[AlphaKilo]

Originally Posted by TKMCE

...
And finally what is shocking it took 20 minutes for the first responders to reach the accident site although it occurred within the aircraft boundaries. I think this is unacceptable. Not the first time this has happened either.

In most international airports, there is a rule that the airport licence will be cancelled if their emergency services cannot reach any point within airport premises within 15 minutes. Atleast, the report mentions this and suggests the airports authorities to improve the training of Rescue crew.


What I don't understand is the chain of command during the emergency. Does this airport not have any ground control? can they not see every inch of the airfield from the tower? Why should the ATC wait for someone from the ground to inform them of the crash? or am I missing something here?

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by TKMCE

I still believe, a low hour (on Jet aircraft) Captain with a low hour FO has played a part here . Most of the captains PIC experience was on turboprops.

I am not so sure. This was an issue with differential thrust. This captain was likely to have got himself into trouble on any twin engine plane, be it prop or jet for that matter. The FO wasn’t assertive enough. We don’t know, as their is no voice transcript, but it is likely he tried to warn the captain, who choose to ignore. Assertiveness has nothing to do with experience. It’s down to attitude and demeanour. This incident/accident has nothing to do with flight hours, be it total or on type. It is down to attitude. This is sloppiness. Short cutting known, published, simulated and practiced standard operating procedures. Ignoring stuff you were taught as a pilot student. No amount of training or experience will put that right. These pilots have bad attitudes to safe flying, period!

Originally Posted by TKMCE

This particular occurrence is an accident (not an incident) as passengers were injured.

Maybe, but not because passengers got injured. There were no serious injuries.

I don’t know what DGCA uses as definition, but most aviation authorities use ICAO or stay very close:

Accident: ICAO defines an accident as an occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked in which:

A person is fatally or seriously injured
The aircraft sustains damage or structural failure
The aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible
Note: The following are not considered accidents: experimental test flights, sabotage, hijacking, terrorism, or direct military action
There are several ways to classify an accident. These include classification by the level of damage incurred, by the extent of injuries caused, or by the cost of the damage to the aircraft. The following definitions are used in various classification taxonomies:

Damage

Destroyed : The aircraft is not repairable, or, if repairable, the cost of repairs exceeds 50% of the cost of the aircraft when it was new
Substantial : Damage or failure that adversely affects the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component. Not considered in substantial damage are; engine failure or damage limited to an engine only, bent or dented skin, damage to landing gear (to include wheels and tires), flaps, or wingtips.
Minor : Damage that neither destroys the aircraft nor causes substantial damage.
Injury • Fatal : An injury that results in death in the accident itself, or up to 30 days after the accident • Serious: An injury that requires more than 2 days of hospitalization up to 7 days after the accident. Fracture of any bone (except simple fractures of the toes, fingers, or nose). Serious also includes injury to an internal organ, any muscle or tendon damage, any second or third degree burn, or any burn covering more than 5 percent of the body. • Minor : An injury that requires less than 2 days of hospitalization up to 7 days after the accident.

By this definition it is not an accident because of the injuries of the passengers. They were minor. Under this definition it can only be an accident if the damage to the plane was quite substantial. But again, maybe the DGCA uses different definition. If they do, it would be interesting why they belief they need to differ from the rest of the world

Originally Posted by TKMCE

And finally what is shocking it took 20 minutes for the first responders to reach the accident site although it occurred within the aircraft boundaries. I think this is unacceptable. Not the first time this has happened either.

Originally Posted by AlphaKilo

I
What I don't understand is the chain of command during the emergency. Does this airport not have any ground control? can they not see every inch of the airfield from the tower? Why should the ATC wait for someone from the ground to inform them of the crash? or am I missing something here?

ICAO requirements (Annex 14) are a lot more strict. From the relevant ICAO requirements specification on so called ARFF Response Times:

2.7.1 The operational objective of the RFF service should be to achieve response times of two minutes and not exceeding three minutes to the end of each runway, as well as to any other part of the movement area, in optimum conditions of visibility and surface conditions. Response time is considered to be the time between the initial call to the RFF service and the time when the first responding vehicle(s) is(are) in position to apply foam at a rate of at least 50 per cent of the discharge rate specified in Table 2-3. Determination of realistic response times should be made by RFF vehicles operating from their normal locations and not from positions adopted solely for test purposes.

So quite a bit of improvementl required. We discussed in another thread the safety of Indian Airspace. But on the ground it still needs a lot of improving too it seems! I agree it is strange that the report does not elaborate more on this part of the incident/accident.

