Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 2:38 pm

Emirates773ER wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Emirates773ER wrote:

Sindh's Education Minister telling us about a lack of confidence is the height of hypocrisy. PIA has been destroyed by the civilian authorities that have run this airline since the 90's. Majority of the people given positions are not even degree holders to begin with. Arshad Malik was brought in to repair the airlines image and sort out the unions who have been black mailing PIA for decades. He has done a valiant job by turning it into a profiting entity to start with. This plane crash inquiry is also expected to bring further scrutiny on people within the organization who are thoroughly unskilled for the rules they occupy.

And secondly, Pakistan is not a military state. The past civilian governments have brought pakistan onto its haunches and now the current government of Imran Khan is helping to clean out the mess with the help of the army to get Pakistan on track.

Without going off topic, can the PM imran Khan sack the army chief ? If not then he is in power at the mercy of the army.
But this topic is on the independence of the crash enquiry. A civilian aircraft has crashed, but the constituted enquiry committee is dominated by defense guys ? This does not happen anywhere in the world.
Are the airforce guys more familiar with the Airbus than the civilians who are operating them day in day out ? Their is no logic in stacking it full of defense personnel.
And suddenly after a week , the news comes out that the CVR is not found. It's all unbelievable. Typical setup to absolve the favorites of any culpability and to probably save the acting PIA ceo(a serving airforce guy) neck.


Can Imran Khan sack the army chief? Yes he can. Conspiracy theories of the army running Imran Khan have long been running with zero credibility. The army chief is symbolic position that heads the establishment. He is not a dictator.

Was it a civilian pilot who operated the airbus day in and day out while crashing it? PIA is well known to harbor people without any degrees or qualifications. Should they be put in charge of this investigation? Airbus will be taking part in the investigation themselves, do you expect the CEO of PIA to twist airbus's hand to alter the report?

The idea of any investigation team is to have investigative experience which you will not find within PIA or any other Pakistani CAA body, proof being no accident report has ever been made public. The CEO of PIA has no reason to hide the CVR. He is the one who has been sacking PIA officials in the first place for mis-conduct. Shocking that some how the very guy who is turning PIA around is now culprit?

The downing of PIA gives more power to the CEO than ever before to bring in sweeping changes. He was recently re-instated by the supreme court after the high court removed him from the post based on false allegations by PIA unions.


See the crash report for EgyptAir 990.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
OldB747Driver
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:40 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 5:52 pm

A330freak wrote:
Flightradar24 has been able to analyse extended mode S data to produce indicated Airspeed information
Image
https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/paki ... r-karachi/

Thank you for posting this information - while it may not be "dead balls on" it illustrates the most likely scenario; this one reads very consistently:

  • Altitude ~10,000 ft at 30:23 and at ~1,500 at 33:30 indicates a VERY steep descent ( the math says ~8,500 ft in ~3 min = ~2800 average rate of descent)
  • This clearly establishes the crew was too high and ultimately too fast to make a stabilized approach without intervention of some sort - which was not only recognized by the ATC controller, but also attempted to correct by giving a vector to resolve; unfortunately the clearance was declined by the crew, along with their affirmation that they were aware and implied they had the unusually fast and steep descent under control.
  • You can see the small level-offs in the descent where they attempted to slow the aircraft, ostensibly in attempting to comply with airspeed limitations while applying increasing drag configuration changes (presumably flaps) further indicating crew awareness.
  • The airspeed near the bottom of the curve (the "flare") never approaches anything reasonable for the aircraft type which allows not only for a prolonged flare (2,000 ft +) but enough energy, even after crew either recognized their speed would not allow a stop on the runway (anticipating spoilers and landing gear braking) or they were sitting lower than normal and one of the crew recognized the gear was not extended, to go around.
  • The go-around must have been initiated while there was positive engine control - they not only climbed out rapidly, but the airspeed was increasing rapidly as well - the next tell-tale sign on this graph is that as the speed approached 250 KIAS, the thrust lever position was likely reduced, which is followed by rapid drop in airspeed and necessary leveling out of the aircraft, i.e. the engine was likely only capable of running at a high thrust setting due to loss of instrumentation necessary to configure the engine controls for proper function at reduced thrust settings, which ultimately resulted in the engines flaming out at a thrust setting less than high thrust - or after the deterioration of power to a point that re-establishing high thrust was very difficult at best by a crew understanding this problem.

The CVR "disappearing" after being announced as found and stipulating that only the "casing" had been found should tell anyone familiar with the politics of this type of situation that the CVR is predicted to have some very incriminating information, NOT that it somehow "popped" out of its casing... it's a disservice to all traveling public when accident investigations are subject to politics and should not be tolerated (see TWA800).
 
User avatar
Blimpie
Posts: 310
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 3:48 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 8:33 pm

I do not see the an issue with cameras in the cockpit. The FDR can tell you how something thing happens, the CVR can explain why certain things events occurred, an in-camera monitoring system to show a lot more context to the why than a CVR can.

B737MAX wrote:
Heinkel wrote:
LABA wrote:
Safety v/s privacy - that's all that there is to it. There is no problem in having transit buses with 10 cameras inside and yet in the isolated environment of an airplane 36000 feet in the air, privacy is a concern?


There is no right on privacy, when a pilot / flight crew crashes an airliner and kills pax and people on the ground.

