Boeing 737 from Dubai crashes in southern Russia

I'm a little confused with the crash scene pictures... some of them show snow on the ground, some don't, and some show it currently snowing. It appears the weather was definitely less than ideal.

Also the METARs had the wind coming out of 250* w/ gusts of 25 kts which really isn't too bad of a crosswind for runway 22. But the ceiling being as low as it was along with the precipitation probably did not help.

a reply to: charolais

Surface winds were actually quite a bit lower at the time of the crash. They reported 60+ around 1500 or so.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: charolais

Surface winds were actually quite a bit lower at the time of the crash. They reported 60+ around 1500 or so.

Ahh I see. That does not make for a very stable approach.

a reply to: charolais

Makes me wonder if they got unstable on the approach and then got hit more as they climbed and lost it.

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance

Well it certainly flckers steadily like a fireball in the sky and in the reflection of the wet pavement and I do not see any flashing lights.

Also the car lights and headlight much closer to the camera are not overly bright in exposure as a comparison.

They were most likely landing lights, which are a LOT brighter than car headlights. Also, in the video the plane is passing behind trees, and tree branches, causing a slight flicker.

I don't believe it was on fire at all.

Check out the lights on the wings here:
www.airlinebuzz.com...

That is what you are seeing. It kinda reflects off the main fuselage too, making it easier to see from the side.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Rightio, who was on the plane? and what is your angle ?

a reply to: scubagravy


www.dailymail.co.uk...

Revealed: Russia jet crash pilot was on his last flight before starting a new life in Ireland with his pregnant wife... and IGNORED warnings over deadly turbulence

what was he THINKING???

originally posted by: Quantum12
a reply to: Zaphod58

Ok thank you. The pilot must have not know they would be in a hold for 2 hours. I am sure if he had know he would have diverted his plane.

That is the rub, and at the bottom of it. Pilots discretion, If after two hours of holding conditions haven't changed, then he should have diverted. He wanted to go round again…

a reply to: Zaphod58


If he was dropping from a thousand feet and the rate of descent of the winds from the cloud ahead was 6000 feet a minute, thats less than ten seconds to react.

Scenario

An aircraft on final approach encounters strong headwinds followed swiftly by a strong downdraft and loss of altitude. The Captain elects to carry out a missed approach, raises the undercarriage and pushes forward the throttles. However, the engines take time to spool up, the aircraft continues to lose height and encounters strong tailwinds causing loss of lift and further loss of height. The aircraft hits the ground sustaining structural damage and crashes.

microburst

a reply to: intrptr

They were around 1,000 feet when the decision was made to go around. They were over 3,000 when they began the descent that resulted in impact.

a reply to: research100

Getthereitis. They were supposed to land at Rostov-on-Don, and that was where they were going to land. They didn't have a backup plan. It's happened a lot more than you realize, but most times it doesn't have a bad ending.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So he recognized it, saw it coming and tried to abort, too late. With advance weather warning, the first failed approach, then the second, and then his last transmission, going around (again).

20/20 hindsight is easy, I know. What would you have done?

a reply to: intrptr

Diverted. Two hours is way too long to hold for weather. They landed several planes before him, but that weather changes way too fast, and I have far too much respect for weather. Better to land somewhere, and have to wait a few hours to get to where you're going, then to end up a hole in the ground.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Right, he should have diverted. He most likely did not know he would have to circle for two hours. A sad story.

I'm looking at the limits for the 737-800, and they were pretty close to the crosswind limits. Maximum crosswind is normally 36 knots, which is 41 mph. But depending on runway conditions it can be as low as 10 knots. Dry runway is 36, fair runway is 20, poor is 10. Visibility of less than 3/4 mile it's 15, less than 1/2 mile it's 10, and for an instrument approach it's 10-15.

These aren't hard and fast limits, but at the same time, you really don't want to push them too far.

I will definitely not hold for 2 hours waiting for wx to clear up. just divert when in doubt.

I hope the cockpit voice recorders aren't too damaged. I'd like to know if the other crew member(s) tried to talk the pilot out of trying to land again. Maybe in that culture, it's a no-no to openly question your captain?

a reply to: carewemust

Both recorders were recovered today, and were said to have very little damage.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: carewemust

Both recorders were recovered today, and were said to have very little damage.

Good. Thanks for that information, Zaphod58. I guess we'll know if this is a clear case of pilot error in a few days.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Max demonstrated crosswind for the B737-NG is 36 kts handflown and 25kts autoland.

My airline has 35kts handflown and 20kts autoland limits (dry runway) and 25 kts autoland in those new -800 with active rudder channel and rollout guidance.

A former airline i used to fly for had 40kts handflown and 15kts autoland limits, so i guess it's up to the airline to set limits as long as they can get insurance.