Spanair (SAS) MD-80 Crash on Takeoff in Spain

Amish RakeFight

Registered Loser
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Posts
8,006
Total Time
.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSLK27234920080820

At least 45 dead in Madrid plane crash

Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:23am EDT
By Paul Day

MADRID (Reuters) - At least 45 people were killed when a Spanair jet crashed on takeoff at Madrid airport on Wednesday, the government said, but an emergency services source reported about 150 fatalities.

A large cloud of smoke billowed at Terminal Four from the remains of flight JK5022's MD82 jet for Las Palmas in the Canary Islands. It shot off the runway carrying 164 passengers and nine crew, according to Spanair.

The national government's office in Madrid said 45 were confirmed killed and another 19 were seriously hurt while 35 were unharmed.

But a source at the emergency services said the deathtoll was much higher and that only about 25 people had survived.
"They are pulling out burnt corpses. The plane has been completely destroyed," said the source.

There were thick columns of smoke and police blocking off both ends of the runway, where more than 20 ambulances and many fire engines were parked, a Reuters witness said.

Dozens of shocked relatives began arriving at Las Palmas airport on the island of Gran Canaria, where they were whisked into a room away from the press and comforted by Red Cross psychiatrists.

Spanair is a subsidiary of Scandinavian Airlines Systems (SAS).
 

skyaddict

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Posts
651
Total Time
6500
Death toll now looks heavy with just a small number of survivors. I was looking at pprune where multiple posts indicate the plane had rejected an earlier takeoff, taxied back to the gate, and this was the second attempt, but as always we will have to wait for the investigation to go beyond idle speculation. Thoughts and prayers for the crew and passengers.
 

flyzimex

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
197
Total Time
6400
Latest death toll at 90 confirmed dead. However rescue workers claim only 26 injured have been taken to hospital, out of a total of 172 onboard.

Sad tragedy indeed..
 

satpak77

Marriott Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2003
Posts
3,015
Total Time
5000+
any similarity between this and the AA engine failure on takeoff in New York a few weeks ago?
 

flyzimex

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
197
Total Time
6400
any similarity between this and the AA engine failure on takeoff in New York a few weeks ago?
That would be too early to say, but the black box has been recovered.

This was actually the second attempt for departure. They had previously taxied out only to return to gate some 40 minutes later (without going airborne) to rectify a technical problem. After this was looked at they taxied out again for a second, and very tragic attempt, to takeoff.

FZ
 

ACL65PILOT

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Posts
4,621
Total Time
9000+
The news has stated that it got airborne for a little bit before crashing. If true there is something to be said that.

Either way it is a sad day. Thoughts and prayers with the loved ones of the crew and passengers.
 

Papa Woody

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Posts
520
Total Time
8,000
any similarity between this and the AA engine failure on takeoff in New York a few weeks ago?
The only similarity is that everyone aboard both aircraft speaks Spanish.
 

say again

I love her ARSE!!!!
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Posts
4,006
Total Time
5500
any similarity between this and the AA engine failure on takeoff in New York a few weeks ago?

What would be the similarity?? Im not sure how they could possibly be related in any way. Just me though, and I'm not an accident investigator. Sad news, once again. Thoughts and prayers to all involved.
BTW- love the avatar!!!:beer:
 

Amish RakeFight

Registered Loser
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Posts
8,006
Total Time
.
Update

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/08/hundreds-feared.html

Air safety experts say preliminary reports suggest the left-side engine on Spanair Flight 5022 caught fire or exploded as the airliner approached maximum take-off speed, causing the plane to skid off the runway in a crash that killed 153 people.

Witnesses say the Pratt & Whitney engine caught fire as the plane made its second attempt to take off from Barajas airport, causing the MD 82 to veer off course. The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, which is joining the investigation, said the plane "broke apart" on impact after skidding off the runway in a plume of thick smoke.

Arthur Alan Wolk, a lawyer who specializes in aviation safety, told us he suspects engine failure caused the crash and the plane's speed contributed to the death toll. "Often times passengers end up walking off the plane after an engine failure," Wolk says.

According to a report from Sky News, witnesses saw the plane's left engine catch fire just as the aircraft reached maximum runway speed and started to lift. The plane apparently broke in two on impact. "It's 150 feet long," Wolk says of the MD-82. "And when it hit the runway, it came down hard."

The plane, bound for the Canary Islands, carried 162 passengers, six crew members and four other airline employees. The airline hasn't released the death toll, but Spain's Development Minister, Magdalena Alvarez, said 19 people survived the mid-afternoon crash.
The Spanair plane was 15 years old, according to Bloomberg. The Associated Press reports that the pilot reported a problem with a gauge that measures the air temperature outside the plane, but it was repaired -- delaying the flight -- and the plane later took off. Alvarez said the cause of the accident "seemed to be an error during take-off," but Spanish media quoted unnamed sources saying the engine caught fire.