Everything, which is technically possible should be done to help the investigation and to avoid such accidents and incidents in future.

The era of the Sky Gods should be over.


I also believe a camera should be recording you while driving your car. For the same reasons...


That's an interesting viewpoint. I'm sure law enforcement would not particularly enjoy the extra work of having to view all those cabin cams; on the other hand, I'm sure the insurance company wouldn't mind paying extra staff to go overall that footage so they can deny a claim. Not really convinced by your argument though.


zeke wrote:
Heinkel wrote:

There is no right on privacy, when a pilot / flight crew crashes an airliner and kills pax and people on the ground.

Everything, which is technically possible should be done to help the investigation and to avoid such accidents and incidents in future.

The era of the Sky Gods should be over.


This comment is not correct. Aircraft are not public property, there is every expectation for privacy for anyone onboard.

The technical reality is that a video camera in a cockpit is not going to be effective. The lighting conditions are not consistent, and there is not a lot you can see for example if a camera placed on the back wall facing the front, you are not going to pickup any detail on the screens or pilot controls.


Sorry Zeke, while I value much of your input on various topics, your statement is not exactly 100% accurate either. While aircraft are not publicly owned, they are publicly accessible. To state there is an expectation of privacy in an aircraft is no more valid than for one to claim that they have an expectation of privacy in a shopping mall, which too is also privately owned property, that is publicly accessible. To use the argument that an aircraft is private property is no more valid that stating a private taxicab, or a condo that is privately owned, there for let's say ADA is not applicable, or in this case right to privacy is absurd. As long as said facilities are open to the public, it does not matter under US law if it is publicly or privately owned.
Now get the hell off of my lawn your dang kids!
 
User avatar
Gonzalo
Posts: 1855
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 9:21 pm

This is the 23855th time we discuss the camera in the cockpit issue here. It was already demonstrated to exhaustion that the DFDR recording hundreds of parameters and actions taken by crews is much more efficient and accurate than any HD camera you can have. It will be a non sense to waste money and time putting cameras to film the same actions or parameters that you can have with better accuracy from the DFDR and CVR. Not to mention that, if the aircraft crashes, the chances of the camera’s memory to survive is almost zero compared with the current recorders. The only ones happy with cameras in the cockpit will be some sensationalist newspapers who will publish the “exact moment of the crash” in the front page.

Rgds.
G.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / FH-227 / A318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789 / B788 / A343 / ATR72-600
 
889091
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:56 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 9:33 pm

Blimpie wrote:
I do not see the an issue with cameras in the cockpit. The FDR can tell you how something thing happens, the CVR can explain why certain things events occurred, an in-camera monitoring system to show a lot more context to the why than a CVR can.

B737MAX wrote:
Heinkel wrote:

There is no right on privacy, when a pilot / flight crew crashes an airliner and kills pax and people on the ground.

Everything, which is technically possible should be done to help the investigation and to avoid such accidents and incidents in future.

The era of the Sky Gods should be over.


I also believe a camera should be recording you while driving your car. For the same reasons...


That's an interesting viewpoint. I'm sure law enforcement would not particularly enjoy the extra work of having to view all those cabin cams; on the other hand, I'm sure the insurance company wouldn't mind paying extra staff to go overall that footage so they can deny a claim. Not really convinced by your argument though.


zeke wrote:
Heinkel wrote:

There is no right on privacy, when a pilot / flight crew crashes an airliner and kills pax and people on the ground.

Everything, which is technically possible should be done to help the investigation and to avoid such accidents and incidents in future.

The era of the Sky Gods should be over.


This comment is not correct. Aircraft are not public property, there is every expectation for privacy for anyone onboard.

The technical reality is that a video camera in a cockpit is not going to be effective. The lighting conditions are not consistent, and there is not a lot you can see for example if a camera placed on the back wall facing the front, you are not going to pickup any detail on the screens or pilot controls.


Sorry Zeke, while I value much of your input on various topics, your statement is not exactly 100% accurate either. While aircraft are not publicly owned, they are publicly accessible. To state there is an expectation of privacy in an aircraft is no more valid than for one to claim that they have an expectation of privacy in a shopping mall, which too is also privately owned property, that is publicly accessible. To use the argument that an aircraft is private property is no more valid that stating a private taxicab, or a condo that is privately owned, there for let's say ADA is not applicable, or in this case right to privacy is absurd. As long as said facilities are open to the public, it does not matter under US law if it is publicly or privately owned.


We're slewing off topic a bit here, but .....

Where will the streamed cam data be stored? Will the data be GDPR compliant for European registered aircraft?

It's just cracking open a can of worms. As Starlionblue mentioned further upthread, there's progress being made, albeit at a snail's pace when it relates to this matter.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14978
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 9:34 pm

Blimpie wrote:
Sorry Zeke, while I value much of your input on various topics, your statement is not exactly 100% accurate either. While aircraft are not publicly owned, they are publicly accessible. To state there is an expectation of privacy in an aircraft is no more valid than for one to claim that they have an expectation of privacy in a shopping mall, which too is also privately owned property, that is publicly accessible. To use the argument that an aircraft is private property is no more valid that stating a private taxicab, or a condo that is privately owned, there for let's say ADA is not applicable, or in this case right to privacy is absurd. As long as said facilities are open to the public, it does not matter under US law if it is publicly or privately owned.


