nine4nine
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:36 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
spacecadet wrote:
An767 wrote:
I think crash is a bit of overkill. The aircraft according to news reports the aircraft overshoot the runway during a landing attempt at 09.30am local this morning. No reports of weather at the time


Airplane in the water = crash. Not complicated.

Any time an airplane is not a) in the air, b) standing on its wheels, or at least c) resting (even without landing gear) on a designated clearway, it has crashed.

No different from a car. If your car is in the water, you've crashed.


If my car rolls down the beach into the sea I wouldn't call it a crash.

To my mind, a crash involves both impact and resulting damage to the vehicle or whatever it impacted. It is an onomatopoeic word, for goodness sake! You literally can't have a crash without a "CRASH!"...


If you speed and miss the turn and drive your car off the side of the highway and into the lake you crashed. Wouldn’t you say you crashed your car, or would you tell people you had a highway excursion or a road incident???

And to say it just rolled into the water. Come on.....geez.
717 727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 742 748 752 753 762 763 772 773 DC9 MD80/88/90 DC10 319 320 321 332 333 CS100 CRJ200 Q400 E175 E190 ERJ145 EMB120
 
ScottB
Posts: 6591
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:39 pm

goboeing wrote:
Because the brakes are garbage compared to the Airbus, and the 738 has high approach speeds which obviously does not complement a lack of effective braking.


CS/CO/UA has operated the 737 into TKK several times a week without incident for close to two decades. Plus the incident aircraft didn't even make it to the runway, so it really doesn't seem like aircraft performance on landing was the issue here.

dredgy wrote:
Chuuk/Truk is a popular dive site because of all the sunken tanks and stuff, if they're able to move the plane or allow diving at the sink site, they could definitely spin it as a tourist attraction.


Not so much tanks, but roughly 40 Japanese ships (although some of the cargo vessels were carrying tanks) which were sunk in Truk Lagoon during Operation Hailstone in 1944 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Hailstone). I'm not sure I'd recommend recreational diving through the cabin of a 737 unless the seats were to end up being removed.

aemoreira1981 wrote:
On the issue of load factors---this appears to be a last-minute equipment up-gauge (the route is usually flown with a Fokker F70---and for good reason, TKK and PNI each have only one 6,000-foot runway)


POM-TKK is a bit over 1,200 miles and the nearest alternates for TKK are PNI and GUM. Plus POM-TKK must operate under ETOPS-90 and I'm not sure the F70 has been certified for that. Are you sure it's usually on the F70?
 
groundbird
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:15 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:40 pm

Stop all the hair-splitting folks. This was a UCFIW - UnControlled Flight Into Water
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1679
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:10 pm

nine4nine wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
spacecadet wrote:

Airplane in the water = crash. Not complicated.

Any time an airplane is not a) in the air, b) standing on its wheels, or at least c) resting (even without landing gear) on a designated clearway, it has crashed.

No different from a car. If your car is in the water, you've crashed.


If my car rolls down the beach into the sea I wouldn't call it a crash.

To my mind, a crash involves both impact and resulting damage to the vehicle or whatever it impacted. It is an onomatopoeic word, for goodness sake! You literally can't have a crash without a "CRASH!"...


If you speed and miss the turn and drive your car off the side of the highway and into the lake you crashed. Wouldn’t you say you crashed your car, or would you tell people you had a highway excursion or a road incident???

And to say it just rolled into the water. Come on.....geez.


Why can no-one actually read anything in context these days?

If I miss the turn and drive into a lake AT SPEED then I will IMPACT the water AND WILL HAVE CRASHED.

I do not disagree with that scenario (probably) being a crash!

If I'm trying to park by the sea and roll off a low harbour wall into the water then... I drove into the water. IN THAT CASE I DID NOT CRASH.

And I NEVER SAID this aircraft rolled into the water!!!

Some reading comprehension, please, guys, please!
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
mm320cap
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:35 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:42 pm

groundbird wrote:
Stop all the hair-splitting folks. This was a UCFIW - UnControlled Flight Into Water


Maybe. Could be a CFIT
 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2603
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:25 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
jetero wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:

If my car rolls down the beach into the sea I wouldn't call it a crash.

To my mind, a crash involves both impact and resulting damage to the vehicle or whatever it impacted. It is an onomatopoeic word, for goodness sake! You literally can't have a crash without a "CRASH!"...


