Footage of TransAsia Airway plane crash in Taipei

[DaveBB]

My apologies.  Here is the full Master's Thesis.  Please reference page 120 for vertical stabilizer sizing and corresponding supporting mathematical calculations.  http://www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/Scholz/arbeiten/TextNita.pdf  

[PR3D4TOR]

Ok, on another bbs they came up with the following:

Vmca Flap 15 1000 ft 25°c  93 kts

Vstall Flap 15 a 22000 kg 100 kts

Vstall Flap 15 a 18000 kg 91 kts


So when heavy (take-off) the ATR's stall speed is faster than its control speed in a one-engine configuration. The plane would stall before the rudder becomes ineffective.

[PR3D4TOR]

Here's the Quick Reference Handbook for the ATR 72-500.

It has the flame-out emergency procedure and how to determine Vmca.



http://www.scribd.com/doc/141616443/ATR-72-500-QRH#scribd

[Toad]

Data from the "black box" flight recorders retrieved from the wreckage suggests the pilots shut down one engine after the other lost power.  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-31162351

This will likely become the textbook example of How NOT To Perform the V1 Cut Maneuver in Recurrent and Initial Ground Schools around the world. It will also be featured in the CRM classes with emphasis on crew co-ordination in shutting down the correct engine.

Earlier, TransAsia said all of its pilots would be retaking proficiency examinations following the disaster.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-31162351

A really good idea; I am actually surprised to see an airline management team directly and immediately address a serious training issue in their company. Bravo for TransAsia.

[Rich46yo]

I'd like to know how many hours those pilots had been clocking in the weeks prior to that crash.

[earl1937]

I'd like to know how many hours those pilots had been clocking in the weeks prior to that crash.

can't answer that question, but will say this: It comes down to basic stick and rudder control of the aircraft, where are not you are descending or in level flight! All pilots, who are trained correctly in cockpit interaction in an emergency should both agree on which engine is to shut down. I would always ask the Captain or co=pilot, depending on which position I was flying in to respond back to me verbally which engine had failed, by reference to dead foot, dead engine, manifold pressure or in this case compresser speed, or even some have old EPR gauges or some did anyway. On top of that, that is a master watning light for each engine with a big number right in the middle of the thing.
My question, if they were a 1,000 high, why were they in such a hurry to shut down the dead engine anyway? This has been an amazing collection of thoughts, suggestions and yes some critics of what happen!
Almost in every ATR72 accident, there has been a loss of control! Wonder how many of those could have saved with a 12% larger rudder and vertical stab? 

[earl1937]

Earl, at what speed does the ATR's rudder become ineffective in a one engine configuration?

It would depend on the estimated weight at takeoff, by the flight ops dispatcher, forget what they were called, and the agreement by the Captain, at which he would sign a document stating that he agrees with dispatch about the weight.
That are charts with various flap settings to determine the VMC at a certain weight!

[Toad]

Rudder Schmudder.

They were dead as soon as they shut down the only remaining engine putting out power.

Can't blame it on design.

[earl1937]

I'm not a pilot if that's what your asking.

Sir, with all due respect, if you are not a pilot and are just going by the "book", here is something you won't find in a book that if you don't do, you will DIE! Fly the aircraft first, navigate second and communicate third, what did he, the capt do, started hollering "mayday" when he should have been thinking about flying the aircraft.
I appreciate your comments, however uninformed they are, we are just having a general, "wonder what happened" discussion and none of us will know until the "boxes" are analyzed.

I was giving a check ride to a ATR applicant one time in a DC-3 and picture this: we were at altitude of 8,000 feet, we were simulating an approach to an airport at 7,000 feet, he has the airspeed nailed down good, heading was excellent, vertical speed right where it was supposed to be, and then I casually shut the fuel down to left engine. As soon as it, the left engine quit due to lack of fuel, we are now down to about 600 feet above the simulated ground and what does he do, starts looking for the paper which has the VMC at our current weight, in case he has to go around!
Needless to say, I failed the applicant, he should have known those figures by heart, and he didn't!!!
And by the way, he was down to 5500 feet before he got everything cleaned up, feathered engine and other items on check list. Since the ground was supposed to be a 7,000 feet, don't you guess he and everyone in back would more than likely be dead?

[Zimme83]

Almost in every ATR72 accident, there has been a loss of control! Wonder how many of those could have saved with a 12% larger rudder and vertical stab?  

I would say none. If you just look at the accidents most are Wheather related and/or human errors. Can u show us any hard fact that there is a design flaw in the rudder of the ATR? And seriously, don't u think that such a thing would have been unnoticed by air crash investigators?
(And doesnt all air crashes involves loss of control....)

[Zimme83]

Sir, with all due respect, if you are not a pilot and are just going by the "book", here is something you won't find in a book that if you don't do, you will DIE! Fly the aircraft first, navigate second and communicate third, what did he, the capt do, started hollering "mayday" when he should have been thinking about flying the aircraft.
I appreciate your comments, however uninformed they are, we are just having a general, "wonder what happened" discussion and none of us will know until the "boxes" are analyzed.

I was giving a check ride to a ATR applicant one time in a DC-3 and picture this: we were at altitude of 8,000 feet, we were simulating an approach to an airport at 7,000 feet, he has the airspeed nailed down good, heading was excellent, vertical speed right where it was supposed to be, and then I casually shut the fuel down to left engine. As soon as it, the left engine quit due to lack of fuel, we are now down to about 600 feet above the simulated ground and what does he do, starts looking for the paper which has the VMC at our current weight, in case he has to go around!
Needless to say, I failed the applicant, he should have known those figures by heart, and he didn't!!!
And by the way, he was down to 5500 feet before he got everything cleaned up, feathered engine and other items on check list. Since the ground was supposed to be a 7,000 feet, don't you guess he and everyone in back would more than likely be dead?

And because of that the ATR is dangerous?

[PR3D4TOR]

Earl, I already posted the QRH on the ATR showing all the info I need to know. At take-off weight the ATR's Vmca is below stall speed. You could increase the size of the rudder tenfold and it wouldn't make a difference. You're a pilot (used to be at least), and that's fine. However, aircraft are designed by engineers not pilots. There's nothing wrong with the ATR. Its rudder authority is adequate. It is not a "death trap" as you so not eloquently called it. The designers of the ATR are not idiots as you called them. If any idiot was involved he was a pilot. With all due respect.

[Busher]

Gentlemen;

There is nothing wrong with the design of the ATR. It's probably been most widely flown in the USA and Canada with an admirable safety record. A tremendous number of American and Canadian regional airlines flew them along with the Dash-8 in ridiculously huge numbers.

I can say from personal experience (despite the comments of our apparent FAA examiner) that it is a very easy airplane to fly in normal and abnormal flight configurations (eg. single engine, flapless, etc.).  Simply put it does everything fairly well and places few demands on the pilots.

Why don't we just wait and see what the official report has to say.

[PR3D4TOR]

(And doesnt all air crashes involves loss of control....)

Not always. Many are "controlled flight into terrain", usually at night or in bad weather. Flying into mountains and such.

[manurin]

Has anyone noticed?, the left horizontal stab looks to be damaged prior impacting the taxi / bridge, which could mean that the plane could have clipped it on top of one of the building after-all ?

Maybe if this was the case, this could have also contributed to the plane stalling to the left?

here are 2 pics where on both of which you can see the clipped vertical stab.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nt4ikw2zljsnsmh/pic%201.jpg?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/dfsuuxweem5jco7/pic%202.jpg?dl=0