A member of the public cannot access any aircraft (tail number) they desire. A passenger purchased a ticket, and that ticket does not buy them access to a specific aircraft (tail number), just the flight number.

So no, aircraft are not publicly accessible. Members of the public can purchase tickets for a flight number, not to access a particular aircraft.

A passenger has no real idea of which aircraft (is tail number) they will get on, and even after buying a ticket they can still be refused carriage, stopped from entering, or even removed. That is buying a ticket still does guarantee access for a flight.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4414
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 10:53 pm

SpoonNZ wrote:
B737MAX wrote:

I also believe a camera should be recording you while driving your car. For the same reasons...

Pretty commonplace around the world in taxis and buses now, right?


Yes. I operate a bus and have cameras all over it. I think this would be a huge help. Yes, the black boxes give alot of information, but there is always the big question... WTF were they doing? So many bus and truck crashes revealed the drivers were busy texting or falling asleep. How many crashes has left the ultimate question of, "medical issue?" Companies should want these flight decks outfitted with cameras.

Any preliminary reports out yet on this crash?
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
maint123
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 11:14 pm

So if the cvr has been recovered , can the Airbus team release the unedited recording independently ? Or it has to kowtow to the Pakistani authorities and is bound by some agreement to never release information unless okd by Pakistan ?
 
889091
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:56 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 11:20 pm

maint123 wrote:
So if the cvr has been recovered , can the Airbus team release the unedited recording independently ? Or it has to kowtow to the Pakistani authorities and is bound by some agreement to never release information unless okd by Pakistan ?


As a rule of thumb, CVR recordings are never released by any investigative body who is investigating the accident. Unwritten rule, out of respect for the deceased. Transcripts will be released in due course, but actual recordings, never.
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 11:41 pm

889091 wrote:
maint123 wrote:
So if the cvr has been recovered , can the Airbus team release the unedited recording independently ? Or it has to kowtow to the Pakistani authorities and is bound by some agreement to never release information unless okd by Pakistan ?


As a rule of thumb, CVR recordings are never released by any investigative body who is investigating the accident. Unwritten rule, out of respect for the deceased. Transcripts will be released in due course, but actual recordings, never.


Never say never.....

The CVR recordings were released publically until the Delta 727 crash in Dallas. I seem to recall that many people took exception to the fact that the CVR recording was being used to slander the pilots. Now, that being said, if you listen to what the crew were talking about, they deserved to be slandered. Also, the Western Airlines DC-10 crash in Mexico City was and is widely available on the internet:

https://youtu.be/d0DtWDNzf3Y?t=48
My other car is an A320-200
 
User avatar
SuseJ772
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:13 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 11:57 pm

zeke wrote:
Blimpie wrote:
Sorry Zeke, while I value much of your input on various topics, your statement is not exactly 100% accurate either. While aircraft are not publicly owned, they are publicly accessible. To state there is an expectation of privacy in an aircraft is no more valid than for one to claim that they have an expectation of privacy in a shopping mall, which too is also privately owned property, that is publicly accessible. To use the argument that an aircraft is private property is no more valid that stating a private taxicab, or a condo that is privately owned, there for let's say ADA is not applicable, or in this case right to privacy is absurd. As long as said facilities are open to the public, it does not matter under US law if it is publicly or privately owned.


A member of the public cannot access any aircraft (tail number) they desire. A passenger purchased a ticket, and that ticket does not buy them access to a specific aircraft (tail number), just the flight number.

So no, aircraft are not publicly accessible. Members of the public can purchase tickets for a flight number, not to access a particular aircraft.

A passenger has no real idea of which aircraft (is tail number) they will get on, and even after buying a ticket they can still be refused carriage, stopped from entering, or even removed. That is buying a ticket still does guarantee access for a flight.


Same could be said for taxis and Ubers or Subways. Like Blimpie, I respect you very much and agree greatly with you on most things. This is just not one of them.
Currently at PIE, requesting FWA >> >>
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2124
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Fri May 29, 2020 11:59 pm

Gonzalo wrote:
This is the 23855th time we discuss the camera in the cockpit issue here. It was already demonstrated to exhaustion that the DFDR recording hundreds of parameters and actions taken by crews is much more efficient and accurate than any HD camera you can have.
Agreed. But it's also a strawman; the camera would be in addition to the DFDR, to pick up subtleties not revealed by the DFDR.

Gonzalo wrote:
It will be a non sense to waste money and time putting cameras to film the same actions or parameters that you can have with better accuracy from the DFDR and CVR.
see above.
Gonzalo wrote:
Not to mention that, if the aircraft crashes, the chances of the camera’s memory to survive is almost zero compared with the current recorders.
And with one sweeping comment, you have somehow accounted for all aircraft crashes? Really?
It may have escaped your attention, but I'm reading reports that two live and very fragile human beings survived Pakistan PK8303, so I'd say there was at least some chance a camera flash card would have survived this impact too.
I will agree that a simple surface mounted cockpit camera would probably not survive a number of recent high profile crashes (e.g. ET302), but if it helps us in just 33% of cases, I'll take that.

zeke wrote:
….
Hell, I don't even know where to start!
Perhaps it is best if I just leave it at that.... :white:
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
Saintor
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 1:58 am

Aesma wrote:
Saintor wrote:
This youtube channel insinuates that the gear lever was actually lowered. They claim to rely on official statements and eye witnesses. I wonder where they took that.

