UPDATED: Spanair Off Runway at Madrid, 140 Dead

Quote:

---

Plane crashes in Madrid - deaths feared
Times Online

At least two people were reported to have been killed today when a packed passenger jet overshot the runway as it tried to take off from Madrid airport.

El Mundo newspaper reported on its website that the Spanair plane, with 60 passengers aboard, crashed as it tried to take off from Terminal 4 at the Barajas airport. It was headed for Las Palmas airport on the island of Gran Canaria.

Reports put the number of wounded as high as 43.

The craft was said to be in flames and sending a huge column of smoke into the air. Eleven fire engines were tackling the blaze. [Full Article]

---

UPDATED 11am

Quote:

---

140 dead in Madrid plane crash
Some 140 people were killed today when a packed passenger jet caught fire and overshot the runway as it tried to take off from Madrid airport, official sources said.

The Spanair plane, with 173 passengers and crew aboard, crashed and broke apart as it tried to take off from Terminal 4 at the Barajas airport. It was heading for Las Palmas airport on the island of Gran Canaria.

The Reuters news agency quoted sources in the emergency services as saying that all but about 25 of those aboard had been killed - far ahead of initial death tolls given by officials.

---

From what I found out, it was an MD-82.. The plane tried to abort take off after the #1 engine had fire.. I didnt think death would be involved with such incident... I havent seen pictures yet..

No pics of the plane yet it seems, just a lot of smoke. The airport is in a somewhat hilly area, and it looks like the plane may have gone down a pretty large hill, which would explain the break up and death toll.

Looks like 45-50 people are dead. All those news agencies making it out of proportion. Lets wait and see what Spanish government will say.

The aircraft that crashed is EC-HFP: http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6274538

R.I.P. to those who perished.

Here in the UK we heard about it around 5.30pm UK time and we got the same images as you.

Its very scarey to think such a thing happened, I aint a pilot or airplane engineer but it makes me think 3-4 engined planes could have been safer than 2 engined ones coz if one of the 3-4 fails you still have 2-3 left to fly the bird.

My deepest condole-lon-sense to the families of the dead.

Jetinder, a twin-engine airliner has the ability to continue takeoff and fly on one engine. Based on the reports, it sounds like this was an aborted takeoff that went off the end of the runway. Depending on when they initiated the abort, and what the conditions were, you can have that happen with any aircraft. If they were past V1 speed, they should have continued the takeoff, unless there was some catastrophic condition where they felt it better to abort and risk going off the runway. But past V1, even a twin-engine airliner should be able to safely complete the takeoff following an engine failure.

Well said Moose. I agree, something else had to have gone wrong in order for an accident like this to happen, as one engine failure alone should not crash a jet like this. There must be some other contributing factor, be it mechanical, or pilot error (aborting too late), or something else entirely. I read that the black boxes have already been recovered, so hopefully there will be some answers soon.

RIP to all who passed, a sad tragedy...

From one of the survivor reports I read, it sounds like they took off and landed smoothly before running off the end of the runway. This would certainly give a lot of weight to the pilot error/aborting wayyy too late theory.

Hi Moose :)

No worries thank you for helping me understand what happened today.

What a tragedy. May they RIP.

some of the first pictures have come out. needless to say quite disturbing :(

http://www.elmundo.es/albumes/2008/0...jas/index.html

I'm speechless over that first picture.

RIP to those that perished. Wow, those are some bad pictures.

The Spanish response teams are certainly some of the best in the world, for those who managed to survive this tradgedy it was partly do to that I'm sure. During the bombings in Madrid in 2004 ambulances and fire fighters were on scene within minutes.

Today was a tragic day for Spanish aviation since this is the worst crash they've had in 20 years. My family feels rather disturbed by the crash since we feel very connected to the airport.

RIP to all who perished.

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).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stuart schechter

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 (http://www.spanair.com/web/es-es/DSite/ ... -pasajeros).

---

---

Still, it's pretty tactless to release the list so soon.

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc2aqg

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 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.

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

---