You think this plane “rolled into the sea”?


1) I was responding to the idea that EVERY incident involving ANY vehicle not being where it should be is by definition "a crash", according to spacecadet. That is clearly false. He brought up "If your car is in the water, you've crashed", not me. In fact he goes even further and states that if an aircraft is not in the air, at rest or on a designated clearway then it has by definition "crashed".

2) An overrun into the sea would also not be a "crash" in my book unless there was significant water impact and associated damage. To be honest, from the pictures this might indeed fall into the not-crash category. It is, of course, still both an incident and an accident.


The "crash" supporter probably works for an insurance company :) In car insurance, even a small dent inflicted by a low speed brush against another car is called a "collision".....most of us think of a nasty impact and injuries when we hear that word, but insurance companies tend to use it for anything that results in damage to the car......similarly, the obsession with the word "crash", which to most of us, conjures images of an impact and severe damage....
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1679
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:38 pm

asuflyer wrote:
The airport has breakwater barriers on either end. Hitting these would typically split the aircraft into multiple pieces similar to other 737 overruns, AA in KIN and BW in GEO come to mind. It appears they landed straight in the lagoon.


BBC quoted a witness saying it came down short of the runway as well.
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2772
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:58 pm

leleko747 wrote:
I remember reading about a JAL DC-8 which was put back in service after landing in San Francisco Bay. Wonder if the same could happen to this 737? Although the repair must be really pricey.


Is San Francisco Bay fresh water or salt water? That may have something to do with this here. When US Airways Flight 1549 landed in the Hudson River, it was in salt water.

aemoreira1981 wrote:
On the issue of load factors---this appears to be a last-minute equipment up-gauge (the route is usually flown with a Fokker F70---and for good reason, TKK and PNI each have only one 6,000-foot runway)


POM-TKK is a bit over 1,200 miles and the nearest alternates for TKK are PNI and GUM. Plus POM-TKK must operate under ETOPS-90 and I'm not sure the F70 has been certified for that. Are you sure it's usually on the F70?[/quote]

When the route was announced, it was on a Fokker F70 as a triangular route. https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... -dec-2016/
 
rspenmoll
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 2:06 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:24 pm

The Sydney Morning Herald is reporting that the investigation is being handled by the Papua New Guinea Accident Investigation Commission. https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania/png-bound-air-niugini-flight-lands-in-ocean-20180928-p506n0.html Is this correct? I had assumed the NTSB would be the lead agency under the terms of the Compact of Free Association between the United States and Federated States of Micronesia.
 
ScottB
Posts: 6591
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:48 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
When the route was announced, it was on a Fokker F70 as a triangular route. https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... -dec-2016/


It might have been announced that way, but as best I can tell, PX has only been sending 737s to TKK. Marketing might have announced the route as F70 and been overruled by operations.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:53 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
leleko747 wrote:
I remember reading about a JAL DC-8 which was put back in service after landing in San Francisco Bay. Wonder if the same could happen to this 737? Although the repair must be really pricey.


Is San Francisco Bay fresh water or salt water? That may have something to do with this here. When US Airways Flight 1549 landed in the Hudson River, it was in salt water.


Salinity varies. By the Golden Gate, it's darn near seawater - about 80% the salinity of typical ocean water. Down by SFO airport, it drops somewhat (and of course it varies by river flow rate and tides), but it's still usually around half as saline as seawater.
 
Cdydatzigs
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 3:31 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:07 pm

bennett123 wrote:
According to airfleets, all their B737 are leased.


WET-leased, amirite?
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5907
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:10 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Is San Francisco Bay fresh water or salt water? That may have something to do with this here.


I believe that part of SF Bay is officially termed 'brackish'. Might be wrong about that. There was definitely potential for salt water corrosion in the Japan Airlines DC-8.

The big difference between the DC-8 and this B738 was that UA had a major level repair facility for the DC-8 less than five miles from where the DC-8 came to rest in the water. The repairs of the DC-8 reportedly costs more than the original cost of the aircraft. Japan Airlines had a couple issues that don't exist today. It was quicker to repair the aircraft than it was to order and receive a new/replacement aircraft. The number of available used aircraft on the market back then was basically nil. Also, carrier and insurance costs were different back then. Today a hull will be written off at a much lower costs of damage repairs than back then. A replacement B738 can be obtained from a wet lease carrier in just a few days.