At about 4m.
https://youtu.be/oUOn6FrDPwg?t=240


The plane crashed with the landing gear down, I didn't see any doubt about that, so yes the lever would be down.

What we'd want to be sure about is the state of the lever just before the first landing attempt, but that will have to wait for the deciphering of the recorders.


The video claims that the lever was down before the first attempt.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 3:32 am

FlightRadar24 has decoded more of the Mode S data. Now includes airspeed and vertical speed data.

You can see how the airspeed during the first approach is much higher than normal. However still well below Vlo and Vle.

Random musings:
- Seems a bit "sloppy" to accelerate all the way back up to 250 knots after the go-around, especially given the damage. That would be the managed speed target (barring any speed constraints) so it makes sense, but since they would have known they were coming right back, selecting 210-220 kt would seem more appropriate.
- Vertical speed topped out around -7000 fpm in the final part of the first approach. Holy crap!


Image


Source: https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/paki ... r-karachi/
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 3:52 am

Gonzalo wrote:
This is the 23855th time we discuss the camera in the cockpit issue here. It was already demonstrated to exhaustion that the DFDR recording hundreds of parameters and actions taken by crews is much more efficient and accurate than any HD camera you can have. It will be a non sense to waste money and time putting cameras to film the same actions or parameters that you can have with better accuracy from the DFDR and CVR. Not to mention that, if the aircraft crashes, the chances of the camera’s memory to survive is almost zero compared with the current recorders. The only ones happy with cameras in the cockpit will be some sensationalist newspapers who will publish the “exact moment of the crash” in the front page.

Rgds.
G.


The camera’s memory would not be an issue I think.

If such a system is implemented, it seems given that the actual recording would be stored in a recorder similar to the CVR and DFDR. Otherwise the whole exercise would be pointless.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 4:34 am

zeke wrote:
Blimpie wrote:
Sorry Zeke, while I value much of your input on various topics, your statement is not exactly 100% accurate either. While aircraft are not publicly owned, they are publicly accessible. To state there is an expectation of privacy in an aircraft is no more valid than for one to claim that they have an expectation of privacy in a shopping mall, which too is also privately owned property, that is publicly accessible. To use the argument that an aircraft is private property is no more valid that stating a private taxicab, or a condo that is privately owned, there for let's say ADA is not applicable, or in this case right to privacy is absurd. As long as said facilities are open to the public, it does not matter under US law if it is publicly or privately owned.


A member of the public cannot access any aircraft (tail number) they desire. A passenger purchased a ticket, and that ticket does not buy them access to a specific aircraft (tail number), just the flight number.

So no, aircraft are not publicly accessible. Members of the public can purchase tickets for a flight number, not to access a particular aircraft.

A passenger has no real idea of which aircraft (is tail number) they will get on, and even after buying a ticket they can still be refused carriage, stopped from entering, or even removed. That is buying a ticket still does guarantee access for a flight.


This has nothing to do with anything. You have to pay to access an Uber, a sporting event, the subway, a bus etc.

An aircraft is publicly accessible in exactly the same way. And they all have cameras.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
OldB747Driver
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:40 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 4:43 am

Starlionblue wrote:
Random musings:
- Seems a bit "sloppy" to accelerate all the way back up to 250 knots after the go-around, especially given the damage. That would be the managed speed target (barring any speed constraints) so it makes sense, but since they would have known they were coming right back, selecting 210-220 kt would seem more appropriate.


Probably not too much of a stretch to presume that after both the recognition of what they had just done, combined with a growing list of caution and warning messages from the damage done on the bottom of the engines, "sloppy" = highly distracted; it's already evident they were well behind the aircraft...
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 8:27 am

OldB747Driver wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
Random musings:
- Seems a bit "sloppy" to accelerate all the way back up to 250 knots after the go-around, especially given the damage. That would be the managed speed target (barring any speed constraints) so it makes sense, but since they would have known they were coming right back, selecting 210-220 kt would seem more appropriate.


Probably not too much of a stretch to presume that after both the recognition of what they had just done, combined with a growing list of caution and warning messages from the damage done on the bottom of the engines, "sloppy" = highly distracted; it's already evident they were well behind the aircraft...


Yep. That tracks.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14978
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 8:52 am

Antarius wrote:
This has nothing to do with anything. You have to pay to access an Uber, a sporting event, the subway, a bus etc.

An aircraft is publicly accessible in exactly the same way. And they all have cameras.


The examples you gave are not the same, I agree that a stadium and subway is accessible to the public, a member of the public know exactly what they are accessing and how to access it.

With Uber and other ride-hailing companies passengers do not have direct access to a particular vehicle, they book a service and Uber assigns a vehicle. This is unlike a taxi where a passenger can directly hail and access the taxi of their choice.

No member from the public can access any airliner they desire, all a member of the public can do is purchase a ticket. With that ticket they are purchasing a service, not access to a particular aircraft.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11104
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 11:19 am

BEA says they will begin work on reading both CVR and FDR in Paris on 2 June. Pakistan officials will also attend in Paris to continue investigation

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-paki ... SKBN2360FC
Forum Moderator
 
bennett123
Posts: 9625
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 11:30 am

So they do have the CVR after all.
 
