Combination of errors cited for Fokker crash

[Abbas Ali]

By Baqir Sajjad Syed

ISLAMABAD, Feb 16: A combination of errors made by the ground staff and those made by the pilot resulted in the crash of Fokker flight PK-688, killing all those on board, an official investigation into the tragedy has concluded.

“A tragic coupling of factors led to the crash,” a senior Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) official told Dawn on Friday.

The Lahore-bound Fokker F-27 crashed on July 10 minutes after taking off from Multan airport. The 41 passengers killed in one of the worst air crashes in the country’s history included two judges of the Lahore High Court, two brigadiers of the Pakistan Army and a vice-chancellor. Four crew members also perished.

An investigation was ordered into the crash which was supervised by the CAA. The report of the investigation has been submitted by the defence ministry to Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, who will decide whether or not to declassify it.

So far the authorities have been jealously guarding it. The National Assembly was on Thursday informed by the parliamentary secretary for defence, Tanveer Hussain Syed, that some of the report’s “contents” made its unveiling difficult.

According to one of the sources, the pilot of the ill-fated aircraft could not handle the emergency situation and turn it back towards Multan airport. This means that there may have been some flaws in his training.

Before the plane’s take-off mistakes were committed by the airline’s engineering department which overlooked faults in the aircraft’s mechanical and electrical systems. The right engine of the aircraft was said to have developed a fault while taxiing prior to take-off. The aircraft got airborne with one engine, but the pilot failed to maintain its balance.

However, the source kept mum over reports that the aircraft, after it had caught fire, could not be taken back to the airport because of faulty radars. Unfortunately, visibility was also very poor that day.

President of the Pakistan Airline Pilots’ Association, Capt Khalid Hamza, conceded that the crash occurred due to the pilot’s error. But he added that all possible reasons behind the crash should be explored in great detail.

Azfar-ul-Ashfaque adds from Karachi: The CAA has claimed that the crash was in no way connected to flight inspection or calibration of instruments at Multan airport.

On Thursday the parliamentary secretary for defence, Tanveer Syed, had told the National Assembly that some lapses had been detected in the calibration of instruments at Multan airport. Serious calibration faults had also been found at other airports, he claimed, adding that even a VIP aircraft could meet an accident in such a situation.

However, a CAA spokesman refuted this and said: “(The) CAA, as defined by the ICAO, is maintaining all navigational, communications, route, approach and visual aids on all its airports at an optimum.”

Source: DAWN

Related Topics:

Topic: PIA Fokker down?

Topic: Minister knows what caused Multan Fokker crash

Topic: CAA says airports properly calibrated

[PK757]

??????

its just too easy for them to blame the pilot who is not even around to defend himself,

these officials would ofcourse go to any extent to prove that there was no negligence on their behalf.

human error is a possibility but weigh the other factors !

[PowerPlant]

The report will bascially be protecting those who are alive and caused the crash by putting up the blame on the Cockpit Crew

[Adnaan786]

It's sounds a little like it is turning into a blame game?

The Government, PIA and CAA need to remain objective and not become emotionally involved. There's no doubt that there is always a chain of short comings in any accident, so no one person or organisation is to blame. Best thing to do is to declassify the report, so that we can all learn from the mistakes.

Condolences to the families involved.

[inducedrag]

PALPA president is blaming the pilots is very strange, he is suppose to look after the welfare of PIA pilots specially the one not there to defend them self

[FULLTHRUST]

What faulty radar? what poor visibility? nothing to do with the crash!!!

Khalid Hamza is a straight guy. People like him should be everywhere in the airline.

[ConnieMan]

Blames on fight crew will always be around as they are not there to defend them selves anymore, this is always the case when cockpit crew is lost in any crash, very easy to play this game and cover the actual facts and factors related to the crash and loss of lives. I doubt it had anything to do with radar or that poor doomed day's weather, its more sounds like technical engine and electronics fault, plus may be that being twin engined aircraft since right engine wasn't at full power at the time of take off, even though pilot tried his best to yaw the aircraft in opposite direction to keep it in leveled flight but thrust from opposite engine was too much that he couldn't over take its power resulting in flat spin and loss of control, don't forget most of the controls on F27s were or are mostly mechanical not hydrolic or phenumeticly assisted specially flight control surfaces...

Hey i could be wrong but i am saying from experience of flying twin engined flying model aircrafts and don't say they are toys as they are not!!....

[Saeed]

declassify the report, initiate criminal negligence cases against airline management, engineering and cargo officials and if found guilty send them to jail.

[AN]

why dont we wait till the report is released until blame is laid.

Even when it is released, who is to say its true? how credible is the investigation committee?

[TAILWIND]

Connieman said

Hey i could be wrong but i am saying from experience of flying twin engined flying model aircrafts and don't say they are toys as they are not!!....

Yes indeed they are. A twin engined model and F-27 are two very diferent things.

plus may be that being twin engined aircraft since right engine wasn't at full power at the time of take off, even though pilot tried his best to yaw the aircraft in opposite direction to keep it in leveled flight but thrust from opposite engine was too much that he couldn't over take its power......