Another factor - the heavy lift equipment to get the plane out of the water and the large barges necessary to move the aircraft and cranes to put the plane on the ramp area at SFO were all in place in the port of San Francisco. I doubt such equipment is available to recover and move the Chuuk aircraft closer than Honolulu or Japan. Then it will have to be transported to ?Hong Kong ?Japan. IMHO no way an insurance company is going to pay that much to attempt to recover this aircraft.

Technically possible to recover and return to the air - very likely. Financially likely in today's airline world - very unlikely.

The probably fate of this aircraft is that it will start being stripped in a few days and within a year a typhoon or other tropical storm will move it on the reef and it will break apart.

------------------------
Re the A320 in the Hudson. That aircraft's keel was broken by the excessive G force of the water impact. Sully did a great job putting it down, but hit twice as hard as the A320 manual says he should of landed. IMHO, both Boeing and Airbus all engine out landing scenarios in their manuals are somewhat unrealistic. All three aircraft, the B767, the A330 and the A320 which have landed with no engine power with all passengers and crew safe hit very, very hard. Pilots will maintain all the altitude they know they can land, Then they are going to put the bird down firmly, hard. Sully was not concerned about saving the aircraft, he was concerned about getting it down near rescue boats in one piece large enough for many, maybe most, of the people on board to survive.

This water landing was almost certainly nothing like the ditching in the Hudson. Sully and his first officer knew they were going to land in the Hudson. This crew probably was surprised that they landed in the water. They likely though they were landing on the runway, and were surprised to realize that their flare put them down in the water. The Japan Airlines crew was surprised to find they were in the water.

---------------------------
I've made three landings as a passenger on TKK in 1973 - old shorter runway configuration. Two in the old Continental Micronesia B727 Combi - taking the island hopper from Guam to Honolulu and back. The next time was in a US Navy C-121J. The island hopper had hit a caribou with the nose gear and needed some parts and repairs. The USN squadron I was assigned to Naval Air Station Agana Guam flew the parts into the island. We had to get stopped in less than 3,000 ft because the B727 was still on the runway. We helped the CMI techs repair the aircraft and allow it to clear the runway so we could take off and return to Guam. Unless a person has experienced topical weather, it is something unlike anything we might see in the US or Europe.

I've seen a runway go from CAVOK to visibility of less than 200 ft and back to CAVOK in 15 minutes. Short heavy rains pop-up almost without notice. Sudden microburst high winds that can push an aircraft down into the water early (like DL-191) or even push an aircraft off to the side. I'm sure there are no microburst detectors at this airport, or the others in the region. The cost of installation, operation and repair is too high, and basically because every aircraft crew flying into these airports needs to anticipate that microbursts will ALWAYS be present.

When I watched the Convair 990 crash on Guam in 1973, we saw the lights of the aircraft cross the highway on a normal approach path. The rain and wind blew in, the aircraft touched down almost 600 feet left of the runway, where it had been lined up on the runway just four or five seconds before. (They were in a near zero fuel situation due to some mechanical issues and had to land or crash into populated areas.)

Yes, likely this crew tried to land and got into a situation where they should not have continued the approach. I'd wonder if they had circled waiting on better weather, or if they circled enough to get below the fuel necessary to divert. That has happened out on those islands more than once.
 
avier
Posts: 866
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:38 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:10 pm

goboeing wrote:

Because the brakes are garbage compared to the Airbus, and the 738 has high approach speeds which obviously does not complement a lack of effective braking.

1960s airplane being flown way, way too long in stretched versions.


I've noticed of most of the runway overruns, it's usually been a greater percentage of 737's than the A320 family aircraft. Also, flying on the two types as pax, I see the 737 always has to apply more like a jerk-braking action with reverse thrust applied, whereas on the A320's its always smoother and can do so without the reverse thrust and heavy braking on touchdown.

So yeah, I overall feel more comfortable flying the A320 always, haha . :D
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:19 pm

It was a splash, not a crash.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:49 pm

ATLJRV wrote:
From conversations I have had with a friend in the Lagoon, I understand a team from NZ is enroute to salvage the aircraft. My question is, after a salt water bath, what parts could possibly be salvaged from this bird?

Priority is presumably removing the fuel and other fluids, batteries, cargo, and then other swimming / shipping hazards, plus everything above the low water line.
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:56 pm

leleko747 wrote:
I remember reading about a JAL DC-8 which was put back in service after landing in San Francisco Bay. Wonder if the same could happen to this 737? Although the repair must be really pricey.