User avatar
glideslope
Posts: 1609
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 8:06 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 11:39 am

OldB747Driver wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
Random musings:
- Seems a bit "sloppy" to accelerate all the way back up to 250 knots after the go-around, especially given the damage. That would be the managed speed target (barring any speed constraints) so it makes sense, but since they would have known they were coming right back, selecting 210-220 kt would seem more appropriate.


Probably not too much of a stretch to presume that after both the recognition of what they had just done, combined with a growing list of caution and warning messages from the damage done on the bottom of the engines, "sloppy" = highly distracted; it's already evident they were well behind the aircraft...


Most likely, although while it's looking highly unlikely, they may have sensed the impending engine outs and were also trying to trade speed for altitude prior to failure. Still unbelievable how a crew could get so behind in an event. The monotone nature of their communications still concerns me the most. 7,000' fps decent, no problem, gear not deploying, no problem, scrape the nacelles 3x and still try a go around , no problem, maday call at 500' going into the ground, no problem. Very, very, odd.
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 2:43 pm

zeke wrote:
Antarius wrote:
This has nothing to do with anything. You have to pay to access an Uber, a sporting event, the subway, a bus etc.

An aircraft is publicly accessible in exactly the same way. And they all have cameras.


The examples you gave are not the same, I agree that a stadium and subway is accessible to the public, a member of the public know exactly what they are accessing and how to access it.

With Uber and other ride-hailing companies passengers do not have direct access to a particular vehicle, they book a service and Uber assigns a vehicle. This is unlike a taxi where a passenger can directly hail and access the taxi of their choice.

No member from the public can access any airliner they desire, all a member of the public can do is purchase a ticket. With that ticket they are purchasing a service, not access to a particular aircraft.


And how does this change the ability to have a camera?

And uber is exactly like an air ticket. You book a service through a provider. They assign the equipment. You aren't purchasing access to a specific car.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1587
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 2:56 pm

Saintor wrote:
Aesma wrote:
Saintor wrote:
This youtube channel insinuates that the gear lever was actually lowered. They claim to rely on official statements and eye witnesses. I wonder where they took that.

At about 4m.
https://youtu.be/oUOn6FrDPwg?t=240


The plane crashed with the landing gear down, I didn't see any doubt about that, so yes the lever would be down.

What we'd want to be sure about is the state of the lever just before the first landing attempt, but that will have to wait for the deciphering of the recorders.


The video claims that the lever was down before the first attempt.


The prevailing thought at the time the video was made was that the warning heard on the audio was related to the landing gear.
That now seems unlikely. Now seems more likely to be a speed related warning.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13031
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 3:17 pm

Blimpie wrote:
That's an interesting viewpoint. I'm sure law enforcement would not particularly enjoy the extra work of having to view all those cabin cams; on the other hand, I'm sure the insurance company wouldn't mind paying extra staff to go overall that footage so they can deny a claim. Not really convinced by your argument though.


In France an insurance company is trialing that. They give you a dashcam and offer better rates if you use it. They claim that you don't have to submit the video if you don't want to, but I'm sure if you run over someone, the video will end up in the right hands...

There are also insurance companies offering better rates if you put a GPS tracker in your car and drive as little as possible, and slowly and calmly.

I wouldn't put these in my car, but they should be mandatory for trucks (even the small ones) and coaches.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 3:18 pm

LTC8K6 wrote:
Saintor wrote:
Aesma wrote:

The plane crashed with the landing gear down, I didn't see any doubt about that, so yes the lever would be down.

What we'd want to be sure about is the state of the lever just before the first landing attempt, but that will have to wait for the deciphering of the recorders.


The video claims that the lever was down before the first attempt.


The prevailing thought at the time the video was made was that the warning heard on the audio was related to the landing gear.
That now seems unlikely. Now seems more likely to be a speed related warning.


How does it seem unlikely that it was gear related?
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
ubeema
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:48 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 10:03 pm

Antarius wrote:
And uber is exactly like an air ticket. You book a service through a provider. They assign the equipment. You aren't purchasing access to a specific car.

I beg to differ: airfare and rideshare bookings are different. Uber for safety reasons ask riders to make minimum verifications before entering the vehicle:
Step 1: Match the license plate number.
Step 2: Match the car make and model.
Step 3: Check the driver's photo.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sat May 30, 2020 10:22 pm

ubeema wrote:
Antarius wrote:
And uber is exactly like an air ticket. You book a service through a provider. They assign the equipment. You aren't purchasing access to a specific car.

I beg to differ: airfare and rideshare bookings are different. Uber for safety reasons ask riders to make minimum verifications before entering the vehicle:
Step 1: Match the license plate number.
Step 2: Match the car make and model.
Step 3: Check the driver's photo.


And one takes off and the other doesn't. Sure.

My point was, none of these reasons make cameras perfectly fine everywhere else but not on aircraft.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
Saintor
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 1:38 am

Starlionblue wrote:
LTC8K6 wrote:
Saintor wrote:

The video claims that the lever was down before the first attempt.


The prevailing thought at the time the video was made was that the warning heard on the audio was related to the landing gear.
That now seems unlikely. Now seems more likely to be a speed related warning.


How does it seem unlikely that it was gear related?