Twin engined aircraft are designed with sufficient rudder authority to overcome single engine yaw conditions, otherwise they would not be certified.

........ resulting in flat spin and loss of control.......

The unfortunate fokker never entered spin flat or other wise. It was a gradual descent over a mango orchard and after clipping trees on the egde it hit the ground in an open area.

....don't forget most of the controls on F27s were or are mostly mechanical not hydrolic or phenumeticly assisted specially flight control surfaces...

Then so what?????

It looks everybody in this forum is an (armchair) expert in aircraft accident investigation.. Mind you as flying MSFS does not make you a pilot, watching Nat Geo does not make you an aircraft accident expert. RELAX and wait for the official report....

[ConnieMan]

why dont we wait till the report is released until blame is laid.

Even when it is released, who is to say its true? how credible is the investigation committee?

Sure you have a valid point there, how true will it be is anybody guess???

[ConnieMan]

Connieman said

Hey i could be wrong but i am saying from experience of flying twin engined flying model aircrafts and don't say they are toys as they are not!!....

Yes indeed they are. A twin engined model and F-27 are two very diferent things.

plus may be that being twin engined aircraft since right engine wasn't at full power at the time of take off, even though pilot tried his best to yaw the aircraft in opposite direction to keep it in leveled flight but thrust from opposite engine was too much that he couldn't over take its power......

Twin engined aircraft are designed with sufficient rudder authority to overcome single engine yaw conditions, otherwise they would not be certified.

........ resulting in flat spin and loss of control.......

The unfortunate fokker never entered spin flat or other wise. It was a gradual descent over a mango orchard and after clipping trees on the egde it hit the ground in an open area.

....don't forget most of the controls on F27s were or are mostly mechanical not hydrolic or phenumeticly assisted specially flight control surfaces...

It looks everybody in this forum is an (armchair) expert in aircraft accident investigation.. Mind you as flying MSFS does not make you a pilot, watching Nat Geo does not make you an aircraft accident expert. RELAX and wait for the official report....

Yes on one part you are right but not on other NO, like i said before model aircrafts are not toys and are harder to fly then most real aircrafts out there, i'm sure you haven't flown any model aircraft so you have no clue, even real pilots who also fly model aircrafts say its harder to fly these models compared to there real ones!, this is because you are flying them from out side and trying to get that feel for it vs being inside the cockpit and feeling it that way, like your car!.

Now let me clear this to you Model aircrafts are aerodynamically same as real aircrafts as models are developed similarly, when we design model aircraft we try to use same or close enough airfoils on the wings as real one have and same goes for the shape of fuselages also, everything gets calculated on the plans and C.G , lateral balances are all measured before you can fly models too, effects of air on real aircraft vs model aircraft is same! and they function same to.

I crashed my 85"WS B25 "Mitchell" once due to one engine dead sticked on me, i did gave full opposite rudder and aileron to counter the yaw but i didn't do it with in secs of engine flame out as my model was 500ft away and flying at 300ft !, if i had known right away what engine flamed out i would have cut the power to 1/4 and safely landed it. So my point is model aircrafts fly same or even harder then real ones so please don't judge me on this aspect as i used my experience for briefly relate as to what may have happened on that doomed flight being B25 and F27 twin engined aircrafts..If you guys can't understand still then i'll be out of this topic and won't get into it again....

""Then so what?????""

Well so what is that i am sure pilots of that doomed flight must be trying there best to save the aircraft from crashing but may be flight controls they were fighting may not be responding or may have jammed and poor guys couldn't do much there and went in

[Adnaan786]

Connieman said

plus may be that being twin engined aircraft since right engine wasn't at full power at the time of take off, even though pilot tried his best to yaw the aircraft in opposite direction to keep it in leveled flight but thrust from opposite engine was too much that he couldn't over take its power......

Twin engined aircraft are designed with sufficient rudder authority to overcome single engine yaw conditions, otherwise they would not be certified..

You are right, but if it was an extremely hot day and/or they let the speed drop back too far then this might result in not having enough rudder authority.

The article Abbas posted above read that the pilots didn't have the knowledge or lacked the recurrent training to deal with such a problem - this is really hard to believe!

[Adnaan786]

I crashed my 85"WS B25 "Mitchell" once due to one engine dead sticked on me, i did gave full opposite rudder and aileron to counter the yaw but i didn't do it with in secs of engine flame out as my model was 500ft away and flying at 300ft !, if i had known right away what engine flamed out i would have cut the power to 1/4 and safely landed it.

ConnieMan I suggest next time you cut the power to both engines and glide your plane down.

[ConnieMan]

I crashed my 85"WS B25 "Mitchell" once due to one engine dead sticked on me, i did gave full opposite rudder and aileron to counter the yaw but i didn't do it with in secs of engine flame out as my model was 500ft away and flying at 300ft !, if i had known right away what engine flamed out i would have cut the power to 1/4 and safely landed it.

ConnieMan I suggest next time you cut the power to both engines and glide your plane down.

Yeah i learned it hard way that time, it did happened couple times after that incident and i managed to cut the power but not dead sticked it and brought the plane back and landed it safely while one engine was still running at 1/4 throttle and giving it half opposite rudders