That DC-8 was practically brand new, with a years long wait-list on a replacement ... it was cheaper to fix it, believe it or not.

Fixing it required essentially stripping it down to bare metal and replacing everything inside the tube.

You can have a new 737-800 as fast as you can get payment to a storage site, or a leasing company.
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3476
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:01 pm

Cdydatzigs wrote:
bennett123 wrote:
According to airfleets, all their B737 are leased.


WET-leased, amirite?


NICELY done!!! :highfive:
I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
 
ExpatVet
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:35 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:32 pm

spacecadet wrote:
An767 wrote:
I think crash is a bit of overkill. The aircraft according to news reports the aircraft overshoot the runway during a landing attempt at 09.30am local this morning. No reports of weather at the time


Airplane in the water = crash. Not complicated.

Any time an airplane is not a) in the air, b) standing on its wheels, or at least c) resting (even without landing gear) on a designated clearway, it has crashed.

No different from a car. If your car is in the water, you've crashed.


Can we please get this post put into an Airliners.net Hall of Fame, or maybe framed, or bronzed or something?
L101, 733/4/5/8, 741/2/3 (never managed 744!), MD 80/2/3/8/90, MD11, DHC8/3/Q4, E170, E195, 757, 77W, 763/4, Travel Air 2000. A300/310, A319/320/321, A333, ATR-72, probably a few others I forget. Passenger, not pilot, alas! BUD based.
 
vr-hkg
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2001 7:32 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:41 pm

Looking at FlightRadar, it suggests this flight wasn't meant to be in PNI in the first place, and had diverted there the previous night before departing on the accident flight in the AM. It'd be interesting to know why the diversion happened, and whether that may have had a role to play here.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/p2-pxe

Edit: Looking further upthread it seems this is a scheduled route, so likely just a glitch on the part of FlightRadar.
 
LightChop2Chop
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 3:33 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:54 pm

anyone remember the incident with WS at SXM. Might this be a similar sort of occurrence with an much different outcome.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:00 pm

groundbird wrote:
Stop all the hair-splitting folks. This was a UCFIW - UnControlled Flight Into Water


Controlled or uncontrolled, it doesn't really matter. I can't believe we have people disputing whether a plane that went from (1) flying to (2) in the water, with passengers still on board, without at any point stopping, has crashed.

This isn't the silly hypothetical someone said of a car rolling into the water. This plane went from airborne to wet without any opportunity for anyone on board to disembark. For example, for anyone who thinks this wasn't a crash, try completing the following sentences without using the word "crashed" or sounding like an absolute weasel. "First, the plane failed to land on the runway. After that, [ ] lagoon. Then, the people got off."
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 3358
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:10 pm

National did something very much like this at Pensacola in ‘77 or ‘78. I was flying PHIK-PGUA one night about 3am local, listening on HF. Lo, the Island Hopper declares missed approach at Pohnpei due to weather. The usual, “say your intentions” from the OAK OAC was answered with, “we didn’t see anything in heavy rain at 400’, request clearance to ...”. I can’t, but the next Island on the route, I’d guess.


GF
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2772
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:41 pm

Cdydatzigs wrote:
bennett123 wrote:
According to airfleets, all their B737 are leased.


WET-leased, amirite?


Dry-leased. Air Niugini owns all 16 of its Fokker planes. The Boeings are leased as follows:
P2-PXC (B738): Pacific Life Insurance Company (Aviation Capital Group)
P2-PXD (B737): Dubai Aerospace Enterprise
P2-PXV (B763): Icelandair
P2-PXW (B763): Icelandair

If the B38Ms are replacements, FI is likely to keep -PXV for itself and scrap -PXW as all of the FI B763s are GE-powered and -PXV is not terribly high cycle as it was mostly a VIP frame, except for a short-stint with Etihad.
Last edited by aemoreira1981 on Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1068
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:45 pm

litz wrote:
leleko747 wrote:
I remember reading about a JAL DC-8 which was put back in service after landing in San Francisco Bay. Wonder if the same could happen to this 737? Although the repair must be really pricey.


That DC-8 was practically brand new, with a years long wait-list on a replacement ... it was cheaper to fix it, believe it or not.

