Printable View
I am VERY shocked that Spanair has gone and posted the passenger manifest on their site. I assume that they contacted families and are not using this for notifications, right? Also, why would this be posted at all? It's so disrespectful during a time of mourning.
http://www.spanair.com/web/en-gb/DSite/ ... assengers/
From their main website:
Quote:
Spanair reports that after to have spoken with the relatives of the passengers that travelled in the airplane JK 5022 injured in Madrid has proceeded to publish the list of all the passengers in his web page (www.spanair.com/web/es-es/DSite/Listado-de-pasajeros).
Still, it's pretty tactless to release the list so soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by stuart schechter
I LOVE WERNER KURPJUWEIT
I was hoping that this tragedy will end on 40-50 fatalities (listed in earlier reports). Unfortunatelly poster of this topic was almost correct. Those are very very sad news :(
Some jackass channel 9 reporter stated in addation to the already known news " 30 years ago 2 MD-80s crashed in Tenerife"
Looks like we have yet another aviation expert with irrefutable proof :x
RIP to all on board
Not to speculate on the cause, but I read in a bunch of places about witnesses seeing an explosion in the left engine on takeoff including flames. Since it is typically very unlikely that an engine "shutdown" or compressor stall alone would down an aircraft like this, I am wondering if this engine failure went uncontained and damaged other parts of the aircraft. Has anyone read in what part of the aircraft the survivors were sitting? Sadly, I would venture to say that you won't find any who were sitting in the last few rows...
I have to wonder if the underlying reason that the airplane couldn't follow normal engine-out procedures is because of loss of flight controls somehow related to the engine failure...
I saw a seat map on a Spanish website that had rows 11-14 in green and mentioned something in Spanish about Rows 11-14 so I am guessing that where most of them where, though thats only 15 seats.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc2aqg
As anyone read anywhere if any of the cockpit or cabin crew where among the survivors ?
LGA777
Some IMO interesting updates about the tragic accident in MAD from ATW's Daily news.
Spanair considered 'replacing' doomed MD-82 before clearing takeoff
Monday September 1, 2008
Spanish Public Works Minister Magdalena Alvarez revealed Friday that Spanair considered transferring passengers aboard the MD-82 that crashed Aug. 20 to another aircraft after its first takeoff was aborted before ultimately deciding to clear it for a second takeoff.
Alvarez, whose regulatory responsibilities include civil aviation, testified before a Spanish parliamentary panel that the airline "informed [Madrid Barajas officials] of the possibility of replacing the aircraft" after the MD-82 returned to the gate owing to a malfunctioning air intake probe. Spanair mechanics disabled the system, which they deemed unnecessary for safe operations, and cleared the aircraft for takeoff. The airline has defended the move as standard.
Spanair said on Friday that it is "normal" to consider switching planes when an aircraft returns to the gate "for any reason." A survivor from the crash, which killed 154 of 172 passengers and crew, told reporters that busses pulled up next to the aircraft after it returned to the gate and that passengers believed they would be taken to another aircraft.
Meanwhile, the accident investigation continued to focus on the MD-82's two Pratt & Whitney JT8D-219s' thrust reversers (ATWOnline, Aug. 28). El Pais, citing sources at the airline, reported last week that Spanair disabled the right engine's thrust reverser three days before the accident. The newspaper reported that the carrier said an MD-82 can operate safely temporarily with a disabled thrust reverser and that its actions adhered with the aircraft's safety manual and EU regulations.
El Pais and other Spanish media also have reported that the left engine's thrust reverser was found deployed when it was recovered from the crash site. There has been no official confirmation of either the right reverser's disablement or the left reverser's deployment.
Alvarez defended the country's air safety record and said Spanair underwent 326 inspections from Jan. 1 to Aug. 20.
by Aaron Karp
Regards
LGA777
Had a discussion with one of my friends at work about this , it came out in ATW today
Last time an MD80 took off without flaps was in DTW many years ago , the result was not good either...
Quote:
Recovered flight data recorder from the Spanair MD-82 that crashed last month on takeoff from Madrid Barajas revealed that the flaps were not extended, according to The Wall Street Journal, which cited sources close the accident investigation. Investigators are examining why an automatic audible warning in the cockpit did not sound and are considering whether an electrical problem caused the alert to malfunction, according to the WSJ, which said preliminary FDR data indicated that both engines were operating normally and that there was no engine fire. The aircraft returned to the gate following an aborted first takeoff attempt owing to a malfunctioning air intake probe but was cleared for a second takeoff, during which it elevated only a few meters before crashing tail first into the runway and catching fire, killing 154 of 172 passengers and crew (ATWOnline, Sept. 3).
Things are pointing to an inadvertant link between the reason the aircraft returned to the gate and the accident .
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... rning.html
Quote:
Spanair MD-82 crash inquiry battles to understand absent flap warning
By David Kaminski-Morrow
Investigators of the Spanair Boeing MD-82 crash in Madrid are set to recommend a mandatory check of configuration warnings on the type, after confirming that the jet's flaps had not been deployed prior to a second attempt at take-off.
Spain's Comision de Investigacion de Accidentes e Incidentes de Aviacion Civil, in a draft report, states that the cockpit-voice recorder of flight JK5022 to Las Palmas did "not record any sound" from the take-off configuration warning system on the aircraft.
This initial report into the 20 August accident states that the crew did deploy the flaps to an 11° position when the aircraft first left its gate at Madrid Barajas.
But after receiving departure clearance the crew opted to taxi back to the apron after reporting a technical fault with the ram air temperature probe. The probe had apparently heated to 105°C while the aircraft was still on the ground.
Electrical circuits normally supply heat to the probe only when the aircraft is airborne - this is determined by logic circuits using weight-on-wheels sensors in the nose-gear. The reason for the apparent logic mismatch remains under investigation.
Crucially the probe shares an electrical link with the configuration-warning system, as well as other functions on the aircraft, through a relay designated R2-5.
After the MD-82 returned to the apron to have the temperature probe checked, engineers reportedly disconnected a circuit-breaker in order to resolve the heating issue before clearing the flight to depart