For the aviation fans

[Bateleur1]

Ja I hope so! Otherwise the end of Runway 03L is in Midrand!

 

More like Rietvlei Reserve

[Long Wheel Base]

Ja I hope so! Otherwise the end of Runway 03L is in Midrand!

 

 

More like Rietvlei Reserve

I stand to be corrected but I think the long runway is like 4.5km long.

So if I do some rough maths with 1 foot being about 30cm then it kinda works out. 

[eddy]

Useless info for the day:

Runway numbers correspond to the runways compass heading as you see it from the threshold

03 = 030 deg

21 = 210 deg

Yip, .magnetic heading.

 

More useless info for the day

 

As the magnetic north pole moves, runways have on occasion had to be renamed.

[Bateleur1]

Yip, .magnetic heading.

 

More useless info for the day

 

As the magnetic north pole moves, runways have on occasion had to be renamed.

 

I never knew that.

[Spokey]

I never knew that.

One example I know of, I used to go to Lagos a lot earlier this century, it was 19 left and right. Now it is 18 left and right. ( and of course the reciprocals)

[MrJacques]

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/3-dead-pegasus-airlines-crashed-broke-apart-istanbul-2020-2

[MrJacques]

https://www.rt.com/russia/480238-russian-modernized-tu160m-flight/

[Long Wheel Base]

https://www.rt.com/russia/480238-russian-modernized-tu160m-flight/

Looks like a B1.

[Long Wheel Base]

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/3-dead-pegasus-airlines-crashed-broke-apart-istanbul-2020-2

Weird crash this. There is very little information. Planes don't just split into 3. Also the deaths/injuries seems unknown or the way they reporting it is just odd.

[MrJacques]

Weird crash this. There is very little information. Planes don't just split into 3. Also the deaths/injuries seems unknown or the way they reporting it is just odd.

 

Some more info and footage:

 

 

There seems to be a lot more aviation incidents these days, or is there just more news coverage?

[eddy]

Weird crash this. There is very little information. Planes don't just split into 3. Also the deaths/injuries seems unknown or the way they reporting it is just odd.

 

Landed very, very deep (something like 2/3 of the way down the runway), very fast with a tailwind gusting 30kt.

 

Ran off the end still doing 63kt IIRC.

Edited February 7, 2020 by eddy

[MrJacques]

Landed very, very deep (something like 2/3 of the way down the runway), very fast with a tailwind gusting 30kt.

 

Ran off the end still doing 63kt IIRC.

 

Must have been a very hard landing. I thought they usually land against the wind? Could landing with a tailwind have caused a sudden drop during the landing?

[MrJacques]

Maybe I should offer them my services as a software developer...

 

https://mybroadband.co.za/news/motoring/337854-boeing-finds-another-software-bug-in-737-max.html

 

I wonder if it can even fly without the software?

Edited February 7, 2020 by Jacquers

[Spokey]

Weird crash this. There is very little information. Planes don't just split into 3. Also the deaths/injuries seems unknown or the way they reporting it is just odd.

This is just my own opinion. I have not looked at any other info at all. I fly to Istanbul often and the conditions can be horrible, gusting winds and rain coming down sideways!

 

No crew sets out to have an accident (disregarding the known suicides that have occured) and it is easy to comment when safely on the ground but this is my take on this over run.

 

As per Eddy’s post, nothing weird at all. Absolutely appalling actions by the crew. How on earth they decided to land with such a Tailwind on a wet runway defies belief. Now I dont fly 737’s but there must be some SOP limitation regarding landing with a tailwind. On all the types I have flown ranging from Lear 45 to DC 8 the Tail Wind component must not exceed 10 kts as per the SOP’s (Standard Operating Procedures) The reason is that a tailwind on approach increases your rate of decent leading to a possible unstable approach and increases your ground speed and therefore the landing distance required.

We are required to factor 150% of the tailwind component in our performance calculation whether manual or on the FMS.

As a rule of thumb, each 2 kts (3,9kph) of tailwind increases required landing distance by 10% and each 10% increase in ground speed increases the landing distance by 20%. And these are compounding.

With the gusts, this 737’s ground speed would have fluctuated ( albeit temporarily) up to somewhere in the region of 180kts a 20% increase based on a typical 150 kt approach speed. Factor your extra distance required for the tailwind, the wet runway and the VERY deep landing and you can see how this crew are now wondering why they did not call the go around when crossing the threshold a few hundred feet high.

[Spokey]

Must have been a very hard landing. I thought they usually land against the wind? Could landing with a tailwind have caused a sudden drop during the landing?

Yes, see my post above re the tail wind. This aeroplane broke up after going off the end of the runway. It is a very steep embankment down to the highway that passes the airport. I dont think it hit the highway though. I have not checked.

[Twaatie]

This is just my own opinion. I have not looked at any other info at all. I fly to Istanbul often and the conditions can be horrible, gusting winds and rain coming down sideways!

 

No crew sets out to have an accident (disregarding the known suicides that have occured) and it is easy to comment when safely on the ground but this is my take on this over run.

 

As per Eddy’s post, nothing weird at all. Absolutely appalling actions by the crew. How on earth they decided to land with such a Tailwind on a wet runway defies belief. Now I dont fly 737’s but there must be some SOP limitation regarding landing with a tailwind. On all the types I have flown ranging from Lear 45 to DC 8 the Tail Wind component must not exceed 10 kts as per the SOP’s (Standard Operating Procedures) The reason is that a tailwind on approach increases your rate of decent leading to a possible unstable approach and increases your ground speed and therefore the landing distance required.

We are required to factor 150% of the tailwind component in our performance calculation whether manual or on the FMS.

As a rule of thumb, each 2 kts (3,9kph) of tailwind increases required landing distance by 10% and each 10% increase in ground speed increases the landing distance by 20%. And these are compounding.

With the gusts, this 737’s ground speed would have fluctuated ( albeit temporarily) up to somewhere in the region of 180kts a 20% increase based on a typical 150 kt approach speed. Factor your extra distance required for the tailwind, the wet runway and the VERY deep landing and you can see how this crew are now wondering why they did not call the go around when crossing the threshold a few hundred feet high.

Locally on a DRY runway, guys are fine with 7/8 knot tail win . Turkish flight that runway wasn't just wet, looked like it most likely had standing water as well

 

 

Latest on ZsCAR. Is that they might have had a catastrophic airframe failure, which led to the crash.