Don't have any pictures, too dark right now.
It was on a high power run and somehow the aircraft rolled into a cement wall. The aircraft has broken into at least two section per people on scene.
Printable View
Don't have any pictures, too dark right now.
It was on a high power run and somehow the aircraft rolled into a cement wall. The aircraft has broken into at least two section per people on scene.
Quote:
Airbus A340 involved in ground collision during engine testing
11.15.07, 1:00 PM ET
PARIS (Thomson Financial) - An Airbus aircraft was involved in a collision on the ground during engine testing this afternoon.
The four engine A340-600 destined for Etihad Airways was involved in the collision at around 5pm Toulouse time, a spokeswoman for the EADS unit said.
The accident took place on Airbus land at Toulouse Blagnac, adjacent to the city's airport, the spokewoman said.
The spokeswoman was not able to confirm reports of injuries among the people on board the aircraft.
wow. was it the airplane in this picture: [airlinerstp://www.airliners.net/open.file/1292105/L/[/airlinersbottom right corner of the pic...
What's the deal with 346's and accidents lately? First the incident in QTO and now this in TLS....makes you sorta wonder.
AP reports 5 injuries to people on board.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fligh ... amage.html
HOLY MOLY! :shock: The aircraft is definitely a write-off. The front section has been completely severed from the rest of the aircraft and I'd imagine there was quite a bit of warping and stress in all parts of the fuselage. The photo at the bottom of the link shows the extent of the damage. Talk about a bad week for Airbus.
WOW!! that airplane is done for, probably going to be the #2 A346 scrapped. i'm sure airbus will have to pay for all of that as it hasn't been delivered to ETIHAD yet.
Holy ****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Another bad week for Airbus.
Every week is bad for Airbus if you are a share holder.Quote:
Originally Posted by lijk604
http://www.except.nl/overig/uploads/kittens/fail.jpg
Seriously, I hope no one was badly hurt.
Well, if the issue in Quito was that there's no repair facility close at hand... :> I wonder how much of this aircraft is going to wind up "recycled" further down the 346 line.
Initial Airbus AIRTEC (AOG Center) assessment said the airframe is a total loss. Etihad will be an A340 short for at least 16 months per Airbus' current back log, unless they found another airline or lessor that is willing to give up an A330\A340 production slot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mateo
Just based on my previous experience with a similar incident:
As for "recycling", if it is considered a "total loss", the airframe will be paid for by Airbus' insurance co at the insured value, the insurance co will then auction off the wreckage. Airbus will properbaly not use any part of it for another new aircraft, since they are not authorized to use any "used" parts per their manufacturing authority. Totaled engines will be treated the same as the airframe, damaged engines will get a full tear down, any parts found damaged during detail inspection will be paid for by RR's insurance, to a total limit of 1/2 of the catalog price of the complete engine (typical for Airline insurance), then a total loss will be declared, very likly most of the inspected engine parts will be reinstroduced into the spares market via third party. The cabin furnishing provided (seats, galleys, and IFE system, purchased by Eithad and installed on the aircraft) is approximately $10M, Airbus' insurance company will not consider that as a loss and either sue Etihad to take them back or Airbus may take the responsibility, selling them as an used surplus package and buy all new equipment to be install on the replacement airframe.
Heres My ?
Who's safety record does this go under? Etihad or Airbus themselves. Not to start an A v B war but didn't they damage the airframe that would become AA 587?
Whats with the A346? :( And normally bad things happen in threes so now I wonder whats next? :(
So whose job was it to check the parking brakes??? :oops:
The photos on flightblogger just about made me cry. It's a damn shame to see any a/c written off, but it seems worse that this baby never left home.
I would have loved to have seen the event.
I am speculating the brakes were on, engines spooled up, and then the brakes somehow failed and that thing must have just vaulted right into that incline wall.
Incredible to think it occurred.
Wow that forward section looks bad and seems to be just hanging by a thread, you can really see it in the daylight picture posted on Flight Global. Thoughts are with the injured of course. According to comments from James Hogan of Etihad quoted on PPRuNe, the injured are not Etihad employees, they are from Airbus and Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies (the company formerly known as GAMCO or Gulf Aircraft Maintenance) which does EY maintenance. The important thing for now is that the injuries are not life-threatening. Abu Dhabi has plenty of money for another plane, although it seems they probably hadn't taken possession of it anyway making this an Airbus accident as opposed to an Etihad one.
It is possible that it hopped the chocks with the brakes set. I have seen it happen to a Mig23 privately held in Sarasota. They were running it mac power with afterburner and it hopped the chocks and just skidded untill they retarted power. Not only that but it flat spotted the main gears.
Here is a photo of the disaster:
[airlinerstp://www.airliners.net/open.file/1293784/L/[/airliners
from FlightGlobal:
Quote:
Toulouse accident occurred as Airbus A340 was exiting engine test-pen
By David Kaminski-Morrow
Airbus has told Etihad Airways that the A340-600 wrecked at Toulouse during pre-delivery checks had completed its engine test-runs and was exiting the test area at the time of the accident.