Fixing it required essentially stripping it down to bare metal and replacing everything inside the tube.

You can have a new 737-800 as fast as you can get payment to a storage site, or a leasing company.

I also doubt that the DC-8 had anywhere near as much electronics in it as this 737. And electronics and salt water don't mix well.
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 8:52 pm

mxaxai wrote:
litz wrote:
leleko747 wrote:
I remember reading about a JAL DC-8 which was put back in service after landing in San Francisco Bay. Wonder if the same could happen to this 737? Although the repair must be really pricey.


That DC-8 was practically brand new, with a years long wait-list on a replacement ... it was cheaper to fix it, believe it or not.

Fixing it required essentially stripping it down to bare metal and replacing everything inside the tube.

You can have a new 737-800 as fast as you can get payment to a storage site, or a leasing company.

I also doubt that the DC-8 had anywhere near as much electronics in it as this 737. And electronics and salt water don't mix well.


Well, either way, you're still stripping the airplane down to an empty tube, and building it back out with all new components.

And I'd hazard a guess that all those fancy electronics that power a 737NG are a tad bit more expensive than the stuff the powers the steam gauges in a DC-8 of that vintage.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6486
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Fri Sep 28, 2018 9:03 pm

Flighty wrote:
It was a splash, not a crash.

Fortunately, it was too far northeast to be affected by the tsunami in Sulawesi...else it might have been washed upland on the airfield...or crushed somewhere by rocks ashore.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Blankbarcode
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:10 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 9:49 am

Looking at the images, I've wondered something. How is one supposed to open the main doors with the pressure of water preventing an outwards force? Worst thing I can imagine is them initially going inwards, then getting stuck as water pours in. I'd assume the slides would help, but they're not actually deployed here. I understand the aircraft must have partially sunk after the doors were opened, but I'm sure it doesn't always seem possible.

Is there anyone with training that knows about this?
 
User avatar
AlexA340B777
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:37 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:43 pm

http://www.airniugini.com.pg

„...Additionally as of 12:30pm today, we are unable to account for a single male passenger and are working with the local authorities, hospitals and investigators to locate this passenger who was aboard our flight PX 073. Initial on scene reports had indicated that all passengers and crew had been safely evacuated from the aircraft. The airline confirms that all other passengers and crew have been accounted for. ...“

Lets hope that passenger is OK.
6 continents, 85 countries, 712 flights, 88 airlines, 37 aircraft types
 
juliuswong
Moderator
Posts: 1633
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:06 pm

leleko747 wrote:
I remember reading about a JAL DC-8 which was put back in service after landing in San Francisco Bay. Wonder if the same could happen to this 737? Although the repair must be really pricey.

With cheap lease revolving B737NG nowadays, they are better off leasing another one rather than fixing this old bird. I don't think anything is salvageable, maybe the fuselage can be made into cabin trainer, cockpit for amusement park.
- Life is a journey, travel it well -
 
asuflyer
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:48 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 2:45 pm

https://youtu.be/qNZP8hpByhY

Incredible video of US navy approaching the aircraft. Compared with other evacuations they seem slow getting out of the aircraft. Then again if the pax are not swimmers I can understand why.
 
danman132x
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:02 pm

Pretty good video, also surprised how slow they are getting out. Unless they are all exiting the port side. Looks as if the whole rear of the plane is filled with water, id be getting out for sure. Hope they find the missing person.
 
Qantas737
Posts: 744
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:34 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:42 pm

Amazing footage. That video also shows what looks like some pretty extensive damage to the fuselage midway between the overwing exits and rear door.
 
nikeherc
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:40 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:44 pm

Blankbarcode wrote:
Looking at the images, I've wondered something. How is one supposed to open the main doors with the pressure of water preventing an outwards force? Worst thing I can imagine is them initially going inwards, then getting stuck as water pours in. I'd assume the slides would help, but they're not actually deployed here. I understand the aircraft must have partially sunk after the doors were opened, but I'm sure it doesn't always seem possible.

Is there anyone with training that knows about this?