Jeroen

[pedrolourenco]

Originally Posted by AlphaKilo

Does this airport not have any ground control? can they not see every inch of the airfield from the tower? Why should the ATC wait for someone from the ground to inform them of the crash? or am I missing something here?

The Airport has been controlled by the Navy since 1961.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by pedrolourenco

The Airport has been controlled by the Navy since 1961.

Whoever controls it still needs to comply with basic commercial aviation requirements I would assume?

[AlphaKilo]

Originally Posted by pedrolourenco

The Airport has been controlled by the Navy since 1961.

Yes sir, I am aware of it. But why should that deter them from having an efficient Ground control and RFF service in place? I would rather expect a swift reaction from the military RFF personnel than their civilan colleagues.

Imagine a fully loaded fighter aircraft or a military transporter coming down with an emergency and the emergency responders take 20mins to reach the crashed aircraft! To me that's a no-go. I vaguely remember my CO telling me that first responders in IAF airfields are drilled to reach any point within the premises within 5 - 8 mins. I am not aware of the reality though.

@Jeroen: ICAO timeline for RFF seems to be only a suggestion and not a regulation. Nevertheless, anything under 5 minutes is commendable.

My workplace has its own airport and it is used by several business and private jets regularly. The airport has one first responder (fire tender) standing at one of the parking bays closer to the runway and a huge firestation within 5mins from the airport premises. Well this airport sees a lot of test flights due to the presence of a aircraft manufacturer but still gives the hobby pilots a sense of confidence that in need they will be attended to at the earliest possible.

[Ford5]

737's are notorious for skidding off runways across the world. Maybe the toe-link on max10 will prevent this in future.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by AlphaKilo

@Jeroen: ICAO timeline for RFF seems to be only a suggestion and not a regulation. Nevertheless, anything under 5 minutes is commendable.

In all honesty I am not a hundred percent sure on how all these ICAO regulations work in detail. I think there is some sort of protocol in which per airport the actual response times need to be stipulated by the airport authorities.

But I do know that western commercial airports do dimension for just a few minutes response time. Look at any major airport in Europe and you will see multiple firestations scattered around the airport. So they will always have one fire truck close by..

Many years ago I was flying Amsterdam to Bordeaux with a KLM Fokker 50. In those days the cockpit doors were left open during the flight. The Fokker 50 has its wing mounted on top of the fuselage. The main landing gear is fitted right behind the engine underneath the wing. I was seated at a window seat just under the wing. So as we made our approach on this plane you can actually see the landing gear deploy. It is literally about 2 meters away from you. I was watching the wheels as we touched down, I wanted to see the spin up. As we touched down there was actually quite a bit of smoke, more than I was anticipating. At the same moment I hear the fire alarm going in the cockpit and I see the pilots taking actions. Before the aircraft came to a full stop and the end of the runway there was already a firetruck rolling alongside us. They were really fast!!

In the evening I happened to find myself staying in the same hotel as the KLM crew. We had a little chat and I told the captain what I had observed. There was no fire. On these F50s as the engines are so close to the landing gear, often droplets of oil/grease end up on the landing gear tyres and brake components. That produces some extra smoke and does set of smoke alarms in the cockpit apparently too.

The captain told me that the tower was watching the F50 through binoculars as they landed and they had the firetruck rolling even before the alarm went off in the cockpit and advised the crew they saw smoke and were rolling the trucks! Apparently they were so fast, because the fire crew happened to be in or near the truck. So when they got the call, literally within seconds they had the pedal to the metal and came barreling down the runway catching up with the F50.

Still, a very professional operation!!

Originally Posted by Ford5

737's are notorious for skidding off runways across the world. Maybe the toe-link on max10 will prevent this in future.

What do you base your statement on 737s notorious for skidding off runways on? It is one of the most common planes, so there are a lot of them. Is there any statistical evidence to your claim?

Could you explain why you think that the toe-link might prevent these sort of incidents/accidents?

Thanks, Jeroen

[Ford5]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Could you explain why you think that the toe-link might prevent these sort of incidents/accidents?

Thanks, Jeroen

Google 737 skidding & Av & unto every amateur aviation forum will have a log of classics, NG's skidding while taxiing, during thrust set, at near about slow down after landing on non contaminated runways. Don't get confused with runway overruns and tailstrikes of the 737 while doing this exercise. More than enough statistics for mental consumption.

Toe link supposed to have 777 kinda setup due to significant tonnage over 737/8/9 and some die hard boeing forums have mentioned the same in a pejorative way ascribing to the skidding prevention with the toe link. May or not be totally provable until 2021 when the max 10's come out and remain in service for the years to come. One thing i can guarantee you, the NG's & max's 7/8/9 will keep the tradition alive and well

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Ford5

Google 737 skidding & Av & unto every amateur aviation forum will have a log of classics, NG's skidding while taxiing, during thrust set, at near about slow down after landing on non contaminated runways. Don't get confused with runway overruns and tailstrikes of the 737 while doing this exercise.More than enough statistics for mental consumption.