Etihad Airways had been due to take delivery of the A340 on 21 November. Five of the nine personnel on board the Rolls-Royce Trent 500-powered jet were injured when it struck the wall of the engine-test pen, destroying the forward fuselage.
A spokesman for Etihad confirms that the aircraft has been written off.
http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/g...x?ItemID=20433
© Remy Gabaldi / AP Photos
Neither Airbus nor French investigation agency BEA has given further information about the circumstances of the accident.
But the Etihad spokesman says that Airbus has told the carrier that the engine test-run had already been completed beforehand, and that the A340 had been making its way out of the pen. The pen is located 500m southwest of a point lying about 1,000m along the length of Toulouse Blagnac Airport’s runway 32L.
The spokesman says: “The whole aircraft and its contents were insured by Airbus as the aircraft was operating under a temporary French registration [F-WWCJ] until 21 November when Etihad was set to have the aircraft delivered.”
But he says that the short-term impact on Etihad’s network arising from the loss of the aircraft is “not expected to be significant” because the A340 was initially due to act as a spare to cover heavy maintenance of the A340-600 fleet. Etihad has two of the type.
Very interesting, so it was AFTER the engine test and presumably during a taxi sort of operation. Wonder if the steering or the brakes failed. The -600 is of course the longest airliner in the world (the prototype said so right on the side) and because of this apparently not the most manouverable aircraft on a taxiway.
i could see brakes failing or the a/c jumping the chocks during an engine run, but to crash like that after completing the runs is beyond me. i'm left with one question, was spellman at the controls?
I've suspected this was something much more serious than a brake failure or jumping the chocks, and this reinforces my thinking...
This is complete Monday-morning-quarterbacking, and I have no real knowledge of what is involved in the engine test that was being performed.
However, it is clear that the plane was moving at significant speed in order for the nose to have climbed a 50 foot wall at a 45 degree grade. If the brakes failed, or she jumped the chocks, there likely would have been a good amount of time to cut the throttle and deploy reversers before gaining that much speed, and/or hitting the wall. The photos indicate no deployment of the reversers.
I suspect the aircraft might have suffered a complete loss of throttle control, throttled up on its own and did not respond to attempts to stop it.
The reports by Airbus state it was taxing. With as light a load as the jet had and the power those trents have it should have required nothing over idle thrust onces the brakes were released to get the plane rolling at a nice little clip.
If that's the case and it sounds like it may very well be I'm wondering why the crew didn't shut the engines using the cutoff switches and slam the breaks? I've done things in the sim that concern engine run and and when you hit those breaks these birds do stop pretty quickly. I'm just blown away that this bird is a goner, a brand new A340-600 gone.....amazes me. She'll prob hang around Airbus for a period of time to as I'm sure she'll be parted out over time.Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamSpotter
I agree with Matt. There must have been some speeding up involved if this was AFTER the test. That is not a simple taxi maneuvering issue.
The amazing thing is that after 2 more writeoffs, making 5 total for the A340, it still hasn't killed anyone (2 landings, 2 during mx, and 1 during hostile action)! Let's hope the streak continues.
Matt, I've no real knowledge eiher, but is that A380 trying to ride up the Etihad's backside? :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamSpotter
Seriously, I read this somewhere online:
FOR ABOUT 3 MINUTES BEFORE THE END OF THE EVENT, ALL FOUR ENGINES EPR WAS BETWEEN 1.24 AND 1.26 WITH PARKING BRAKE ON AND WITHOUT GROUND CHOCKS.
THE ALTERNATE BRAKE PRESSURE WAS NORMAL. (WITH PARKING BRAKE ON, BRAKE
PRESSURE IS SUPPLIED BY ALTERNATE).
13 SECONDS BEFORE THE IMPACT THE AIRCRAFT STARTED TO MOVE. WITHIN 1 OR 2
SECONDS THE CREW APPLIED BRAKE PEDAL INPUTS AND SELECTED PARKING BRAKE OFF. THESE ACTIONS LED THE NORMAL BRAKE PRESSURE TO INCREASE TO ITS NORMAL VALUE.
2 SECONDS PRIOR BEFORE THE IMPACT, ALL 4 ENGINE THRUST LEVERS WERE SELECTED TO IDLE.
THE AIRCRAFT IMPACTED THE CONTAINMENT WALL AT A GROUND SPEED OF 30 KTS.
SO no chocks, and it hit the wall at 30 Knots. Still trying to figure out what makes up 13 seconds prior to impact and what was going on. ONly 3-4 seconds are accounted for.
Ran across some more photos of this bird today in my work email inbox.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...eckt/a3457.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...eckt/a3456.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...eckt/a3455.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...eckt/a3454.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...eckt/a3453.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...eckt/a3452.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...eckt/a3451.jpg
A real shame!
Sick, thanks for sharing those.
They did not have chocks!!!! and ran 4 engines up? WOW..... Can you say RETRAINING? NOT GOOD! :roll: