TAM Crash In Sao Paulo

[Ex737Driver]

Airbus A320 that skidded off the runway and airport.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070718/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_plane_crash

 

[whatitdoing?]

If the pilots lived, they'll be in prison for life. It's awful down there........ATC wise.

 

[AA717driver]

Let's hope everyone is ok. Don't we have some TAM people here? TC

 

[regionaltard]

Airport info.

 

[igneousy2]

Let's hope everyone is ok. Don't we have some TAM people here? TC

Vans used by Sao Paulo's morgue sped away from the site hours after the crash and a doctor helping rescue workers told CBN radio that efforts were being made to identify 30 bodies.
"I can verify 30 burned bodies and I know that there are burned bodies in another location"


A federal court in February briefly banned takeoffs and landings of large jets because of safety concerns at the airport, which handles huge volumes of flights for the massive domestic Brazilian air travel market. But an appeals court overruled the ban, saying it was too harsh because it would have severe economic ramifications and that there were not enough safety concerns to prevent the planes from landing and taking off at the airport.




Maybe they'll charge the appeals court judge with murder! NOT!

This is what happens when you let lay-people like judges dictate the course of your aviation safety programs.

Later

 

[B-atch]

CNN reporting that 200 confirmed dead, as a result of the TAM crash. 176 on board and the rest on the ground and in the impacted building. Truly a sad day.

 

[fareview]

Guys - If any of you have a link to a site where the pilots are named I would appreciate it. I have some TAM 320 buddies who I am unable to contact.

fareview

 

[Oakum_Boy]

Regardless of the appeals court ruling, the airlines are willing to take the risk if it means a crash every five years. It's an acceptable loss rate. It works like that here too. It especially works well when they can pin it on the pilots. Like icing on cake.

 

[regionaltard]

Guys - If any of you have a link to a site where the pilots are named I would appreciate it. I have some TAM 320 buddies who I am unable to contact.

fareview

Try the Brazilian media.

 

[fareview]

Thanks - mission accomplished.

fv

 

[B747FR8DAWG]

If the pilots lived, they'll be in prison for life. It's awful down there........ATC wise.

Maybe if they were expat American pilots flying for them................:erm:

 

[flatspin7]

The part that really blew my mind is that its a 6300 foot UNGROOVED runway, landing in heavy rain its probably like stopping on a skating rink. The fact that 2 other planes ran of the end of that runway the day before really makes it sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

Looks like TAM has some experience wrecking airplanes out of this airport:

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9610/31/crash.update/index.html

 

[Draginass]

The Brazilian aviation system is both corrupt and incompetent. Not a good combination. Now they're still trying to hang the US crew involved in the midair collision for adhering to their ATC clearance.

 

[aa73]

Different video footage of the aircraft as it lands, from airport cameras:

http://mach.cdxi.googlepages.com/tam_congonhastv2_128.asf

 

[regionaltard]

Different video footage of the aircraft as it lands, from airport cameras:

http://mach.cdxi.googlepages.com/tam_congonhastv2_128.asf

Looks like they maxed out their bandwith for a while. Here's some spooky video.

 

[venr122]

For the airbus drivers out there, knowing we know almost nothing about this accident. Could the flight protection envelope thing (don't know what its called) have inhibited a max effort rejected landing? (over temping engines, pulling to the shaker etc) just curious.

Either way...on face value this sure seemed like an accident waiting to happen.

 

[StaySeated]

Once you lower the gear, most of the "protections" are inhibited. Upon touchdown, the bus acts like every other aircraft out there, with the exception of the trim-able horizontal stab, which resets itself to zero. The brakes are just like every other antiskid system. The auto brakes have a few oddities, but I would be very suprised if both guys weren't standing on the brakes manually. Reverse thrust is reverse thrust, nothing special. This could have been a 737 or a douglas or a fokker or a rj, standing water on an ungrooved surface is bad news.

 

[Say Again Over]

Thrust reverser 2 inop, why would they even attempt it?

 

[DO328-JET FO]

Short, wet runway with a thrust reverser inop, surely they have some sort of performance/landing limitation that would prevent them from even attempting to land in those conditions.

 

[shiznitobam]

TOLD TOLD TOLD TOLD TOLD!!! What a tragedy!

A question to those who fly a plane twin-engine (non-fuselage mounted) with reversers: If one reverser is inop do you not use the reversers or do you use the remaining reverser? What about if the engines are mounted on the fuselage? How long after deploying the reversers to get the engine back to positive thrust? Just for curious. 6,000ft ain't much space to try to jam on the brakes then decide to abort.

 

[trip]

How long after deploying the reversers to get the engine back to positive thrust? Just for curious. 6,000ft ain't much space to try to jam on the brakes then decide to abort.

What?? Go on home junior.

 

[shiznitobam]

What?? Go on home junior.

Thanks for the advice, I'm glad you jumped all over that one.

 

[sligo1]

Reversers don't come into play with landing performance numbers. Yes they do help but the numbers are not predicated on reversers. The non-grooved runway probally had more to do with the hydro planning. Who knows being a Monday morning quaterback is always easy.

God Bless the crew and pax

 

[CA1900]

Reversers don't come into play with landing performance numbers. Yes they do help but the numbers are not predicated on reversers.

You positive on that? Serious question -- I don't know the A320, but I recall the SWA 737-700 in Chicago did factor the reversers into the landing data. Just wondering if the A320 is the same way, or if it depends on the operator.

 

[shiznitobam]

Reversers don't come into play with landing performance numbers. Yes they do help but the numbers are not predicated on reversers. The non-grooved runway probally had more to do with the hydro planning. Who knows being a Monday morning quaterback is always easy.

God Bless the crew and pax

Wow, who would have thought that someone could actually answer a question instead of trying to reprimand someone for a perceived lack of experience.

Thanks for the answer. My condolences to the families of the crew and passengers.

 

[sligo1]

I am positive that all landing data is not predicated on the use of reversers. The numbers are factory data in a new airplane with test pilots flying the aircraft. Now is it practical-I don't have that answer. The SWA accident at MDW might have been more a contaminated runway issue, but I'm not sure. Once again sitting home at my computer is just not the same as flying that approach that night. I can only hope for the crew and pax

 

[sligo1]

CA 1900 just look at the numbers on your Simuflite or Flight Safety checklist- they don't predicate the landing distance with reversers.

I am certainly not an expert, but check it out


Good luck at NetJets and Fly Safe

 

[CA1900]

CA 1900 just look at the numbers on your Simuflite or Flight Safety checklist- they don't predicate the landing distance with reversers.

Yeah, in my plane they actually do. (Not on the abbreviated checklists--that's just dry data--but in the full AFM behind us.)

The Excel AFM has three landing distance tables: Dry, Contaminated without TR's, and Contaminated with TRs, along with various corrections for standing water, etc. That's why I was curious if the A320 had TR credit in any of its charts.

Good luck at NetJets and Fly Safe

Thanks, you too!

 

[sligo1]

Key point 1900 CA, but contaminated runway is the key. Was it contaminated runway criteria? I don't know. Just fly safe brother.