[skanchan95]

Originally Posted by RM Motorsports

The plane caught fire mid air before crashing.

Just came across this video.

https://twitter.com/pminu/status/161...1fXmdf_plusSgA

This video is that of the crash of the only flying prototype of IL-112V military transport aircraft that suffered a fire in the right engine and crashed near Kubinka Airfield, Russia in 2021.

[arbardhan]

Its a Stall, the left wing was stalling as the aircraft was too slow. After a certain point in stall ,if not recovered - the aircraft simply flips like it did

Originally Posted by ninjatalli

This is so unfortunate! And the weather seems perfectly fine. Wonder if there were other reasons (part failure, human error). Only time will tell once they retrieve the black box to get more clarity.

Rip for the poor souls.

[marcussantiago]

Originally Posted by bsdbsd

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-64280480

https://www.republicworld.com/world-...ticleshow.html

Very sad incident today. I wonder why Yeti Airlines has so much of a crash history. Why would Nepal Govt allow this to happen, year after year and crash after crash. This incident sucks the confidence out of one and all.

Because basically, safety is expensive. Airlines are constantly cutting costs to stay competitive, training and maintenance are often the first places they slash expenses. De-regulation is the other major factor: an airline won't go out of their way to be safe when rules and regulations don't mandate them to.

That said, many airports in Nepal are notoriously difficult to land in. Most require specialized training just to land and take off. This is exacerbated by all the local low-cost airlines constantly one-upping each other to provide the cheapest ticket to consumers.

I also want to warn people that apparently, a passenger on board was livestreaming and captured the crash as seen from inside the cabin. While it isn't gruesome in any specific way, please be warned that this video can be pretty traumatic to watch for those who are more sensitive.

In case you're curious, here's what you see: a young man streaming the video, smiling, seemingly quite happy and relaxed, and shows the view out the window. He appears to be seated at the rear of the plane. Then quite suddenly there's chaos, noise and then the phone's sitting still, only capturing some fire with no reference points. It's all over astonishingly quickly. So hopefully the victims didn't suffer much, as it all looked almost instant.

Very sad. Here's hoping some new laws and regulations are enacted after this to help make Nepal's skies a little safer.

[sandeepmdas]

Originally Posted by skanchan95

..the crash of the only flying prototype of IL-112V military transport aircraft that suffered a fire in the right engine ...

Somewhat OT.

Intrigued by this crash. Not belittling the Yeti crew, but unlike the Nepali aircraft this one was flown by a supremely trained and (far more) experienced crew. Being test pilots it is safe to assume that they were mentally prepared to face the unspeakable eventuality as that's exactly what the "push the envelope" flight testing is.

However, within a couple of seconds after the engine caught fire, the aircraft simply fell from the sky. Just like a bird that suffered a cardiac arrest. Rolled, stalled and flipped is the sequence, but why? Is the Ilyushin with an engine out unflyable even for 5 seconds? Total loss of hydraulics?

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by sandeepmdas

Somewhat OT.

Is the Ilyushin with an engine out unflyable even for 5 seconds? Total loss of hydraulics?

According to this analysis, the critical situation on board was caused by a starboard engine fire which caused structural collapse of the right aileron. This failure sent the aircraft into an uncontrolled side roll at low altitude and the aircraft crashed into the ground almost inverted. There was nothing that the test pilots of PJSC Ilyushin, Hero of Russia Nikolai Kuimov and Dmitry Komarov, as well as test flight engineer Nikolai Khludeev, could do in this situation to save the aircraft and themselves.

Source: https://www.scramble.nl/military-new...112v-prototype

Jeroen

[Akash_1806]

Originally Posted by airbus

Very sad news. May the departed souls rest in peace.

ATR-72 aircraft involved in this accident was 15.5 years old with manufacturer serial number 754.

A noob question, why does the airframe status says written off? Does it mean that the aircraft does not meet the airlines standard (maybe the reason of the crash) or it simply means that the details are not available on the beforementioned website?

[no_fear]

Was reading an Australian aviation forum, and someone mentioned that Pokhara has an old airport and a new airport that just opened this January. It is possible that the pilot mistakenly tried to land at the old airport, realized the error, changed course but did not pick up enough airspeed to reach the new airport, stalled and crashed.

This is pure conjecture and we have to await the black box findings, but I find this to be quite plausible.

[fhdowntheline]

Originally Posted by Akash_1806

A noob question, why does the airframe status says written off? Does it mean that the aircraft does not meet the airlines standard (maybe the reason of the crash) or it simply means that the details are not available on the beforementioned website?

Written off usually means it is no longer repairable to be used in a safe manner. Much like a total loss in case of a car. But airplanes may be written off basis a more stringent assessment of seemingly repairable damage.

[libranof1987]

Both the blackboxes have been recovered, and seem to be in good condition - the first step towards understanding what happened. Sadly, doesn't look like there'll be any survivors.

The only silver lining in this accident - seemingly, no on-ground fatalities, considering the aircraft was minutes from landing.

Originally Posted by Akash_1806

A noob question, why does the airframe status says written off?

It just means, there is no economic sense in repairing the aircraft / the aircraft is damaged beyond repair. It is more often referred to as "hull loss".