Airliner doors are plugs. They move in before they move out. For narrow bodies like the 737 and DC-9, they twist and pivot to open out.
DC6 to 777 and most things in between
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:49 pm

If the PTKK Rwy04 RNAV approach had been set up properly in the FMC and flown in LNAV/VNAV/AP when arriving at FIGBI IAF and thereafter, and the MCP altitude reset to Rwy04 TCH (around) 60 ft MSL at or just before crossing FIGBI (at 2,500 ft MSL), this accident should not have happened. And with proper FMC setup, Rwy04 is displayed clearly on the ND, along with FD lateral and vertical guidance provided on the PFD. In addition, the EGPWS should have been alarming the low altitude situation in an undershoot evolution, triggering the need for a go around. If there may have been a wind shear event, although not indicated in any METARS, that would have triggered a WS warning, and a go around should have occurred. If the VASI was OOS as some note, with a proper RNAV approach set up, that is not a significant variable.

Don’t even want to think about potentially tucking under clouds to a very low altitude and attempting a visual approach as some suggest.

Thank God this did not end up much more serious than what it was, and hope that the missing person from the manifest is found and alive.

All just my opinion.
 
AVB
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:43 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:50 pm

Emergency procedure for ditching in 737 is this:

- Fit life jacket, direct passengers to fit life jackets

- Don't open rear doors, disarm doors as aircraft will be tail heavy.

- Open overwing exits

- Remove life raft from ceiling

- Use able bodied passengers to assit placing life raft outside both overwing exits

- Attach liferaft to fixure of aircraft prior to inflating life raft

- Inflate life raft

- Direct passenger into life raft to hold moring line close to exit

- Evacuate passengers into life raft

- Inflate life jacket outside

And at Doors 1:

- Fit life jacket and direct passengers to fit life jacket

- Disarm doors (because they’re not slide rafts)

- Open doors

- Remove life raft from ceiling

- Attach moring line to aircraft fixure

- Deploy, inflate life raft

- Direct able bodied passenger into raft to hold moring line and bringing raft close to the door

- Evacuate passengers

- Inflate life jacket only once outside

... A report quoting a passenger suggests crew panicked.
 
citationjet
Posts: 2492
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:58 pm

Air Niugini has issued a press release that says one male passenger is unaccounted.

"Additionally as of 12:30pm today, we are unable to account for a single male passenger and are working with the local authorities, hospitals and investigators to locate this passenger who was aboard our flight PX 073. Initial on scene reports had indicated that all passengers and crew had been safely evacuated from the aircraft. The airline confirms that all other passengers and crew have been accounted for."

https://airniugini.com.pg/
Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 3845
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 4:08 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
jetero wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:

If my car rolls down the beach into the sea I wouldn't call it a crash.

To my mind, a crash involves both impact and resulting damage to the vehicle or whatever it impacted. It is an onomatopoeic word, for goodness sake! You literally can't have a crash without a "CRASH!"...


You think this plane “rolled into the sea”?


1) I was responding to the idea that EVERY incident involving ANY vehicle not being where it should be is by definition "a crash", according to spacecadet. That is clearly false. He brought up "If your car is in the water, you've crashed", not me. In fact he goes even further and states that if an aircraft is not in the air, at rest or on a designated clearway then it has by definition "crashed".

2) An overrun into the sea would also not be a "crash" in my book unless there was significant water impact and associated damage. To be honest, from the pictures this might indeed fall into the not-crash category. It is, of course, still both an incident and an accident.


An uncommanded water landing?

They didn't land where they wanted to and the airplane is under 100 feet of water. How is this not a crash?
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
AVB
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:43 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 4:17 pm

The word ‘crash’ is too subjective which is why it’s not used in accident reporting. The correct terminology is ‘accident’ or ‘incident ‘. What happend to PX073 is an accident. Maybe best we don’t use the word ‘crash’ because it means different things to different people.
 
hiflyeras
Posts: 2005
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 6:22 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Glad everyone is ok
That is indeed not many, but the 11 crew seems like an overkill. According to regulations, it should be 1 stewardess on 50 passengers, right? So 2 pilots and 4 stewardesses = 6 crew.


The term 'stewardess' was retired decades ago. And yes, very thankful that everyone was okay except the one still missing. I'm sure this will be studied and lessons learned from.
 
AirCanada777X
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:02 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 6:46 pm

By SomebodyInTLS's definition of a crash, this is a crash, as the aircraft is damaged beyond repair. http://aviation-safety.net/database/rec ... 20180928-0. Why are people arguing over whether this is a crash or not?
 
travaz
Posts: 845
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 1:03 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 8:33 pm

goboeing wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
blandy62 wrote:

what is the problem with a 738 at TKK? The island hopper lands there everyday with a 738. As for the larger number of crew, this is most likely because of the hopping between the island, extra pilots, possibly technical people on board


I’m also confused why the 737 would be a problem for this airport and also why this would cause them to have any interest in cancelling their 737MAX order and buying the A321neo. There are used 737s available on the market now.


