Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
Fajar Surya Lesmana

Lion Air Undershot Runway at Denpasar and Crashed into the Sea

Recommended Posts

how many of this model 737-800 crash? i think i've seen many. American airlines, Turkish..etc..

GOL in 2006 (mid-air collision, Embraer's fault)

Kenya Airways in 2007

China Airlines in 2007

Ryanair in 2008 (birdstrikes)

Turkish Airlines in 2009

American Airlines in 2009 (overran the runway, poor weather)

Ethiopian Airlines in 2010

Air India Express (overran the runway)

Caribbean Airlines (overran the runway)

 

 

I notice that too... And it seems that it has a tendency to break apart in accidents like it is so fragile. Good that everyone is safe and all the more reason to pay attention to safety briefings. This incident looks so much like that illustrated in safety cards.

All is explained in A.net in the thread with over 200 replies. Plenty of information there.

 

From A.net

]Very common occurrence with 737s with loads that are beyond design loads.

Indeed. While airliners can take aerodynamic loads up the kazoo, they are not built for impact loads like cars. They are surprisingly brittle when they hit hard objects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lion Air have too many runway overruns. Why?

 

This is not the case of overshooting the runway after landing. I think they were attempting to land, but landed short of the runway. In other terms undershoot, Heard reports of windshear during approach. Could be microburst as well.

 

Hope they make AIr Crash Investigation episode out of this. Eager to know the real cause of this accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

GOL in 2006 (mid-air collision, Embraer's fault)

Kenya Airways in 2007

China Airlines in 2007

Ryanair in 2008 (birdstrikes)

Turkish Airlines in 2009

American Airlines in 2009 (overran the runway, poor weather)

Ethiopian Airlines in 2010

Air India Express (overran the runway)

Caribbean Airlines (overran the runway)

 

 

All is explained in A.net in the thread with over 200 replies. Plenty of information there.

 

From A.net

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lion Air crash pilot felt jet "dragged" from sky

 

The pilot whose Indonesian jet slumped into the sea while trying to land in Bali has described how he felt it "dragged" down by wind while he struggled to regain control, a person familiar with the matter said.

 

Full report:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/14/us-indonesia-plane-idUSBRE93D0D720130414

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like microburst did play a significant role in this incident. There should be other contributing factors too.

 

Runway 09 is quite frequently used, maybe even more than 27, but there is no ILS there.

 

Lets wait for the investigation report before further speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something contributory to this incident may have been the rather poor meteorological reporting services at WADD.. Many a time, I've operated in based on METARs and TAFs that show no indications of weather during ETA. During cruise and on receipt of the ATIS, the common phrase is always WXR NIL. Only to approach the terminal area and see a weather radar return full of red/magenta overhead the airport. The ATIS is particularly inaccurate... have also encountered false reporting of QNH - in one transmission reported at 1014, and subsequently 10 minutes later the new ATIS broadcasts QNH at 1007.. only to be told by tower after query that correct QNH is 1013..

 

Apparently the preceeding Jetstar 110 flight from PER reported strong turbulence on short finals - indicative of windshear. Seems all the arrows point that way. Despite that, an excellent outcome for quite a serious accident!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indonesian Government To Audit Lion Air Following Plane Crash


JAKARTA, April 15 (Bernama)
-- The Ministry of Transportation is to audit the management of Lion Air
following plane crash occurred on April 13 near Bali`s airport,
Minister E.E. Mangindaan said here on Monday.

"We will conduct special audit for Lion Air. Among factors that will be
checked are the condition of all aircraft owned by the company, plane
maintenance system and airline management," Indonesia's Antara quoted
the minister as saying.

He added the ministry will closely monitor every Lion Air flight to
prevent similar crash to recur. As to the pilot and co-pilot of the
ill-fated plane that crashed in Bali, both of them are grounded for two
weeks to facilitate investigation.

Lion Air management itself has stated its willingness to provide
compensation for all passengers of the plane. Investigation on the cause
of the accident is still on going.

Lion Air flight JT904 from Bandung (West Java province) to Denpasar
(Bali) crashed at sea last Saturday when it was to land at Bali airport.

"The plane with seven crew members was carrying 101 passengers from
Bandung, West Java, to Denpasar when it undershot the runway," said Lion
Air`s Director General Edward Sirait.

No report on casualties from the incident.

-- BERNAMA

 

http://aviation.bernama.com/news.php?id=942140&lang=en

 

Better they push through the safety records for the benefits of JV business as well....even though this crash might be due to either microburst / wind shear...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microbust / windshear is beyond our control, may be a contributing factor but certainly is not the cause of crash. Mishap which is related to mother nature could be minimised if not avoided through 'TRAINING'.

 

Training is a cost factor and I wonder how much each and every organisation is willing to allocate some budgets for more training to frontline operators. It seems that most airlines is run by bean counters and training is an area which is left to bare minimum.

