Back to Squawk list

TransAsia ATR-72 crashes in Tapei

提交时间:
 
Taipei, Feb. 4 (CNA) An ATR-72 airplane belonging to TransAsia Airways crashed into the Keelung River in Taipei after hitting an elevated bridge, Taipei City government spokesman Sidney Lin confirmed Wednesday morning. The plane had just taken off from Taipei Songshan Airport and was headed to Kinmen Airport in the outlying county just off the coast of southeastern China. (focustaiwan.tw) 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


Quackers
Quackers 10
As unfortunate as this is, they missed all of those apartments etc... Had it hit one of those, you'd be dealing with a multistory fire, a lot of wreckage falling on streets below (likely crowded). RIP.
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 6
Audio recording from LiveATC.net

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/rcss/RCSS-Twr-Feb-04-2015-0230Z.mp3

At 23:25 we hear the pilot say "MAYDAY ENGINE FLAME OUT"
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 4
This is the 3rd fatal accident for TransAsia involving an ATR-72!
umcima1964
guy lever 3
news this morning was that the pilots shut down the good engine instead of the failing engine...apparently that information from the blackbox.
whip5209
Ken McIntyre 1
I had that opinion on the first day. Look just below in this thread.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well, further investigation into the CVR/FDR indicates the pilots got the engine out warning for the left side but either in haste or by mistake they shut down the good one. They did get a successful restart but way too late. Taiwanese investigators stopped just short of saying pilot error or mistake. However, transport authority or whatever the regulatory body is over there, has ordered a refresher on all ATR pilots, so we'll see.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well, if it was, it wouldn't be the first time.
flyingcookmosnter
True - Reminds me of the Air Force C5 that crashed at Dover, confused which engine had failed after putting the flaps and gear out. Not enough thrust on the two engines to remain airborne. I guess we can learn that if an engine fails you have to slow down double check (guard the good engine.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fI5xTmmPbsY
whip5209
Ken McIntyre 3
It looks to me like neither engine was powered up as the aircraft went over the highway. Anyone else get that impression?
skittel
skittel 4
yep, further in the thread, someone posted the liveatc feed where the pilot radios ATC with mayday and engine flame out... 23:25 of the audio http://archive-server.liveatc.net/rcss/RCSS-Twr-Feb-04-2015-0230Z.mp3

The resulting engine out causing adverse yaw didnt help as the pilot tried to maintain altitude...watch the sink rate comes over the building. Once the aircraft slows more than the MCA (minimum controllable airspeed), the left wing stalls and the aircraft rolls. The pilot did an admirable job setting the aircraft down in what may have been the only choice of clear areas to minimize casualities on the ground.
spatr
spatr 1
The ATR props don't turn very fast when they are running. I forget the actual number, but its around 1200 RPM. It looked like the left engine was feathered and the right was running....hence the VMC roll right before impact.
usad
usad 0
I agree. Looks like they ran out of right rudder or airspeed...needle below the blueline, in one hell of a hurry. If you ever wondered why your multi-instructer yelled at you if you just sat there and didn't react appropriately (and with all due speed) at an engine cut near the blueline right after rotation...here is a good example of what not to do. Also a good reason to not fudge on your weight figures too. You may need that 100 lbs back one of these days when the fire goes out. God bless those poor folks.
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
I'm happily amazed anyone survived.
AAaviator
AAaviator 2
That's awful. The video is hard to watch, as is the anguish on the faces of the victim's families as seen in other news footage. RIP
DSHartje
Dwight Hartje 2
Nice article! Better than the NBC reporting!
Kolinh
reports saying the plane was "sideways on descent"?

plane in video is wings level in top left navigating buildings and the Pilot flying makes a last hard left bank attempt to hit the river to keep casualties to a hopeful minimum.

