Taiwan twin engine crash. Did one engine flameout or two?

I don't think anybody knows if either engine flamed out at this point in time.
 
I read they called "Mayday engine flame out."



But actually, I think I read it here.
 
Why do people have dash cams in other countries?
 
Looked like it stalled and dropped a wing as it came over the road. Terrible
 
Aren't ATR72s certified to be controllable on one engine after V1? Should still be able to climb if the pilot action is proper, right? Looks like classic pilot error to maintain Vmc following left engine failure.
 
frcabot said:
Aren't ATR72s certified to be controllable on one engine after V1? Should still be able to climb if the pilot action is proper, right? Looks like classic pilot error to maintain Vmc following left engine failure.
Click to expand...

Yes, the ATR should be able to as far as i know.
 
I think the article I saw mentioned something about hitting a bridge? Don't know if that was the cause or the effect, though.
 
Yea...most people see a plane fall out of the sky and just drive around the wreckage.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
I read they called "Mayday engine flame out."



But actually, I think I read it here.
Click to expand...

You can read it in the msn.com article cited in the OP. That article in turn cites a recording at liveatc.net:
The last communication from one of the aircraft's pilots was "Mayday Mayday engine flameout," according to an air traffic control recording on liveatc.net.
​
However, I can't find that recording at liveatc

EDIT - here it is, you can hear the words Mayday Mayday, but the rest is in Chinese:
http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviation-audio-clips/transasia-ge235-crash-t12182/msg63992/
 
Last edited:
The video really looked like the pilot traded airspeed for altitude to clear the buildings, and was just hoping to have a chance to get into the river in one piece. That was just really sickening footage to watch though. Couldn't imagine being a passenger during those last few seconds.
 
frcabot said:
Aren't ATR72s certified to be controllable on one engine after V1? Should still be able to climb if the pilot action is proper, right? Looks like classic pilot error to maintain Vmc following left engine failure.
Click to expand...

And you know he still had one good engine because....???
 
timwinters said:
And you know he still had one good engine because....???
Click to expand...

In the video you can make out prop blades more clearly on the left engine than the right, which would be consistent with lost of that engine and a Vmc rollover situation. Definitely sickening to watch. Prayers for all onboard.
 
I saw that but...

(In my best Steven P. McNicoll voice)

And that means the right engine was still capable of producing full power why..???
 
Interesting data. Are those ground speeds, from radar tracking?

VMCA for this aircraft is about 97 knots airspeed, as I posted in another thread. Their groundspeed went well below that.
 
frcabot said:
Aren't ATR72s certified to be controllable on one engine after V1? Should still be able to climb if the pilot action is proper, right? Looks like classic pilot error to maintain Vmc following left engine failure.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that is with functioning auto feather or prop otherwise feathered. The left wasn't feathered for whatever reason, and with that, all bets are off.
 
Unit74 said:
Yea...most people see a plane fall out of the sky and just drive around the wreckage.
Click to expand...

What else are you supposed do? Park the car and dive off the bridge to fish out the plane?
 
frcabot said:
Aren't ATR72s certified to be controllable on one engine after V1? Should still be able to climb if the pilot action is proper, right? Looks like classic pilot error to maintain Vmc following left engine failure.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that is with functioning auto feather or prop otherwise feathered. The left wasn't feathered for whatever reason, and with that, all bets are off.

From the speed graph he totally screwed up speed discipline and didn't understand "back side of the power curve" performance loss. That cannot be V2 speed for that plane, and he already had >1000' when he lost the engine.

Just didn't understand he needed to put the nose down to accelerate so he could climb out. The speed graph looks like he was holding it against the stick shaker/pusher till the end.
 
Henning said:
Yes, but that is with functioning auto feather or prop otherwise feathered. The left wasn't feathered for whatever reason, and with that, all bets are off.
Click to expand...

Unless I'm watching a low quality version of the video I can't seem to be able to tell whether or not the left engine is feathered.
 
Henning said:
Just didn't understand he needed to put the nose down to accelerate so he could climb out. The speed graph looks like he was holding it against the stick shaker/pusher till the end.
Click to expand...
I'd buy that. If you watch closely, it looks like he was relatively wings level, nose high and descending at the beginning of the video. Probably pulled back on the yoke hoping to clear the bridge and either VMC rolled it or stalled and dropped the left wing. I can't tell how much power he had on the other engine.
 
MachFly said:
Unless I'm watching a low quality version of the video I can't seem to be able to tell whether or not the left engine is feathered.
Click to expand...