 

'Microbust / windshear escape maneuver' is a 'memory item' or 'boldface' and continous practice in sim is required regularly in order for the muscle and brain to work instantaneously, just like doing a take off and landing.

 

 

:hi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microbust / windshear is beyond our control, may be a contributing factor but certainly is not the cause of crash. Mishap which is related to mother nature could be minimised if not avoided through 'TRAINING'.

 

Training is a cost factor and I wonder how much each and every organisation is willing to allocate some budgets for more training to frontline operators. It seems that most airlines is run by bean counters and training is an area which is left to bare minimum.

 

'Microbust / windshear escape maneuver' is a 'memory item' or 'boldface' and continous practice in sim is required regularly in order for the muscle and brain to work instantaneously, just like doing a take off and landing.

 

 

:hi:

 

When it comes to training, they have the latest and the greatest equipment when it comes to their simulators, including all the necessary windshear / microburst exercises included with their training device.

 

I've worked on these projects .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could have anything and eveything under the sky, the Qs are, how much time is being allocated, how frequent is the training to the frontline crew, how qualified are the instructors and last but not least, is the organisation itself being audited by external / foreign agencies such as LOSA / IOSA ,,,,,,,???

 

 

:hi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prelimenary report is out. Here it is.: http://www.dephub.go.id/knkt/ntsc_aviation/baru/pre/Preliminary_Report_PK-LKS_Lion_Air.pdf

 

Now that some facts have be established, its time to have a closer look at events.

First, we can put "microburst" to bed.

Secondly, what has been "educated thoughts" by industry professionals who kept it to themselves,have now become "knowledge"

 

Everyone, with at least basic knowledge about airline operations, can now make up their minds and make their own valuations.

 

In case that there are a few facts which are difficult to apprehend for the non airline pilot, i summarize some highlights here.

The underlining is by me, (A.H.)

 

Page 8

The aircraft followed the VOR DME runway 09 instrument approach procedure. The weather
while the aircraft was on final was raining. During the approach the SIC mentioned that the
runway was not in sight twice.
At 0708 UTC, when the aircraft was at approximately 1,300 ft, the Ngurah Tower controller
saw the aircraft on final and gave a landing clearance with additional information that the
wind condition was 120° / 05 kts.
At 0710 UTC, the aircraft impacted to the water.
Page 10
The excerpts of the CVR and FDR data on the final approach are as follows:
At 0708:56 UTC, while the aircraft altitude was approximately 900 ft AGL the SIC
stated that the runway was not in sight.
At 0709:33 UTC, after Enhance Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS) called
out “MINIMUM” at aircraft altitude approximately 550 ft AGL, the pilot disengaged
the autopilot and the auto throttle then continued to descend.
At 0709:53 UTC, while the aircraft altitude approximately 150 ft AGL the PIC took
over the control. The SIC handed the control to the PIC and stated that he could not
see the runway.
At 0710:01 UTC, after the EGPWS warning “TWENTY”, the PIC commanded a go
around.
At 0710:02 UTC, the aircraft impacted the water.
The aircraft stopped facing to the north at about 20 meters from the shore or
approximately 300 meters south west of the beginning runway 09.
At 0711 UTC, there were two aircraft on holding point runway 09. One pilot of these
aircraft informed the Ngurah Tower controller that the Lion Air aircraft had crashed
into the sea.

 

So, there you have it, in a nutshell. No heroism here, no Boeing awards, but very questioniable airmanship.

Crew and pax were very very very lucky that the outcome was as it was. Would the PIC had initiated the go around a few seconds earlier, they would most probably have hit he embankment.

 

One more thing, the VOR approach is not alligned with the runway. You have to see the asphalt at minimums, if not, go away.

 

Page 12.

Here the flightdeck experience is noted.

If you do basic simple calculations on time 90-60-30 days you see a very disturbing fact. Unless this info is flawed.

 

On the last page there are recommendations, lets hope that they elaborate on that extensively in the final report.

 

Cheers

A.H.

 

 

Edited by Arthur Van Straten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lion Air crash pilot felt jet "dragged" from sky

 

The pilot whose Indonesian jet slumped into the sea while trying to land in Bali has described how he felt it "dragged" down by wind while he struggled to regain control, a person familiar with the matter said.

 

Full report:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/14/us-indonesia-plane-idUSBRE93D0D720130414

So the PIC flatly lied to the whole world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to know Indonesia is transparent in its air incident investigation reports. Ours continue to be blanketed in secrecy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So am I correct to assume that the pilot should have aborted the landing the moment he reached minimums & still did not have the runway in sight?

That is correct if they were on a precision approach. In this case where there were no ILS on Runway 09, they should have gone around before reaching minimums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...