If they really noticed that gear was an issue as suggested in the video, they would have informed the ATC. Assuming that the alarms were about overspeed, this is a probable reason why the pilot chose to continue to ignore it. I don't get why the video is so affirmative about the gear lever down
and the pilot noticing the gear alarms. Anyway we will know for sure soon.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1587
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 2:59 am

Starlionblue wrote:
LTC8K6 wrote:
Saintor wrote:

The video claims that the lever was down before the first attempt.


The prevailing thought at the time the video was made was that the warning heard on the audio was related to the landing gear.
That now seems unlikely. Now seems more likely to be a speed related warning.


How does it seem unlikely that it was gear related?


Because, pending further info, the crew seems to have done nothing, verbally or physically, to indicate that there was a gear problem.
(The video claims that there was a gear malfunction.)
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 3:59 am

LTC8K6 wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
LTC8K6 wrote:

The prevailing thought at the time the video was made was that the warning heard on the audio was related to the landing gear.
That now seems unlikely. Now seems more likely to be a speed related warning.


How does it seem unlikely that it was gear related?


Because, pending further info, the crew seems to have done nothing, verbally or physically, to indicate that there was a gear problem.
(The video claims that there was a gear malfunction.)


Ah.

Well, the gear doesn't have to malfunction for a warning to be gear related. You'll get a warning if you're too low without the gear.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
maint123
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 10:44 am

So 5 m Pakistani rupees insurance for each passenger of the ill fated aircraft.
That's around 30k usd.
What's the normal mandatory insurance that each passenger is covered by in different countries incase of death ?
Its 1 cr for India ie 133000 usd.
I googled & it seems to be capped at 174000 usd. Does capping mean that different airlines can contest the compensation and payout lesser ?
https://www.dawn.com/news/1560333/each- ... r-rs5m-pia
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14978
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 3:15 pm

Antarius wrote:

And how does this change the ability to have a camera?

And uber is exactly like an air ticket. You book a service through a provider. They assign the equipment. You aren't purchasing access to a specific car.


It is not exactly the same as Uber, an Uber driver is not locked behind a bullet proof door that no one has access to.

This is what a camera would see in ideal conditions, no pilot inputs, no information on the displays, no resolution to make any detail out. Then add that to the practical aspects that it will be useless flying towards the sun, how does the data get stored, who is going to pay for the design, installation, maintenance.

Image

Picture credit Airbus https://www.airbus.com/virtual.html?uui ... lator-(FFS)‬


maint123 wrote:
So 5 m Pakistani rupees insurance for each passenger of the ill fated aircraft.
That's around 30k usd.
What's the normal mandatory insurance that each passenger is covered by in different countries incase of death ?
Its 1 cr for India ie 133000 usd.
I googled & it seems to be capped at 174000 usd. Does capping mean that different airlines can contest the compensation and payout lesser ?
https://www.dawn.com/news/1560333/each- ... r-rs5m-pia


Domestic and international insurance payout ceilings are different, and will depend if the accident was a result of the negligence or wrongful act of the air carrier, or resulted from the negligence or wrongful act of a third party. International flights are covered under the Montreal Convention, domestic flight insurance limits are normally set by the local regulator.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
dopplerd
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 4:40 pm

zeke wrote:
This is what a camera would see in ideal conditions, no pilot inputs, no information on the displays, no resolution to make any detail out. Then add that to the practical aspects that it will be useless flying towards the sun, how does the data get stored, who is going to pay for the design, installation, maintenance.

Image


That photo is far from ideal conditions. It is taken from the eye level of the observer seat, not where the actual camera would be placed. A location at the top of the breaker panel would show pretty much everything not shown in this image. Additionally, why is complete coverage of every pixel on every screen and square inch of the cockpit a requirement before cameras can be added to the cockpit? Time and time again human factors have been the cause of accidents. Having a better understanding of the human factor can be provided by video in a way that CVR and FDR cannot. Frankly, the only reason I can think of to not want cameras in the cockpit is to protect bad pilots.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 19733
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 6:31 pm

Please start a new thread for cockpit cameras. That discussion has gone off topic from this thread.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
889091
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:56 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Sun May 31, 2020 10:48 pm

Is the wreckage being stored anywhere for further analysis in case the FDR/CVR /QAR files are corrupted?
 
Ammad
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:10 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:02 am

889091 wrote:
Is the wreckage being stored anywhere for further analysis in case the FDR/CVR /QAR files are corrupted?


Wreckage is stored at the hangar of recently bankrupted Airline. Shaheen Air.

Chances are almost zero that CVR and FDR files are corrupted, and both of the devices are in very good shape. Also, good to notice that CVR Is found after 6 days of crash, hence many of the conspiracy theories related to the disappearance of CVR is gone for the good.
 
maint123
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 2:33 am

Ammad wrote:
889091 wrote:
Is the wreckage being stored anywhere for further analysis in case the FDR/CVR /QAR files are corrupted?


Wreckage is stored at the hangar of recently bankrupted Airline. Shaheen Air.

Chances are almost zero that CVR and FDR files are corrupted, and both of the devices are in very good shape. Also, good to notice that CVR Is found after 6 days of crash, hence many of the conspiracy theories related to the disappearance of CVR is gone for the good.