It's spinning, but at a much slower speed. It's most noticeable in the stills where you can see the blur arc of each blade. Both are rotating, but the arc of the left is shorter.
 
Engine put in a few months back:

The crashed aircraft, which is less than a year old, had once changed an engine, TransAsia Airways Vice President Wang Cheng-chung told a news conference Wednesday. He said the original one was returned to the manufacturer, Pratt & Whitney Canada, after a glitch was found.

"P&WC gave a complete, brand new engine to TransAsia . and installed it for us," Wang said.

The engine was replaced in April before the aircraft went into use, an airline publicist said.
 
Copied this from another board. The discussion was with an airline consultant at a conference in SE Asia.

"The topic of doing some work with TransAsia came up but the consensus was, "we've tried, but they already know everything"

Seems to coincide with some of R&W's experiences in that neck of the woods.
 
Henning said:
Yes, but that is with functioning auto feather or prop otherwise feathered. The left wasn't feathered for whatever reason, and with that, all bets are off.

From the speed graph he totally screwed up speed discipline and didn't understand "back side of the power curve" performance loss. That cannot be V2 speed for that plane, and he already had >1000' when he lost the engine.

Just didn't understand he needed to put the nose down to accelerate so he could climb out. The speed graph looks like he was holding it against the stick shaker/pusher till the end.
Click to expand...

I don't know how much faith I'd put in those radar plots. Any wind at altitude and you won't really know what his IAS was based on radar groundspeed. Not to mention we have no idea what the update interval is.

As for getting the nose down, I'm not familiar with that airport but from what I understand obstacles there are quite prevalent.
 
Turningfinal said:
As for getting the nose down, I'm not familiar with that airport but from what I understand obstacles there are quite prevalent.
Click to expand...
Of course obstacles prevent challenges, but that is where training and discipline come into play. The odds of survival when colliding with fixed obstacles are much better if you have the airplane under control going into the impact.

The survivability outlook is NOT positive once the airplane departs controlled flight.

Continuing to hold the yoke back and stalling an aircraft with asymmetric thrust is guaranteed to depart controlled flight.
 
If anything the IAS would be higher than the GS as the airplane was basically on runway heading and likely did not take off with a tailwind.

On a turbine like that, with the engine shut down and feathered, will the prop still windmill a bit? I would expect it might, as there is no big block engine compression to keep it from turning over.
 
Turningfinal said:
I don't know how much faith I'd put in those radar plots. Any wind at altitude and you won't really know what his IAS was based on radar groundspeed. Not to mention we have no idea what the update interval is.

As for getting the nose down, I'm not familiar with that airport but from what I understand obstacles there are quite prevalent.
Click to expand...

That's the thing, it doesn't matter, because unless you get the damned nose down, you're going to hit it regardless. The only chance you have in these situations is an aggressive pitch down to get to V2 or whatever your best SE performance speed is. The failure to pitch down close to the ground is deadly, dive at the ground so gravity helps accelerate you in a productive vector rather than a reductive vector, aka 'behind the power curve'.

If you don't get the nose down when you are out of flying energy, you crash, simple as that. Holding the nose up will not help.
 
Henning said:
If you don't get the nose down when you are out of flying energy, you crash, simple as that. Holding the nose up will not help.
Click to expand...
Yep, and that is exactly why the BA 777 that lost power on final punched the gear through the wings. They held it in stick shaker all the way to the ground. No reserve airspeed to flare/arrest the descent.
 
Holding the nose up just at stall speed is what you want to do when you know you are going to crash, not when you're tryg to avoid it.
 
If he cut the good engine, he might have possibly been able to make it to a water landing.
 
B9Dx3DVCQAAIOBp.jpg



Compare left prop to right. Left definitely turning much slower. Blades look feathered, but can't be sure.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
B9Dx3DVCQAAIOBp.jpg



Compare left prop to right. Right definitely turning much slower.
Click to expand...

No, the left is definitely turning slower. Blurrier=faster. Right=blurrier. (We are looking at the belly of the plane.)
 
FloridaPilot said:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...to-river-after-take-off-killing-23/ar-AA8Xolx

After reading the article I didn't know if one or two engines flamed out. If there is anymore info please post. My apologies if its a repost!
Click to expand...

Knowing no more that what I saw on TV, I thought it was a classic Vmc roll, the kind with which every nascent multiengine pilot must deal during training and on the checkride.

When I went to King Air school I learned about negative torque sensing and autofeather, and I wonder if the accident plane had either or both.

Bob Gardner
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top