so sad they couldn't power up enough with remaining engine to sustain flight.
skittel
skittel 2
makes sense...if the aircraft lost power, the pilot did the best with what he could.. the river was probably the only place he could set it down, but it looks like it possibly stalled as he was trying to get over the bridge, causing the wing to drop...You can see the sink rate in the video as it comes over the apartment buildings, then rolls left...
gearup328
Peter Steitz 0
No, the pilot didn't make a last hard left. The plane was out of control at that point. We'll see what his airspeed was. The left wing probably stalled with all thrust on the right and P factor pushing further to the left.
robertm46
Robert Mooney 2
Looks like the classic case where with one engine out (not sure which one critical on the ATR-72) and the pilot trying desperately to maintain altitude, the airspeed continues to drop to a point below that required for the rudder to continue to have control of the roll caused by the full-powered good engine trying to roll the aircraft to left. When you drop below the minimum single engine control speed, the aircraft will just roll to the left out of control and drop with no vertical lift. This is why multi-engine pilots do engine out minimum control speed demonstrations. Hopefully in the simulator. If you do them at altitude and take it below the minimum control speed you lose a lot of altitude quickly and it looks just like the car dash cameras shots taken of the crash. It is very hard to keep the aircraft pointed straight as the rudder struggles to control the roll and yaw and the airspeed is low. And, if the propeller is not feathered you will really have to push hard on the right rudder to maintain directional and roll control with the good engine at full power. One way to stop the roll/yaw tendency is to pull the power off the good engine and let it glide straight ahead. That has its own set of problems!
BaronG58
BaronG58 0
Port engine critical.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Everybody is saying that it was the port enging that went out. I really couldn't tell by looking at the video, except he lost a bunch of altitude in a hurry and did a fine job of missing those apartments and buildings
gearup328
Peter Steitz 1
Everything working properly that airplane should fly on the right only. Something else was going on.
preacher1
preacher1 2
CBS reporting this morning that both engines were out
BaronG58
BaronG58 1
Yes...just heard that on local news. Preach..we all have seen video..do you see that as a possibiliaty? Right engine appeared to be cranking at a pretty good clip to me.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Unless it went out on the way down and that's what they are talking about but I am like you it was cranking as it started down
BaronG58
BaronG58 0
I saw a still picture...obvious it was port.
gearup328
Peter Steitz 2
I think you guys have it right. CNN now has the talking heads and "experts" 24/7. That ATR should have been controllable (with an American crew). The Asians just aren't trained to our standards. Maybe, just maybe it was out of W/B limits? The performance is only guaranteed if the aircraft is flown within limits. Most engine failures in the sim are with loads that are legal. I flew the Do-328 and she would climb better than certificate even with the left failed, not feathered AND the gear down. That's an airplane!! Never liked the ATR or the Dash for that matter.
preacher1
preacher1 2
Well, the talking heads can say what they want, but as there is no GA program in most of these countries, most of these pilots, at least the seniors, are American trained. Now lack of a GA program may deprive them of some of the basics, but from what I have seen, you have to give the devil his due, and the FAA, along with the Airlines, are pretty well toing the mark on training and maintenance, which is why our U.S. crash rate has been so low in the last few years. That monitoring & enforcement seems to have been what is lacking overseas.
yr2012
matt jensen 1
Only like dash 7's - wingspan is longer than length
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
UPDATE

Taipei TV replaying video of the actual crash (see my link below)
vpinon01
vpinon01 1
Does anyone know for sure if it was fueled up? Having just taken off, there was no mention or video of any fire or smell of jet fuel. Thought that was a little unusual since he hit bridge. Did dry or low tanks cause an engine failure?
gearup328
Peter Steitz 1
Good observation. We'll soon know.
spatr
spatr 1
Well, it looks like the #2 failed and auto feathered and they shut down the #1. On the video it looks like the #2 is running. It is, autofeather doesnt shut the engine off it just feathers the engine. The #1 looks somewhat stationary because they feathered and shut it off. This shouldn't happen, but it does. As was mentioned in a post already, the plane was flying on one engine for a bit before they shut the wrong engine down. No reason to rush.
CaptJohn1
CaptJohn1 2
I guess in the heat of the moment, with little altitude to work with, there is very little room for error.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Likely, indeed!
rideclickcode
ride click 1
This stills pulled from the video in this look like it clipped the building damaging the pilots side horizontal stabilizer
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
Dash-cam video of the plane crashing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MMzCwzXMQY
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
Picture of taxi cab that we see being clipped by the wing of the a/c. Not known if there are injuries to occupants of the cab


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8-Ux3tIUAImOkV.png
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
UPDATE:

Video of the aftermath. No word on casualties

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VXVu3HQZXw
ssjan
Jan F 1
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Small plane crashes in Taiwan

An ATR-72 flying from Taipei was forced to dirch in a river after hitting an object.

http://jansaviation.com/news.php?art=small-plane-crashes-in-taiwan
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
UPDATE:

Amazing pictures of the a/c just before the crash!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8-NDJNIAAEdvyJ.jpg
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
UPDATE:

• 12 dead
• 16 injured
• 30 missing
• 58 aboard

Prospects of rescuing any more passengers look very grim
glen4cindy
Glen England 1
A similar thing happened with British Midland Flight 92. They shut down the good right engine when the left engine had suffered an internal failure, causing a crash. This may have already been said, but, I didn't read through all 103 comments.....
knutvm
Knut Meyer 1
Glen, further to all the other comments one has to wonder how both pilots could have mis-identified the failed engine. I can understand the need for haste at such a low altitude, but still they were about 1200' agl which would have been adequate to clean the aircraft up and adopt a straight and level flight when the engine failed and if the pilot flying had both feet on the rudder pedals I would have thought the old rule "dead foot = dead engine" would have helped the identification.
Assuming the aircraft departed from runway 28 at Songshan airport at the time of engine failure a gentle change in heading to the NW to follow the Keelong River valley would have given them the advantage of heading for the coast as well as obviating the need to climb. As it happens it seems that the aircraft did track to the right of runway centerline possibly to avoid rising terrain (there is a hill 1970' and 9 nm pretty well straight ahead after take off) which could account for them continuing to climb. The fact is that if they had done NOTHING except concentrating on flying the aircraft S&L at 1200' - 1300', let alone not pull the good engine, they would have survived. I believe the aircraft would have an autofeather prop.
Was the autopilot engaged (which it should not have been) so soon after take off? If it were engaged could that have been one of the reasons for not being able to identify the correct failed engine? Those final moments we see on the video certainly would suggest the aircraft had entered an incipient spin following a stall.
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
Watch LIVE TV of the rescue efforts in progress!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwrKzkRUlaw
fxg107
felipe gomez 1
any possibility they feathered the wrong engine british midland style?
spatr
spatr 1
The ATR autofeathers. If everything is working the failed engine autofeathers and the system adds power to the good engine. IF everything is working.
preacher1
preacher1 2
That is an awfully big IF.
spatr
spatr 2
My only engine failures in the ATR were in the sim. Even with autofeathering it was a handful. You still had work the rudder to maintain control. I can't imagine if the autofeather failed.
mariofer
mariofer 1
If you look closely at the still photos, you can see the left prop is feathered and the the blur is less than the right prop so the left prop was defenately running slower
gearup328
Peter Steitz 2
mariofer, you have it exactly correct. I saw it right away even before CNN got a hold of the video and now are claiming to have all the "experts" talk about it. Still, the aircraft should have been controllable.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Seems like I had a SIM round in them but I have slept since then. AA sent them to Abilene after a couple of months so I didn't have to deal with them anymore or refresh. I never did like them anyway. Sorry excuse for a plane. I think the junk that AA was running was the 24's. They went back to ERJ's on most of their schedules as the ATR's didn't save that much fuel and the slower time was really F******G up their schedules. They were running them out of DFW to mostly points in Texas, OK and AR. They had about 6 schedules a day into FSM and they would try and turn the ATR's on about half of them.
CaptJohn1
CaptJohn1 1
Heard something about they may have lost one engine and partial loss of power in the other one. Anyone else hear anything like that? It might explain why they weren't able to control the aircraft if they had one good engine.
preacher1
preacher1 1
As I said below, CBS reported this morning that both engines were go, but as we discussed, all of us have seen the videos and it looked like the right was cranking, so idk.
jamescagney2000
Abc just said they mistakenly shut off the good engine in hopes of restarting
preacher1
preacher1 1
Everybody is saying port engine is the critical one on the ATR. If it was down and they shut off the other, that may have worked with more altitude; obviously it didn't here.
CaptJohn1
CaptJohn1 1
I understand the starboard engine has a prop brake on it, they basically use the engine on the ground like an APU. Not aware of other differances between port and starboard engines.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I really can't remember. I was just going by another comment in this thread. I had ATR SIM time and about a month's worth of flying but that was about 5-6 years ago and all I flew was the 24.
gearup328
Peter Steitz 1
Hey guys and gals--this was not a V1 cut. This aircraft flew 3 miles on one engine. I'm thinking the left didn't feather. Gear box? Is it a free turbine or geared? How was it loaded? The ATR has a forward cargo bay (very unusual). Lots of questions I have. With all the secrecy over there and especially with TransAsia, we may never get the whole story.
madbluejay
jay vlez 1
Hello to all, these links provide Google views to those interested in these sort of details.

Contact point after wingtip impact a vehicle on the elevated roadway:

https://www.google.com.tw/maps/@25.062865,121.616984,3a,75y,58.96h,62.57t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sUtiZTzXP_ufcn-FeC8pIYA!2e0?


What it missed: View of the flight path it took towards impact avoiding lots of buildings:

https://www.google.com.tw/maps/@25.063035,121.616463,3a,75y,235.92h,100.45t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1siyXDYMbTCcvmWgGk2xvspQ!2e0

It's amazing that it's Pilots managed to avoid crashing into a building.
s2v8377
s2v8377 1
Here is a link to the Aviation Herald report on this crash:

http://avherald.com/h?article=48145bb3&opt=0
rideclickcode
ride click 1
The stills pulled from the video in this look like it clipped the building damaging the pilots side horizontal stabilizer.

(this didn't post right - trying to delete the other one)
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 3
I've looked at the video numerous times, and I'm wondering if there's a different one. To me it doesn't look like the plane came anywhere near close enough to clip the building.
madbluejay
jay vlez 1
The angle or perspective gives the impression of having a seemingly damaged HS but if you slow down the vid you see there isn't anything amiss. The path it took over those building here: https://www.google.com.tw/maps/@25.063035,121.616463,3a,75y,235.92h,100.45t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1siyXDYMbTCcvmWgGk2xvspQ!2e0?

A good path with lower buildings.
usad
usad 1
Yes, there are at least two different dash-cam videos. One is from a vehicle farther back on the highway and resolution can be turned higher on Youtube. I think that when it struck the building (as it appears to have...saw debris trail briefly) it slowed the plane so rapidly that it was pulled down below VMC immediately. Not positive about the left horizontal stabilizer, but I thought it looked like it took the blow. Pilot may have been in a VMC roll to the left when it struck the building. Don't know how they missed hitting the port wing. These guys were definitely in deep kimche at that point. If they had not fallen into the river, death toll would have been higher both in the plane and out. Plane was climbing like a B58 Baron, one engine, on a hot Texas afternoon with a full load of passengers and fuel.
rideclickcode
ride click 2
it looks controlled until the instant it passes over the building in Kevin's first video link.
usad
usad 1
By golly, I believe you are right. I watched the other videos at highest def several times. I think it clipped a building with the port side horizontal stabilizer. If you check the other vid, it's apparent that it is much shorter than the starboard side when it was at 90 degrees of bank in over the bridge. Totally out of control. VMC didn't have much to do with it at that point...except to make it worse. They were lucky to be over the water or nobody would have been saved.
CaptJohn1
CaptJohn1 1
Here's a good safety database on the aircraft type,"http://aviation-safety.net/database/types/ATR-72/index";.
shuras85
shuras85 1
Such unfortunate tragedies would continue at faster rates as the booming air travel region in that part of the world continues its growth in geometric progression. The laws are just in the books, widespread corruption, overwhelmed and ancient air traffic control system (s), not to mention a desperate outcry for qualified (safety cultured!!!!) personnel, are all contributing factors to a transportation infrastructure collapse. This is the airliners that make the news! See how many train and bus crashes account for deaths in that region. People of the developing countries are starting to have usable incomes, but their respectful systems are not ready to accommodate them, instead, they claim more and more victims...
preacher1
preacher1 3
Having flown in that part of the world quite a bit, let it just suffice to say that it is like the wild west in places and very nationalized, protective of airspace. It has been awhile since I have been over there and while improved, it's still not to where it needs to be. You had to kinda guess on what ATC meant when they told you something, if you could understand them. If you really wanted to piss a controller off, ask him to repeat in
GOOD ENGLISH.
gearup328
Peter Steitz 2
Yeah old preach. Go into Montreal and listen to the French, even in this day and age. I can speak French a bit and I probably pissed some off when I told them in French to use Englais.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Well, that's like that story going around about a Lufthansa pilot at Frankfurt was told by controller to speak English instead of German. He said here I am a German, in a German Aircraft, at a German Airport. Why should I have to speak English. A Speedbird pilot out there somewhere chimed in and said "because you lost the bloody war". Montreal not much better and it's been about 6-8 since I've been there but I have been told it hasn't improved much either. Truthfully, with the rise of all the airlines in various parts of the world, I wonder how long it will be before they go for a language change. It is only English because we are so many and whupped everybody in WW2.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Spanish comes to mind. We've already got a big start on that. Lol
preacher1
preacher1 2
Let's be nice Jimbo. We wouldn't want to be called racist or prejudice. LOL
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 3
We know we aren't racist. I do admit to many prejudices on a "one on one" basis. Those who say they don't are 99% liars. I feel real bad for the people involved in this accident and wish no harm to anyone in the world with the exception of those trying to kill us. You and I will probably make "remarks" till we run out of fuel. :-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
Yeah, and it has got to the point now that I am old, crusty and retired, I guess the truth will come out, whether PC or not. LOL
gearup328
Peter Steitz 1
Funny that ICAO is in France.
preacher1
preacher1 1
On the serious side, I wouldn't be surprised if there came a push for something else at some point and time. I can remember being in Germany as an Army brat in the early 60's. We weren't all that far past the war at that time, and while living on the economy for awhile until quarters on base opened, our land lord had a picture of himself in a SS uniform and Iron cross hanging off his neck, yet he worked for daddy out on post. My point is that he had 2 kids about our age and fluent English was required of them in school. Of course we had German in class and after 6 months, me and my sister were both speaking it fluently. After we came back stateside and no one to talk to on a routine basis, can't speak a word now. I don't know what they are doing over there now, whether it is still required or not. I have listened to Lufthansa pilots at various places around the world, and most of theirs don't even carry an accent.
preacher1
preacher1 1
On the serious side about the language, there does have to be something universal, but a lot of these guys concentrate more on their piloting skills than they do language. I guess it is English since, as Robert E Lee once said, we were there firstest with the mostest. He was speaking of winning a battle but I'm talking about the most planes.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
A cross country trip last year went thru Canadian provinces. I noticed that all of the signs were bilingual English and French, except in Quebec.
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 0
UPDATE:

Death toll stands at three. Watching LIVE Taiwan TV (see link below) and another passenger extracted from wreckage being given CPR
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 0
Rescuers are currently using the jaws-of-life to cut a hole in the fuselage
davemattenley
It is odd that they are having so many crashes with these Chinese company's . Maybe that lets not hire any one over 52 is staring to catch up with them.

[This poster has been suspended.]

KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 1
Yep! Just a little over six months since the last fatal TransAsia ATR-72 crash. This airline must have one of the worst safety records in the world.
bennettgaryw
Gary Bennett -3
Engine fail. Poor energy management. Stall. Your dead!
nashcat
nashcat 3
Brain fail. Poor thought management. Send. <- your post
bennettgaryw
Gary Bennett -3
You don't fly!
nashcat
nashcat 2
You don't think.
bennettgaryw
Gary Bennett -3
If you do then you should understand what I am talking about. It may not be PC but its a fact!
nashcat
nashcat 1
You've no idea what a presumptuous fool you look like.
bennettgaryw
Gary Bennett -2
I knew I was right.
CaseyGa1991
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

transAsia plane crash-lands in river in Taiwan

Reports say regional airliner came down in Keelung river in Taipei, with television footage showing ruptured fuselage in water.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/04/taiwan-plane-crash-lands-in-river
frank1711
frank1711 -1
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Very close call, dashcam video - TransAsia Flight 235 ATR-72 crash

An ATR-72 ditched attempted to ditch into a river in Taiwan Wednesday morning, after taking off from a nearby airport.

TransAsia Airways flight 235 took off from Taipei's Songshan Airport at 10:53am. Songshan Airport is a smaller alternative to Taoyuan, where most of the international flights land. Flight 235 was headed for Kinmen.

Just minutes after departure, it was forced to ditch in the Keelung River. The pilots called a mayday due to an engine failure. The plane was sideways on its descent, hitting an elevated roadway and a bus before flipping and breaking up on impact.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fWhYJNZt08
bizjets101
biz jets 1
I'd say failed port engine - not feathered - aircraft below VMCA - loss of control.
Investigators will need to know why engine failed, why props were not feathered, why the crew failed to maintain VMCA. Know for a fact I wouldn't be getting on this airline - period.
preacher1
preacher1 2
At least there were survivors. The investigation will be interesting
zainulp
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Video: Transasia ATR-72 Crash

A Tranasia Airways ATR 72-600 airplane which took off from Taiwan's Taipei-Sung Shan Airport crashed four minutes into the flight during its initial climb phase.

http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2015/02/transasia-atr-72-crashed.html
chuckmtl
chuckmtl 0
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

TransAsia plane crashes in Taiwan river - as it happened

Reports of 23 killed after regional airliner with 58 on board came down in Keelung river in Taipei

http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2015/feb/04/transasia-plane-crash-lands-in-taiwan-river-rolling-coverage
LittleT
LittleT 0
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Video of TransAsia ATR crash

A passenger plane clipped a bridge and plunged into a river in Taiwan on Wednesday, killing at least 23 people, according to the country's official news agency, CNA.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/04/asia/taiwan-plane-crash-transasia/index.html

登录

还没有账户吗? 现在就注册(免费),设置诸多自定义功能、航班提醒等等!