Dont think any conspiracy theories will be required in this case as the general consensus is that it was a piloting error. Which suits both the army establishment in Pakistan and airbus the manufacturer.
But if the gear wheels were lowered and indicated that they were down, but were actually up, then it's in Airbus interest to follow up the rectification in other planes.
We have seen like in max case that problems tend to reoccur and don't just disappear.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 8774
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:12 am

maint123 wrote:
But if the gear wheels were lowered and indicated that they were down, but were actually up, then it's in Airbus interest to follow up the rectification in other planes.
We have seen like in max case that problems tend to reoccur and don't just disappear.


Very good point. I'm thinking, however, that if there were a problem with the design of the A320 that led to the gear being stowed when the handle was down with 3 green, it would likely have popped up before now, given the number of models in production. Doesn't mean it couldn't happen: could be a faulty procedure on assembly, could be a faulty group of parts, could be that after X hours, something fails to function properly. But it seems less-likely than on a recently-substantially-updated (MAX) or brand-new type.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:44 am

wjcandee wrote:
maint123 wrote:
But if the gear wheels were lowered and indicated that they were down, but were actually up, then it's in Airbus interest to follow up the rectification in other planes.
We have seen like in max case that problems tend to reoccur and don't just disappear.


Very good point. I'm thinking, however, that if there were a problem with the design of the A320 that led to the gear being stowed when the handle was down with 3 green, it would likely have popped up before now, given the number of models in production. Doesn't mean it couldn't happen: could be a faulty procedure on assembly, could be a faulty group of parts, could be that after X hours, something fails to function properly. But it seems less-likely than on a recently-substantially-updated (MAX) or brand-new type.


Agree. That said, to your latter point, we did see an issue with the 737 jackscrew that only showed up in 1991, 24 years after the aircraft type was released.

However, the likelihood is very low as there was plenty else wrong with the whole approach that points to the pilots.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
Antarius
Posts: 2163
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:45 am

wjcandee wrote:
maint123 wrote:
But if the gear wheels were lowered and indicated that they were down, but were actually up, then it's in Airbus interest to follow up the rectification in other planes.
We have seen like in max case that problems tend to reoccur and don't just disappear.


Very good point. I'm thinking, however, that if there were a problem with the design of the A320 that led to the gear being stowed when the handle was down with 3 green, it would likely have popped up before now, given the number of models in production. Doesn't mean it couldn't happen: could be a faulty procedure on assembly, could be a faulty group of parts, could be that after X hours, something fails to function properly. But it seems less-likely than on a recently-substantially-updated (MAX) or brand-new type.


Agree. That said, to your latter point, we did see an issue with the 737 jackscrew that only showed up in 1991, 24 years after the aircraft type was released.

However, the likelihood is very low as there was plenty else wrong with the whole approach that points to the pilots.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
SpectralK
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2020 4:14 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 6:28 am

AIB1889, carrying the CVR/FDR, currently en route to Paris-Le Bourget for analysis, as per FR24 notification.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:12 am

wjcandee wrote:
maint123 wrote:
But if the gear wheels were lowered and indicated that they were down, but were actually up, then it's in Airbus interest to follow up the rectification in other planes.
We have seen like in max case that problems tend to reoccur and don't just disappear.


Very good point. I'm thinking, however, that if there were a problem with the design of the A320 that led to the gear being stowed when the handle was down with 3 green, it would likely have popped up before now, given the number of models in production. Doesn't mean it couldn't happen: could be a faulty procedure on assembly, could be a faulty group of parts, could be that after X hours, something fails to function properly. But it seems less-likely than on a recently-substantially-updated (MAX) or brand-new type.


I'll add that gear position is not only shown by three greens. There are three separate gear position sensing systems, and the indications are displayed separately in the cockpit (gear lights, and two separate triangular indications on the Wheels page for each gear.) The chance of a design flaw or manufacturing fault causing all three to indicate falsely seems rather slim. At worst, you'd get a discrepancy, I think.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Theseus
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:18 am

SpectralK wrote:
AIB1889, carrying the CVR/FDR, currently en route to Paris-Le Bourget for analysis, as per FR24 notification.


Indeed. Flight done on an A330-800.
Any idea how long before news from the CVR/FDR analysis emerge ?
 
exfss
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:49 pm

Can some pilot explain to me something?
Why if ATC ask him to turn left 180, (so to lose altitude I assume)
so why The request from the ATCwas not taken as an order (or a clearance) that he had to follow?

He had no declared emergency so ATC could have order him to.

(also when I was FSS in Quebec, we had to say at last transmission after wind check '' check gear down''
I thought it was universal.

In my mind, he forgot the gear with this so fast and unprepared approch, realised it while scraping, but had to fast choose between not enough runway to stop or to take off again.
(many pilot , I think , would have this instinc to go back in the air.)
But really, having been very fussy in com and phraseology, I think this interaction ATC- cockpit is just the useless communication .
He would have been nordo, it would have maybe help so it was so few...
No question is stupid.Only answers can be.
 
pecevanne
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 12:54 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:43 pm

wjcandee wrote:
maint123 wrote:
But if the gear wheels were lowered and indicated that they were down, but were actually up, then it's in Airbus interest to follow up the rectification in other planes.
We have seen like in max case that problems tend to reoccur and don't just disappear.


