abletofly From Denmark, joined Nov 2006, 118 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 20729 times:
An Air Iceland flight from KEF to GOH has crashlanded in Nuuk, Greenland at 13.10 local time supposedly due to severe windconditions.
34 PAX were onboard, and should be albe to walk away. http://sermitsiaq.gl/
It's in danish though.
sandroZRH From Switzerland, joined Feb 2007, 3412 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 20628 times:
Quoting na (Reply 1): I think "crash" is a bit too much said. That plane doesnt look like a writeoff.
How would you possibly know that? You can't see from the pictures what kind of damage the righthand side of the aircraft sustained. It might not be a writeoff, but if the wing, propellers and/or fuselage sustained enough damage it could and should certainly be classified as an accident.
rikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1563 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 20279 times:
"...ed had to spend the night in Reykjavik. Dash 8-aircraft ought namely originally have been arrived at Nuuk airport Thursday evening. The landing was canceled because Air Iceland decided that the situation Thursday also was too bad. In Kulusuk early Friday morning, Air Iceland assessed so that the situation was now sufficiently good that the plane could make a safe landing in Nuuk. But then something went wrong Friday morning when landing finally be performed. A passenger on board the aircraftA Dash 8-fly from Air Iceland wrecked this morning around kl.13 in Nuuk airport. On board were 31 passengers and 3 crew members. Everyone escaped without physical blows, when the plane cooed along the runway and ended up stopping across the runway with the front pointing down the slope in a westerly direction. Earlier in the day the plane landed in Kulusuk, when weather and wind conditions in Nuuk airport was assessed as poor to make a landing. Since many of the passengers had veryWhich Sermitsiaq have spoken to describe that immediately came lots of snow into the plane when landing gear collapsed, and he doubts that it havarede flight with his injuries take wing again..."
Translated from Babelfish
WIndsheer? Ice on Runway? Bake failure? Gear Collapse before or after leaving the runway?
Sad to see a "Baby-8" in such a forlorn condition, but glad there were no injuries other than rattled nerves. The airport certainly looks like it is in a (very cold) remote area.
Numero4 From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 260 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 20174 times:
Runway is 3,167 ft long.
'The airport was constructed to serve the largest town in Greenland, yet due to space constraints at the location in a mountainous area and problems with the weather, it is unable to service large airliners. An expansion of the airport is not an acceptable option also due to the approach over the urbanized area of the outlying districts of Nuuk, although the issue continues to be a subject of internal debate in Greenland.'
Of course, this may have nothing to do with the accident. Speaking of which: isn't it automatically an 'accident' when there is damage to the aircraft? I can't remember the official criteria that makes it an accident and not an incident.
HAL9k From Norway, joined Feb 2011, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 19947 times:
Quoting Numero4 (Reply 6): Of course, this may have nothing to do with the accident. Speaking of which: isn't it automatically an 'accident' when there is damage to the aircraft? I can't remember the official criteria that makes it an accident and not an incident.
ACCIDENT and INCIDENT are ICAO Annex 13 definitions:
Let me quote it:
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND RECOMMENDED PRACTICES
AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT AND INCIDENT INVESTIGATION
TO THE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION
CHAPTER 1. DEFINITIONS
When the following terms are used in the Standards and Recommended practices for Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation they have the following meaning:
Accident. An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which:
a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of
- being in the aircraft, or
- direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft, or
- direct exposure to jet blast,
except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew: or
b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which:
- adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and
- would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component,
except for engine failure or damage. when the damage is limited to the engine, its cowlings or accessories: or for damage limited to propellers, wing tips, antennas, tires, brakes, fairings, small dents or puncture holes in the aircraft skin: or
c) the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible.
Incident. An occurrence, other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft which affects or could affect the safety of operation.
Therefore this is clearly an accident.
Moreover I would say that, as seen from the pictures I guess that this aircraft will be written off... apart from the engine propeller (clearly beyond repair due to the contact with the ground) during the off-runway excursion the A/C have probably damaged the RH wing (panels and wingbox), landing gears, engine pylon.... as the fuselage seems completely out of axis from the runway I imagine that the wing impact on the soft ground should have damaged the wing-fuselage attachments... the plane should have left the runway with quite a bit of speed to end up there running on the soft ground and not ditching into it....
As from the marking under the wing it seems to be TF-JMB (s/n 337) that is a 1992 frame... and seen the location I guess nobody would invest much money in it....
F9Animal From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4912 posts, RR: 29
Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 18455 times:
Wow! Seriously? Arguments about an incident or crash... Anyways, I am glad that everyone is okay. From the looks of it, it appears to be a challenging environment. I do like the look of the colors on that Dash 8 by the way.
goblin211 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 1209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 18227 times:
This is certainly an accident b/c there was damage and it was of course unintentional. if you ask me, it's the equivelant of a fender bender. an incident is where the plane can still move and no damage was done at all, just a malfunction if you will.
AvroArrow From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 1045 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 16673 times:
The right side of the aircraft certainly looks worse than the left, damaged prop blades and more serious fuselage damage. It looks like it went off the runway to the right in an uncontrolled manner, possibly due to the extreme winds as alluded to in the first post. Just thinking out loud here, please don't pick on me with the old "its too soon to state facts...yada yada yada" we've all heard it before and this is just a web forum for the discussion of ideas and opinions. Glad that everyone seems to be OK.
Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
It's rare to see such good photographs of an accident scene. It's even rarer to see a shot of an aircraft seconds before the crash itself. I remember looking on Flightaware the schedule for GOH a few weeks ago and at any given day there's only one or two scheduled landings. I guess people there get to watch for these things.
Navigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1142 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 14308 times:
Quoting sandroZRH (Reply 3): How would you possibly know that? You can't see from the pictures what kind of damage the righthand side of the aircraft sustained. It might not be a writeoff, but if the wing, propellers and/or fuselage sustained enough damage it could and should certainly be classified as an accident.
It looks like this can be classified as an accident.
Chiefwip From Greenland, joined Mar 2011, 1 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 13321 times:
I live in Nuuk, and I was at the airport app. 20 minutes after the incident. The airport is situated in an area, where both the sorrundings, and the weather does make flyinfg difficult from time to time. But it has been operation since 1979, and there has never been an accident or an incident like this before.
Interesting note on that behalf, is that Air Greenland who up untill recently was the sole user of the airport, only flew Dash-7 equipment. They themselves aquired 2 second Dash-8 not lang ago. And speculations has been made, regarding the Dash-8´s ability to land on the short strips, in often harsh weather conditions, compared to the Dash-7.