Because the brakes are garbage compared to the Airbus, and the 738 has high approach speeds which obviously does not complement a lack of effective braking.

1960s airplane being flown way, way too long in stretched versions.


Oh Boy don't tell that to WN at MDW! They might have to abandon MDW
 
beechnut
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:27 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 8:51 pm

The term "crash" isn't really used in aviation. Transport Canada divides reportable occurrences into "accidents" and "incidents". The definition of accident includes loss of life or serious injury, or major damage to the aircraft: "the aircraft sustains structural failure or damage that adversely affects the aircraft's structural strength, performance or flight characteristics and would normally require major repair or replacement of any affected component". In the case of nearly full immersion on water, most certainly major repairs will be required, perhaps even a hull loss.

Even if there wasn't loss of life, this would be most definitely be classified as an accident.

I don't understand why people want to minimize the seriousness of this occurence. It was an accident, period.

Beech
 
kiowa
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 11:02 pm

joeblow10 wrote:
Looks like he’s off the end of the runway? Overrun?

I know the one time I took the island hopper years ago Chuuk was the hardest landing. 6000 ft isn’t horrible but it looks with the weather it have been wet



John Wayne, Orange County, Santa Ana airport only has a 5700 foot runway and I have seen 767s land there. Maui is less than 7000 feet. Both airports have lots of traffic and few mishaps.
 
Q
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2000 10:29 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sat Sep 29, 2018 11:56 pm

Maybe they forgot to change new fresh tires! Tires may be worn out. If worn out tires it will not grip on wet runway enough to slow down.

Q
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5228
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sun Sep 30, 2018 8:59 am

Q wrote:
Maybe they forgot to change new fresh tires! Tires may be worn out. If worn out tires it will not grip on wet runway enough to slow down.

Q

Except in this case they didn’t overshoot due to insufficient braking, they undershot and arrived in the water prior to reaching the runway.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1334
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sun Sep 30, 2018 2:40 pm

From the article linked in the OP:

[quote]Eight people were hospitalized as of 4 p.m., according to Chuuk State Hospital Chief Nurse Irene Nero. Nero said all the patients are males and four of them will need to be evacuated because of head injuries, spinal cord injuries and hip fractures. ... There were reports of people with broken legs and at least one person with a broken arm Colson said after visiting the local hospital.[\quote]

If a plane stops flying in a manner that produces those injuries, I think it’s not credible to say it didn’t crash.
 
kiowa
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sun Sep 30, 2018 2:53 pm

travaz wrote:
goboeing wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:

I’m also confused why the 737 would be a problem for this airport and also why this would cause them to have any interest in cancelling their 737MAX order and buying the A321neo. There are used 737s available on the market now.


Because the brakes are garbage compared to the Airbus, and the 738 has high approach speeds which obviously does not complement a lack of effective braking.

1960s airplane being flown way, way too long in stretched versions.


Oh Boy don't tell that to WN at MDW! They might have to abandon MDW


Southwest 1248 crash at MDW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9B_f8XNThcA

Southwest calls it an "incident". It looked like a crash to me. One child died.
 
AVB
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:43 pm

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:58 pm

Well of course SouthWest is going to call it an incident. Obviously they want to protect their brand and there’s no legislation making them call it something else.

I think we’ve already ascertained the difference between an incident, accident and the highly subjective word ‘crash’.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1068
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Plane Crash at TKK (Chuuk, FSM) - Air Niugini

Sun Sep 30, 2018 6:55 pm

citationjet wrote:
Air Niugini has issued a press release that says one male passenger is unaccounted.

"Additionally as of 12:30pm today, we are unable to account for a single male passenger and are working with the local authorities, hospitals and investigators to locate this passenger who was aboard our flight PX 073. Initial on scene reports had indicated that all passengers and crew had been safely evacuated from the aircraft. The airline confirms that all other passengers and crew have been accounted for."

https://airniugini.com.pg/

The entry at aviation-safety.net says that US Navy seals searched the submerged fuselage and found nobody. The passenger also was reportedly spotted on a boat. So he might be fine.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos