It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Columbia Reporting Plane Crash 81 People Brazilian Soccer Team

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Just heard a recording has been released of the Pilot saying they were out of fuel just before they crashed....Crazy.




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

It's not confirmed but a leaked copy of the recording shows the pilot reporting a total electrical failure and lack of fuel. They were actually about 60 miles beyond the published range of the RJ85, before adding in the time in the holding patten.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

How do they not make sure they have enough fuel for such a short trip???

Hundreds of flights everyday go from the West Coast to Europe and never run out of fuel.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Soloprotocol

It's not confirmed but a leaked copy of the recording shows the pilot reporting a total electrical failure and lack of fuel. They were actually about 60 miles beyond the published range of the RJ85, before adding in the time in the holding patten.

Makes it even more crazy does it not...Whatever happened to.... Sorry Tower, but we are landing NOW!!..Clear the #ing way... or,,,, Sorry boss but this plane wont make the Journey on that fuel load...Someone #ed up.
edit on 30-11-2016 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysticPearl
a reply to: Soloprotocol

How do they not make sure they have enough fuel for such a short trip???

Hundreds of flights everyday go from the West Coast to Europe and never run out of fuel.


I dont know?....You wouldn't set out on a journey in a car knowing you would run out of fuel before the next gas station..?utter madness.
edit on 30-11-2016 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

Why single out the US? If what you are saying is true ( I think that you are full of crap) there could be other countries with the same ax to grind. Hell it could be a false flag operation designed to put the blame on the US.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

the captians father was also a pilot...who died in a plane crash when his son (the pilot of this crash) was a baby....what are the odds?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: research100
a reply to: JIMC5499

the captians father was also a pilot...who died in a plane crash when his son (the pilot of this crash) was a baby....what are the odds?

In Latin America?...quite low.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: MysticPearl

It wasn't a short trip. It's roughly 1868 miles from Santa Cruz, Bolivia where they refueled, to Medellin, Colombia where they crashed. The published range of the RJ85 is 1600 nautical miles, which comes out to 1841 miles. That's not including the holding patter they were put into shortly before he called he was out of fuel. If they hadn't been put into the holding pattern, there's a good chance they land and nothing happens.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

This wouldn't be the first time it's happened with a South American pilot. An Avianca 707 crashed in New York. They were running low on fuel and were asked several times if they wanted to declare an emergency, and due to communication issues, they didn't. They were holding due to weather, and by the time they were cleared to land, they didn't have enough fuel and came down in some woods.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

The RJ85 has the option to add extra tanks to extend the range. It's not clear if this one had them or not. It's not necessarily the crew's fault. They could have had a mechanical issue preventing the fuel from reaching the engines, or even a slow fuel leak. It's too early to say for sure that they took off without enough fuel, even though that's most likely going to be the cause.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 08:04 PM
link   
The accident aircraft was put into a hold, for at least 7 minutes, after a VivaColombia A320 made an unscheduled landing with a cabin alert. The crew of the RJ85 asked controllers how long it would be and said they had an issue with fuel. They were told they would have priority to land as soon as the airport reopened. They were told to hold at FL210, but declared a fuel emergency, and they were already below FL180. They then reported a total electrical and fuel failure, and repeatedly asked for vectors. The controller tried to get them to the runway, but it was too late.

www.flightglobal.com...

Goal Keeper Jackson Follman had to have his right leg amputated.
Defender Helio Neto is in intensive care with severe skull trauma, as well as injuries to his lungs and chest.
Defender Alan Ruschel had surgery on his spine.
Flight mechanic Erwin Tumiri and flight attendant Ximena Suarez both suffered minor injuries.
Journalist Rafael Valmorbida is in intensive care for several rib fractures that caused a partial collapse of his lung.

www.reuters.com...
edit on 11/30/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 11:36 PM
link   
According to the airline website, before it was taken down, the range of the aircraft involved was 1842 miles, which means it didn't have extra tanks. There was no reason whatsoever for them to try to make this flight in one hop from Santa Cruz. Even if they hadn't run into the hold for the unscheduled landing, they would have been far below the international requirements for minimum fuel.

Amendment 36 to ICAO Annex 6 Part 1 discusses fuel management. Per chapter 4, the minimum amount of fuel on board will allow the aircraft to safely arrive at the destination airport, and divert to the nearest airport that a safe landing can be made at, with the planned reserve fuel amount on board.


4.3.6.3 'Turbine-engined aeroplanes' - The fuel and oil carried in order to comply with 4.3.6.1 shall , in the case of turbine-engined aeroplanes , be at least the amount sufficient to allow the aeroplane
4.3.6.3.1 - When a destination alternate aerodrome is required , either: a) to fly to and execute an approach , and a missed approach , at the aerodrome to which the flight is planned , and thereafter: 1) to fly to the alternate aerodrome specified in the operational and ATS flight plans ; and then 2) to fly for 30 minutes at holding speed at 450 m (1 500 ft) above the alternate aerodrome under standard temperature conditions , and approach and land ; and 3) to have an additional amount of fuel sufficient to provide for the increased consumption on the occurrence of any of the potential contingencies specified by the operator to the satisfaction of the State of the Operator ; or b) to fly to the alternate aerodrome via any predetermined point and thereafter for 30 minutes at 450 m (1 500 ft) above the alternate aerodrome , due provision having been made for an additional amount of fuel sufficient to provide for the increased consumption on the occurrence of any of the potential contingencies specified by the operator to the satisfaction of the State of the Operator ; provided that fuel shall not be less than the amount of fuel required to fly to the aerodrome to which the flight is planned and thereafter for two hours at normal cruise consumption
4.3.6.3.2 - When a destination alternate aerodrome is not required: a) in terms of 4.3.4.3 a) , to fly to the aerodrome to which the flight is planned and additionally: 1) to fly 30 minutes at holding speed at 450 m (1 500 ft) above the aerodrome to which the flight is planned under standard temperature conditions ; and 2) to have an additional amount of fuel , sufficient to provide for the increased consumption on the occurrence of any of the potential contingencies specified by the operator to the satisfaction of the State of the Operator ; and b) in terms of 4.3.4.3 b) , to fly to the aerodrome to which the flight is planned and thereafter for a period of two hours at normal cruise consumption.
4.3.6.4 - In computing the fuel and oil required in 4.3.6.1 at least the following shall be considered: a) meteorological conditions forecast ; b) expected air traffic control routings and traffic delays ; c) for IFR flight , one instrument approach at the destination aerodrome , including a missed approach ; d) the procedures prescribed in the operations manual for loss of pressurization , where applicable , or failure of one engine while en route ; and e) any other conditions that may delay the landing of the aeroplane or increase fuel and/or oil consumption.

www.skybrary.aero...



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: EchoesInTime

My question is, I want to know where the people who lived were sitting on that plane.

It's true that people in danger freak-out and that's bad. I have flown a lot, especially when I was young (with my parents, to visit family in Mexico) and we always knew that if something bad happened, freaking out would be 1. an even scarier way to die 2. useless 3. possibly a contributing factor to one's death. Therefore, staying calm is the answer. And praying, ofc.

I heard they fell from a height of 9000ft when they ran out of fuel. It's just awful.
I'm so glad there were survivors, though. That made me happy to hear. Especially the one who was well enough to speak to journalists right after the crash. From that height, that's nothing short of miraculous, imo.

edit on 1-12-2016 by rukia because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 04:22 AM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

6



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 04:24 AM
link   
RIP to those lost.

Put me in mind of Torino and Man U at first.
I know there were others on the plane, just the similarities that stuck.

Can not believe they ran out of fuel in 2016 for god's sake.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 04:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: rukia
I heard they fell from a height of 9000ft when they ran out of fuel. It's just awful.
I'm so glad there were survivors, though.


I's highly unlikely that it 'fell' from 9000ft. The issue it had was more that it was in a mountainous region, where that is not an above ground altitude - the runway is at about 7000ft above sea level. And it was night, the concept of trying to glide at night in mountainous terrain? Yuck.
And, unless the pilot was utterly terrible, the aircraft was likely still controlled until the ground, and not stalling. After all, there are plenty of survivable fuel exhaustion/loss of engine disasters out there:
The Gimli Glider Incident
Air Transat 236, landed in the Azores.
Miracle on the Hudson - loss of both engines and glided.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: apex

It all depends on the type of aircraft. Some, such as the Air Transat flight, you can glide for hours if you're careful. But there are some that if you don't stay two steps ahead of the aircraft, you're going to come down hard. According to reports, this one spiraled down to impact.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

OK, interesting. And how much is gliding an airliner ever expected to occur? I mean, are they not designed to be fairly controllable in that situation?



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
The Colombia Civil Aviation Authority confirmed they did not operate with the mandatory fuel load. The distance from Santa Cruz to Medellin, on the route they flew was 1588 nm, while the aircraft had a range of 1600 nm. The divert airport was listed as Bogota. They confirmed the recording was accurate, but he couldn't confirm it was complete.

www.flightglobal.com...



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join