Very good point. I'm thinking, however, that if there were a problem with the design of the A320 that led to the gear being stowed when the handle was down with 3 green, it would likely have popped up before now, given the number of models in production. Doesn't mean it couldn't happen: could be a faulty procedure on assembly, could be a faulty group of parts, could be that after X hours, something fails to function properly. But it seems less-likely than on a recently-substantially-updated (MAX) or brand-new type.

Never in the Airbus Fam aircraft,
If the gear is down you will have 3 green lights in panel and a couple of triangles in the landing gear page on system display page on lower ECAM.
If for any reason you do not have the green lights, in case of LGCIU 1 failure, you will not have the 3 green lights in panel but THE PAGE LDG GEAR ON ECAM will come on and you will see the triangles there.
No way, never, if the landing gear is up you will never see three green lights or you will never see the triangles on system display in lower ECAM.
 
HVN2HEL2LAX
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 9:26 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:56 am

exfss wrote:
Can some pilot explain to me something?
Why if ATC ask him to turn left 180, (so to lose altitude I assume)
so why The request from the ATCwas not taken as an order (or a clearance) that he had to follow?

He had no declared emergency so ATC could have order him to.

(also when I was FSS in Quebec, we had to say at last transmission after wind check '' check gear down''
I thought it was universal.

In my mind, he forgot the gear with this so fast and unprepared approch, realised it while scraping, but had to fast choose between not enough runway to stop or to take off again.
(many pilot , I think , would have this instinc to go back in the air.)
But really, having been very fussy in com and phraseology, I think this interaction ATC- cockpit is just the useless communication .
He would have been nordo, it would have maybe help so it was so few...


Gear down check is not universal. Not required by civil ATC in US - even to military aircraft unless prescribed in a specific agreement.

I asked the same question you did a few pages back and no one has the answer as to why the crew did not accept or ask for vectors...maybe when the CVR is read, it will answer just that.

With that said, you also answered your own question: Ask and request. To ask/request is far different then issuing a control instruction. "Can you turn left heading 1-8-0" is far different then "Turn left heading 1-8-0." Also, it's not ATC job to fly the airplane. ATC can offer flight crew options to help when something unusual is observed but at the end of the day, it's up to the flight crew to accept/decline, advice if they are unable to comply, or are in need of additional/special service/handling.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:46 am

exfss wrote:
Can some pilot explain to me something?
Why if ATC ask him to turn left 180, (so to lose altitude I assume)
so why The request from the ATCwas not taken as an order (or a clearance) that he had to follow?

He had no declared emergency so ATC could have order him to.

(also when I was FSS in Quebec, we had to say at last transmission after wind check '' check gear down''
I thought it was universal.

In my mind, he forgot the gear with this so fast and unprepared approch, realised it while scraping, but had to fast choose between not enough runway to stop or to take off again.
(many pilot , I think , would have this instinc to go back in the air.)
But really, having been very fussy in com and phraseology, I think this interaction ATC- cockpit is just the useless communication .
He would have been nordo, it would have maybe help so it was so few...


ATC wanted them to turn left to heading 180. The PM answered, "But we are established ILS 25L" to which Tower responded, "cleared to land". Tower thus gave them an amended clearance, invalidating the previous instruction to turn to 180.

In the end, pilots fly the aircraft, not ATC. We have to follow the rules but if we are not busting any published or ATC constraints, profile management with regards to speed and altitude is up to us. The important corollary is that if we feel an ATC clearance is unsafe or will mean our profile will be difficult to maintain, we must challenge it.

The phraseology in this case was not very professional.
- Since ATC could clearly see they were very high, they could have been more clear in intent, if nothing else to help the pilots' situational awareness. "We show you very high on profile. Make left turn to 180 for extra track miles"
- PM response could have been, "we are on profile 25L. Request straight in." or something, to make it clear that they were requesting an amended clearance. Instead of taking the hint from ATC, they doubled down.
- Tower's response could have been "cancel left turn, cleared to land 25L." But "cleared to land 25L" was unambiguous given the earlier transmission from the aircraft.


"Check gear down" is a military thing. It is not a standard call in civilian operations.



klkla wrote:
zeke wrote:
This comment is not correct. Aircraft are not public property, there is every expectation for privacy for anyone onboard.


Doesn't your airline place cameras in the inflight entertainment? Why don't the passengers have an expectation of privacy?


The cameras in the inflight entertainment system show the outside, not the inside.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
TEMPO
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 2:34 am

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:36 pm

As a self-confessed skeptic about the mysterious week-long disappearance of the CVR data module, I stand rebuked by the following statement on the AvHerald website article:

On Jun 2nd 2020 the BEA reported both FDR and CVR have been downloaded successfully. Analysis of the data is in progress.
 
AT
Posts: 904
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2000 12:16 pm

Re: PIA A320 (flight PK8303) crashes in Karachi

Tue Jun 02, 2020 11:37 pm

It seems that the events following the initial landing attempt are not really in question, nor that the plane was too fast and high on its first attempt (on historyofpia, they report interview with the air traffic controller confirming this too.

The only question mark remains the "why" -- why the plane landed without its gear. Three options- 1. the pilots forgot to lower it; 2. they did think they lowered it but the gear did't lower because they were too fast; or 3; they did actually lower it but during the go-around it retracted too quickly before the engines could spool up.
The last option seems less likely as there would have been significant damage on the gear doors.

I can't believe it has been 11 days.

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