The aircraft was fitted with a Pratt & Whitney JT8D-217c engines, and Wolk says it isn't the first time that model's had problems. A Delta Airlines MD-88 had an engine fail during takeoff in Pensacola in 1996, killing to passengers when pieces of the engine penetrated the cabin.

McConnell Douglas built more than 1,100 MD-80s between 1979 and 1999. Generally considered a safe and reliable workhorse, the planes have been plagued by a recent spate of problems including issues with the plane's wiring and horizontal stabilizer, and more than 400 people have died in MD-80 crashes during the past five years. Questions about the MD-80's hydraulic system wiring prompted the Federal Aviation Administration to ground hundreds of the planes earlier this year for mandatory inspections.

The plane that crashed Wednesday in Madrid was owned by Spanair, a financially troubled subsidiary of Scandinavian Air System. Aviation Week reported earlier this month that Spanair plans to reduce capacity and cut over 1,000 employees, a move that had the airline's pilots considering a strike. Standard & Poors said Spanair, which SAS had been trying to sell, probably now has "no future," according to Bloomberg.
 

Papa Woody

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Posts
520
Total Time
8,000
Abort attempt past VeeOne.
 

skyaddict

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Posts
651
Total Time
6500
On pprune, consistent with some other reports, it now appears it got very briefly (just a few meters) airborne, then went off the side of the runway and into a ravine between the parallel runways, breaking up as a result of going down the ravine.
 

Papa Woody

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Posts
520
Total Time
8,000
My money's on this:

A "no-flap" takeoff attempt.

Reports are:

1) no "engine fire or explosion" despite what "eyewitnesses" said.

2) Used the whole runway, got briefly airborne, flipped over.

3) Pilots were distracted by financial insolvency, labor issues, and a return-to-gate maintenance event.

I love eyewitness accounts!
 

fifinella

Active member
Joined
May 7, 2008
Posts
43
Total Time
+
My money's on this:

A "no-flap" takeoff attempt.

While that's a possibility, highly unlikely with the takeoff config warning unless they didn't extend to flaps 11/Optimum and somehow the warning didn't annunciate.

Some survivors reported hearing a loud bang from the left engine and that the aircraft didn't seem to be going fast enough to lift off.

If the crew dealt with a left engine failure on takeoff, it seems odd that the a/c would impact right of runway centerline unless somehow more aileron than rudder authority was used to counteract the adverse yaw. Aileron use in this situation could be real problem because only 5 degrees of aileron movement will cause the flight spoilers to augment the ailerons in the turn with the MD80 series.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the families, loved ones, and those that perished.
 
Last edited:

flyzimex

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
197
Total Time
6400
At a friend's of mine (MD80 capt) former company a crew took off in an MD with 0 flaps fully loaded at an airport in the Canarian Islands, destination of flight 5022. Somehow they managed to get it off the ground and the FDR showed three VERY steep banks at low altitude. How they could miss it on the checklists and no warnings going off is a mystery to me.

Not nice to be a pax on that flight!

While that's a possibility, highly unlikely with the takeoff config warning unless they didn't extend to flaps 11/Optimum and somehow the warning didn't annunciate.

Some survivors reported hearing a loud bang from the left engine and that the aircraft didn't seem to be going fast enough to lift off.

If the crew dealt with a left engine failure on takeoff, it seems odd that the a/c would impact right of runway centerline unless somehow more aileron than rudder authority was used to counteract the adverse yaw. Aileron use in this situation could be real problem because only 5 degrees of aileron movement will cause the flight spoilers to augment the ailerons in the turn with the MD80 series.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the families, loved ones, and those that perished.
 

fifinella

Active member
Joined
May 7, 2008
Posts
43
Total Time
+
I read on another thread that it's been reported that investigators found a thrust reverser deployed. Doesn't say which thrust reverser.
 

Papa Woody

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Posts
520
Total Time
8,000
I read on another thread that it's been reported that investigators found a thrust reverser deployed. Doesn't say which thrust reverser.
That would explain the "bang" and the crash.

Obviously a major malfunction.

Someone's in BIIIIIG trouble.
 

fifinella

Active member
Joined
May 7, 2008
Posts
43
Total Time
+
Read yesterday investigators looking at the wreckage found the right thrust reverser deployed. Now they need to determine whether the thrust reverser deployed on takeoff or deployed due to impact.
 
Top