Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Question About Avianca 707 Crash  
User currently offlineBigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4076 posts, RR: 54
Posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3255 times:

http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/view_details.cgi?date=01251990®=HK-2016&airline=Avianca

I can understand that there was no fuel and therefore no explosion, but I'm sitll surprised that this plane fell from the sky and more than half of the passengers survived.

I'm just trying to learn more. Did they actually fall out of the sky or did they coast? And from what height?

What were other factors?

-Phil





Phil Derner Jr.
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIsitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3204 times:

He was holding for awhile, I forgot the reason why, then headed in to JFK and ran out of fuel.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineNikv69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3200 times:

You know it is funny, this 707 basically crashed in my backyard and a friend and I rushed to the scene, didn't see much and rescue and police were everywhere, but I never have really researched this crash. I would think by looking at pictures and how the plane remained somewhat intact that it did not come into the terrain at a steep angle. The lack of fuel and fire did save many lives. Thank God for that.

User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days ago) and read 3165 times:

The NTSB report:

http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/ntsb/aar/AAR91-04.pdf

They were put in 3 different holding patterns coming up the coast (ORF, BOTON, and CAMRN) and spend over an hour doing it. There opportunity was there to have diverted the flight somewhere well before it got into a low-fuel situation, but there was nobody to do it. The operational control rules/standards used by foreign countries operating into the US (under Part 129) are often different and less stringent than the FAR 121 rules that US-registered airlines operate under.

I was at the NTSB Hearings on this one, and still have a full set of exhibits on it.


User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7387 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days ago) and read 3160 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The fuel tanks on this aircraft were bonedry. The engines were were flame out and no one heard the impact except for Jon McNroe's backyard. The pilot never radioed MayDay, he radioed Fuel Emergency which does not give a cleared runway. They were put in a holding pattern.


Made from jets!
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days ago) and read 3152 times:

If that Pilot understood the fuel procedure he would have been given a runway to put that plane down. Unfortunate..

R.I.P.


User currently offlineIDAWA From Italy, joined Aug 2004, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days ago) and read 3149 times:

As far as I know the pilot spoke very little English, so he didn't manage to communicate the ATC he was in such a deep trouble.


Flown on: 319, 320, 321, 340, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC9, D10, M11, M80, 146, EM2, BEH, CRJ, DH8, L4T.
User currently offlineKellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 683 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days ago) and read 3140 times:

They made it to JFK, with very little fuel remaining. But then they were unable to land and had to do a missed approach. They ran out of fuel during that. They took one two many chances and had no support from the airline.

On arriving at their destination, they should have had at least a reserve fuel plus fuel to a good alternate. They had neither by the time they had held for so long enroute and foolishly continued on to their destination.


User currently offline757MDE From Colombia, joined Sep 2004, 1753 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3081 times:

The plane came into NY with enough fuel to land, but less than the required reserves (I don't know if they could have made it to BOS, the alternate). The weather at the scene was bad, much rain and wind. They approached to RWY 22L but got a windshear and didn't see the runway so they made a missed app. When doing those procedures (I think they had to make more than one pattern) they began to run out of fuel. They noticed that to the tower but too late (comms error by the Pilot, had to notice loong before so they were given priority) the tower sent them for a final pattern some 15nm out of the RWY threshold and when on final approach the engines flamed-out due to fuel exhaustion and the plane just fell.

I think the Aircraft didn't break too much and some passengers survived because the fall was a kind of glide and it wasn't that high.

That's the version I have of the things, but maybe I have some details wrong.



I gladly accept donations to pay for flight hours! This thing draws man...
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3072 times:

If the aircraft was on finals, it could have glided into the ground at a reasonable flat gradient and as slow as say 150 knots. Under these conditions I guess it's reasonable there was such a high number of survivors.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3060 times:

BOS was the filed alternate, but the weather there was below alternate minimums even before they left Colombia... Better choices that day would have been PIT, IAD, BWI, or SYR, as everything else in the NE was cruddy...

As to that NTSB link I posted earlier, it's a big 290+ page .PDF file, and there's lots of data there, including:

Page-10 (of the .PDF file)
The flight's radar track across the ground

Page-18 (of the .PDF file)
A profile view of the first ILS approach to 22L

Page-40-42 (of the .PDF file)
Under "1.12 Wreckage and Impact Information" there's a description of the impact, a diagram, and some photos...


User currently offlineDc863 From Denmark, joined Jun 1999, 1558 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2934 times:

A PA Clipper 747 suffered almost the same fate as the Avianca 707. The PA jumbo was approaching JFK from IAH in 1981 when it was told to hold numerous times due to poor weather and traffic. By the time it landed on 22R several engines flamed out just as they went into reverse. The 747 had to be towed to the terminal.

User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2925 times:

>>>A PA Clipper 747 suffered almost the same fate as the Avianca 707. The PA jumbo was approaching JFK from IAH in 1981 when it was told to hold numerous times due to poor weather and traffic. By the time it landed on 22R several engines flamed out just as they went into reverse. The 747 had to be towed to the terminal.

The way I recall hearing it was that was that it was a XYZ-JFK flight that diverted to EWR, and got vectored all over creation. That far exceeded the mileage than the burn-to-the-alternate was predicated on, and didn't fully account for excessive vectoring. IIRC, one or two engines flamed out just before they landed and the others on landing rollout, and yes, they did need to be towed off the runway. I've got a blurb on it around somewhere in my "well-organized" files...  Big grin


User currently offlineBigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4076 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2802 times:

After going through the report, I see that the plane was gliding at a pretty slow descent and more people probably would have survived if the plane didn't hit a hill.

Also, the plane's engines were fitted with hush kits. Don't they make the plane consume a lotmroe fuel? I bet that would have made the difference between them having enough fuel to make it those last few miles.

-Phil



Phil Derner Jr.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Question About UTA 727 Crash Christmas 2003 posted Mon Sep 12 2005 14:53:04 by NA
Info About 1990 707 Crash At MZJ? posted Fri Apr 25 2003 00:07:20 by Tom in NO
Question About This 707... posted Wed Jul 25 2001 05:43:09 by N757tw
Question About El Al Cargo AMS Crash. posted Sun Jan 29 2006 23:36:52 by Jeremy
Question about CI642 Crash at HKG in 1999 posted Tue Jan 11 2005 05:06:05 by Trex8
Question About 707 Exit Configuration posted Mon Jun 10 2002 11:53:45 by Airsicknessbag
Question About Antrak Air (Ghana) posted Wed Dec 6 2006 14:08:08 by ENU
Question About US Dividend Miles posted Tue Dec 5 2006 09:30:49 by QXatFAT
Question About Intl. Ops At PDX posted Mon Dec 4 2006 16:01:23 by Planenutz
A Question About Route Maps posted Wed Nov 29 2006 21:48:21 by LY777