[Akash_1806]

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

Written off usually means it is no longer repairable to be used in a safe manner. Much like a total loss in case of a car. But airplanes may be written off basis a more stringent assessment of seemingly repairable damage.

Originally Posted by libranof1987

It just means, there is no economic sense in repairing the aircraft / the aircraft is damaged beyond repair. It is more often referred to as "hull loss".

Thank you for your response(s). As you mentioned that the aircraft's body/hull is total loss or damaged beyond repair, does that mean it is unsafe for the passengers or could have resulted in a crash like this or is it pilot error/ parts failure which would have resulted in a scenario like this?

Really sorry for the dumb and OT question, but an economically/physically irreparable aircraft being crashed within seconds of everything being normal (or appearing to be normal) is raising this question for me. Is it linked by any chance?

[V.Narayan]

My prayers for all those who perished and for their loved ones. Cannot comment on this crash till the black box details are published.

One reason that Nepal has such a unusually high crash frequency is the terrain. The other is the absolutely shocking {shocking even to us Indians} level of corruption, winking, chalta hai and blatant corner cutting that bedevils their entire aviation industry and regulator. I won't narrate other anecdotes just suffice to say that it is one of the few countries where before getting your aircraft refuelled you do a fuel adulteration test! That is how bad it is. When ever we flew into Nepal we made sure we had enough fuel for our return leg to avoid refuelling there.

[the_skyliner]

Such a sad news this is. Prayers for the families who lost their loved ones.

I am curious to learn how airlines like Yeti maintain their aircrafts? Especially the structural and systems part? Do they have any facilities in Nepal or do they rely on Indian airports/MROs?

[arijitkanrar]

Originally Posted by Akash_1806

Thank you for your response(s). As you mentioned that the aircraft's body/hull is total loss or damaged beyond repair, does that mean it is unsafe for the passengers or could have resulted in a crash like this or is it pilot error/ parts failure which would have resulted in a scenario like this?

Really sorry for the dumb and OT question, but an economically/physically irreparable aircraft being crashed within seconds of everything being normal (or appearing to be normal) is raising this question for me. Is it linked by any chance?

The aircraft wasn't physically/economically irreparable before it crashed.
The airframe is declared a written-off/hull loss after/total loss after the crash. It means that the current status of the airframe is that it cannot be economically/physically brought back into service.
Hope this clarifies.

No airline will dispatch an airframe if it was damaged before the flight.

[johy]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

My prayers for all those who perished and for their loved ones. Cannot comment on this crash till the black box details are published.

One reason that Nepal has such a unusually high crash frequency is the terrain. The other is the absolutely shocking {shocking even to us Indians} level of corruption, winking, chalta hai and blatant corner cutting that bedevils their entire aviation industry and regulator. I won't narrate other anecdotes just suffice to say that it is one of the few countries where before getting your aircraft refuelled you do a fuel adulteration test! That is how bad it is. When ever we flew into Nepal we made sure we had enough fuel for our return leg to avoid refuelling there.

I have to narrate my experience here from a few years ago when I had gone off to the Langtang Trek. I took a short flight from Bhadrapur (which is very close to my hometown /Panitanki border crossing) to Katmandu. The flight got delayed because that day our then (Late) President Pranab Mukherjee had landed in Katmandu and so the entire area was a no-fly zone - or at least that was what we were told.

So a 12 noon flight finally took off just before it started getting dark. Most of the other flights got cancelled - except ours and a couple more.

I speak Nepali rather fluently and so when I was boarding the craft, a Gulfstream (I was the last one to board), I overheard this conversation between the Pilot, co-pilot and the air-hostess.

Pilot: Tel bharyo [Have (they) filled the oil?
Hostess: Hazoor, yes.
Pilot: Koti bharyo ? [How much?]
Hostess: Muttered some number (I did not catch this)
Co-pilot to Pilot: Pukcha? (Will it suffice?)
Pilot : Pugnu Parne (I think it should suffice)

And then we took off in a few minutes.

Man, at that time, I thought it was funny and laughed to myself, but this is exactly the nonchalant attitude that one should be afraid of.

Having said that, Nepal has always been this way. The trek routes are fraught with danger (just yesterday a solo hiker died on the Annapurna Circuit doing the high pass), the weather and political climate unpredictable. The rickety buses and aircrafts are similar - that sense of danger/unpredictability is what attracts/used to attract a lot of us. I myself nearly got caught in the snowstorm on Annapurna some years back when many people died.

Of course, now more and more tourists visiting Nepal is not much for adventure, but mainly for sightseeing.

I am in no way supporting the low maintenance or corruption, but that is what it is.

[NiInJa]

Originally Posted by no_fear

It is possible that the pilot mistakenly tried to land at the old airport, realized the error, changed course but did not pick up enough airspeed to reach the new airport, stalled and crashed.

This is pure conjecture and we have to await the black box findings, but I find this to be quite plausible.

Aviation forums are discussing this possibility with whatever data available at this point. Just to add, if it indeed happened, this makes it even bizarre as co-pilot's Husband died in similar circumstances while trying to switch to another runway during approach.

https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=20060621-0