I went to youtube and searched for plane skid:
This comes up in the first 20 hits or so:

Several 737s
Several A320 and several A321
One MD80
Two A380

Not quite sure what you mean by

More than enough statistics for mental consumption

? But it seems that you go by if it shows up a lot on the Internet it’s true.

Be my guest, but I prefer a little bit more precise understanding of things. To date there are well over 10.000 737s. so even if every type of plane has the exact same percentage, the absolute number of 737 skidding is going to be considerable more than any other. To make such claims you really need to look at the number of planes in operations and factor in their number of take off. Obviously long haul aircraft have far fewer take offs.

Poor handling will make just about any plane skid.

Originally Posted by Ford5

Toe link supposed to have 777 kinda setup due to significant tonnage over 737/8/9 and some die hard boeing forums have mentioned the same in a pejorative way ascribing to the skidding prevention with the toe link. May or not be totally provable until 2021 when the max 10's come out and remain in service for the years to come. One thing i can guarantee you, the NG's & max's 7/8/9 will keep the tradition alive and well

I am not familiar with toe link as a term or a mechanism. Internet doesn’t throw up anything directly either, neither does PRUNE. Could you share some information?

Jeroen

[pedrolourenco]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Whoever controls it still needs to comply with basic commercial aviation requirements I would assume?

Originally Posted by AlphaKilo

Yes sir, I am aware of it. But why should that deter them from having an efficient Ground control and RFF service in place? I would rather expect a swift reaction from the military RFF personnel than their civilan colleagues.

Well the Navy does not seem to be complying with requirements or being efficient.

[the_skyliner]

Another Jet airways plane skids off the runway:

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/jet-...ome-topstories

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by the_skyliner

Another Jet airways plane skids off the runway:

Every take off planning ensures that a plane can come, safely to full stop, up to the point of no return in the take off roll, V1. So either they were past V1 and then your try to fly and sort things in the air, unless it really isnt possible. Or they were not yet at V1 and aborted and they should have been able to come to a normal full stop on the runway. So something is seriously amiss here.


Quite a bit of turmoil in Indian aviation at the moment it seems:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/65236889.cms

To our earlier discussion on whether there is a correlation between pay and safety. Difficult to prove. But put yourself in the position of Jet Cockpit staff. They will now be worried what will happen, can they still afford to send the kids to school, pay the mortgage etc. etc.

Do you really want to have two people on whom your live depends being distracted by this kind of stuff?

Meanwhile, on PRUNE (Professional Pilots forum) a warning against working for Indian carriers:

https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/...-co-india.html

[the_skyliner]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

To our earlier discussion on whether there is a correlation between pay and safety. Difficult to prove. But put yourself in the position of Jet Cockpit staff. They will now be worried what will happen, can they still afford to send the kids to school, pay the mortgage etc. etc.

True that. With tremendous pressure on airlines to reduce fares, it is the staff that gets affected financially. Other costs can hardly be reduced due to regulations and external factors.

I sincerely hope most airlines in India and across the globe starts making money as otherwise it is going to be a mess.

[AlphaKilo]

Originally Posted by the_skyliner

True that. With tremendous pressure on airlines to reduce fares, it is the staff that gets affected financially. Other costs can hardly be reduced due to regulations and external factors.

I sincerely hope most airlines in India and across the globe starts making money as otherwise it is going to be a mess.

There is simply another way to do, that by reducing the profit margin.

The report on Jet airways skidding off the runway during T/O seems to be sketchy. Lets wait for the detailed report. Thankgod nothing serious happened. Must be a nightmare for the crew and passengers.

[para_7k]

There are some media reports that the Captain sighted a foreign object on the runway which caused him to reject the take off. The reports are from media which do not state any technical details whether they were beyond V1 etc.,

I am waiting for the report on Avherald or PPRune.

On an another note, there seems to be lots of news about Jet airways requesting employees for a salary cut and financially not in a stable position.

In my flights for the last 2 months I saw a generally laid back attitude with the cabin crew who acted as if they were forced to serve the food. It happened in 4 flights.

Also, neither the captain nor the FO made any announcements on the PA. Indigo and Jet are known for detailed announcements from my past experiences.

In fact, Jet was the only airlines where an amazing captain announced even runway numbers in my 50+ flights in the last 2 years.

I still have Jet in my preferred list and I hope they recover soon.