff earlier in the day, so my initial guess would be mechanical failure.

 

[joeybigO]

It's interesting to see how many turn into "experts" on aircraft knowledge when talking about a crash.

Funny thing mentioned is that the left engine caught on fire when landing.
Well, fact is that both engines are on fire when they are running.

 

[pete.dakota]

It's interesting to see how many turn into "experts" on aircraft knowledge when talking about a crash.

Funny thing mentioned is that the left engine caught on fire when landing.
Well, fact is that both engines are on fire when they are running.

The plane was taking off, actually.

Jet engines, when running normally, are compressing air, adding fuel, and igniting the mixture. This is a working, functional engine. It is not 'on fire'.

 

[Urwumpe]

It's interesting to see how many turn into "experts" on aircraft knowledge when talking about a crash.

It is more funny when this criticism comes from a "CEO of absolute nothing". Are you something better as the rest of us?

Funny thing mentioned is that the left engine caught on fire when landing.
Well, fact is that both engines are on fire when they are running.

It was taking off, and it was not the first take-off run, according to simonpro's sources.

An engine is not on fire, when operating properly. It has a controlled combustion process inside it, based on mixing fuel and air in a fine spray to heat air. An engine is regarded on fire, when this process fails and the combustion is no longer controlled. This can happen when the combustion process does not run like designed or when such a process happens in the wrong place of the engine.

 

[cjp]

It's interesting to see how many turn into "experts" on aircraft knowledge when talking about a crash.

I've seen many episodes of Air Crash Investigation, so I must be an expert now . One thing I know is that it usually takes months or even years to find the complete cause of a crash.

 

[Urwumpe]

I've seen many episodes of Air Crash Investigation, so I must be an expert now . One thing I know is that it usually takes months or even years to find the complete cause of a crash.

Yeah, and I know that some of the best experts in the world for such investigations operate from Braunschweig, Germany.

I would say, there no reason to not make initial guesses in a forum. So far, the forum had usually been quite right with their "guessing" and it gives people here a good feeling to have been on the right track. Or learn more about planes.

 

[joeybigO]

well i'll take my 18 years of experience and bet it against the best of the world.:beach:

As for my CEO of absolutely nothing comes from an Absolut a commercial.

Most engines if they have a "fire" when they are taking off would indicate that there is a compression stall induced when the variable guide vanes are not working properly e.g. not in rig. Something usually moves them this way. This comes from only one source the Fuel Pump or the Mechanical Fuel Control, sometimes FADEC run, the MFC usually schedules the VG in two ways, through linkage that is run off the MFC, or though a Linear Variable Actuator that runs those bad boys.
Most people think that engines just "blow up". This is far from true, there are several indicators that an engine is about to "blow up" G.E. usually refers to these as "events" which is very funny to me, because they did not like my PC of the whole matter when my Engine "blew up". The EGT will be unusually high or take a spike. When the EGT and the fan speeds up this is an indication of a LPT failure, or a fan disk crack, which is very bad. When your VG is out of rig, or very slightly out of rig, your idle EGT will be quite high, and you get very funny fluctuations on start, sometimes indicated by spikes when going through about 35-50 % N2 just after fuel is added.

A fire is more of when an engine has abrupt flames outside of the "combustion" area.

However if the engine is still making power, or even looses power most pilots are trained to handle this on takeoff, so my vote goes to pilot error.

And the comment comes from the world reporting section, not from the forum, but you can take it however you want.

 

[pete.dakota]

Witnesses are saying that they saw the left engine 'on fire'. No one has said that it 'blew up'. It's obvious from reports that both engines were not in the same state when the events started to unfold. There is no standing mass of fuel in an operational jet engine, so one 'blowing up' has to be close to impossible.

I agree that there could be an element of pilot error. Can an MD-82 climb out with one functional engine? I'm guessing it can.

 

[Urwumpe]

However if the engine is still making power, or even looses power most pilots are trained to handle this on takeoff, so my vote goes to pilot error.

Well, that what they are currently looking for in the flight recorders: Did the aircraft already pass V1?

If it did pass V1 and the pilot braked, it is pilot error.
If it did pass V1 and the pilot tried to take off, he handled correctly according to procedures.
If it did not pass V1 and the pilot braked, he reacted correctly and something else was the problem.

The last witness reports I had was, that the left wing of the plane touched ground shortly after the engine caught fire. By the usual accuracy of witness reports, it could also happen in the opposite order, with the wings touching ground before the engine was on fire.


-----Posted Added-----

I agree that there could be an element of pilot error. Can an MD-82 climb out with one functional engine? I'm guessing it can.

It should be able to do that after passing V1. This is part of the certification process.

 

[Moonwalker]

It's a tragic event. But it's not the first one in civil aviation history and also won't be the last one. It's also tragic how some journalists emerge and create fear of flying once again. The airplane was not too old and the Barajas airport is not unsafe. There is absolutely no need to ask passengers on airports about such things. They usually don't know about it anyway.

For the sequence of events leading to the accident and its causes we now have to wait for the investigation, no matter what journalists and some people in front of a TV camera say.

 

[Urwumpe]

I think today, that my FOD theory makes no sense - the engines on the MD-80 are still too high above the runway to ingest dangerous objects. I now put my bets on a mechanical defect inside the engines, maybe the replaced temperature sensor inside the engine was actually a false diagnosis. The sensor was correct, it measured a wrong condition. Now, it would be good to find out, what the temperature sensor measured.

 

[alrik]

Hi everyone

I got a friend that work's on barajas tower i've asked him about what happens he said:

JKK5022 was at 36L ready to go and the crew request to return to the parking area because they reported something about technical issues.

It was being authorized to go to remote parking area 12 where it stays not much time.

New taxi to 36L this time.

Once it starts to take off...
- Rotated well but once on air the motor 2 started to burn V1 ok but not reached V2 then the plane started to bank right probably in a stall... goes down.

The plan of this plane was go from madrid to canarias it means at least 80%++ fuel, so the plane was probably full or so... so you know what this means.

I think it was a technical issue, the plane was build in 1995 it was a little old... but spanair is a company that cut costs a time ago so... it is probably the main problem.

For the sequence of events leading to the accident and its causes we now have to wait for the investigation, no matter what journalists and some people in front of a TV camera say.

I'm with you, the spanish press is mostly stupid...

One blogger took this photos.

At least we have fast rescue teams (2 or 3 minutes from the airport, 10 minutes by copters from the nord mountains, 15-30m from city)

(Sorry about my bad english it's all I can do right now) xD

 

[Moonwalker]

I'm with you, the spanish press is mostly stupid...

The German press isn't better

 

[Urwumpe]

Update from the German press: The jet had thrust reversal activated - but the investigators are not sure if it was a technical defect or pilot error. If pilot error, the pilot attempted to slow the plane down, possibly with one jet engine missing.