bigphilnyc
Posts: 3874
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2002 10:43 pm

Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:49 am

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.
 
isitsafenow
Posts: 3413
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:22 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:56 am

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.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:57 am

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.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:26 am

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.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6580
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:27 am

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!
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:31 am

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

R.I.P.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
IDAWA
Posts: 281
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:07 pm

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:35 am

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.
 
kellmark
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 12:05 pm

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:40 am

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.
 
757MDE
Posts: 1451
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 11:45 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:03 am

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.
Quisiera volveraamartevolveraquerertevolveratenertecerrrrcaademígirl! Mis ojos lloran porrr ti...
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:11 am

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.

I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:19 am

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...
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
dc863
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 10:52 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:57 pm

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.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Mon Jan 17, 2005 2:07 pm

>>>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
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
bigphilnyc
Posts: 3874
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2002 10:43 pm

RE: Question About Avianca 707 Crash

Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:25 am

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.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AAlaxfan, asqx, Baidu [Spider], BartSimpson, Boeing778X, carljanderson, dozerman, dubaiamman243, Google Adsense [Bot], grbauc, hkcanadaexpat, ikolkyo, jetblastdubai, LAX772LR, laxmia, OSUk1d, steman, TravelsUK and 244 guests