Yep. 5 hurt, apparently, so far.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-28448763
BBC reports.
I thought we also dodged a bullet with this typhoon. Didn’t hear of any horrible stories except some flooding down south, but I came home last night to this kind of news…
I don’t know why some newsmen refer to it as a “failed emergency landing”. It crashed on a go around didn’t it?
However, some say they say sparks while the plane was still in the air. Maybe a mechanical failure prompted the crash?
Or it could be as this poster at pprune.org says:
quote:
I think the 20 TWC would be the least of your worries! I’d be more concerned with the 800m viz and +TS/CB overhead the field. Why would you even go near it let alone try an approach in it? Think of the down draught.
I know it’s easy to sit and pontificate after the event but from what we know so far, on the face of it, this seems to be yet another accident caused by commencing an approach in totally inappropriate weather…how many more?
A4
unquote
Could be the thunderstorm overhead brought some strong down drafts which the aircraft encountered when it attempted the go around and the pilots lost control?
Book a plane ticket for a trip -> there’s a typhoon -> shit happens, you cancel your trip.
I think life is worth a lot more than:“Oh well the typhoon is almost over and I already have the tickets to go there”. I guess Transasia told the customers:“No worries, it’s fine”, if they did so they’re going to have a good time with some lawyers.
taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_c … id=2534164
Two young French ladies on an exchange program lost their lives along with the other unfortunate victims.
Yup, which is where the poor low speed handling I mentioned earlier comes in. Mix this with bad weather and vertical wind shear, which I and Tommy speculated on earlier, or strong gusts; or very probably a drop in headwind or even the addition of a tailwind (which has been suggested elsewhere), which will take 20-30 knots off the airspeed, and you very quickly have a loss of lift. On go-around, with low visibility and in an aircraft which has not cleaned up aerodynamically, this has all the ingredients for a nasty accident.
The problem is they shouldn’t be flying a plane in a typhoon. Perhaps larger jets can handle things but a smaller plane can’t.
Those prop planes strictly speaking is a jet, they’re called “turbojets” meaning the propeller is driven by a jet engine. It is not as fast as a turbofan plane but it is more fuel efficient. Regular prop plane would mean propellers driven by a piston engine.
I hereby unilaterally elect you president.
Exactly! I have no sympathy for these stupid peoples. It is typhoon, why don’t they stay at home, safe and dry? They were too stupid to live. There are lots of people who die every year not because of the typhoon, but because their own stupidity.
My heart feels for the ones who died in Ukraine though.
[quote=“robert the bruce”]Exactly! I have no sympathy for these stupid peoples. It is typhoon, why don’t they stay at home, safe and dry? They were too stupid to live. There are lots of people who die every year not because of the typhoon, but because their own stupidity.
My heart feels for the ones who died in Ukraine though.[/quote]
Wow, that’s just heartless. How many of the 54 passengers on the plane do you think were meteorology or aviation experts? Of course it’s risky to fly in a typhoon, but they were assured by the airline and the pilot and aviation authorities that it was safe to go ahead. If people whose career is on the line tell me it’s safe, I assume it’s safe. If they tell me it’s not safe, I assume it’s not safe.
You might as well say: “I have no sympathy for the passengers of MH17 because they should have known better than to fly over a warzone! They were too stupid to live.”
Come on.
It is summer vacation. As said, the plane was full. People here have so little time off.
There were people traveling back to work. People going for funerals, weddings.
There were flights before and flights after. We will know more later.
Planes fly under unfavorable conditions all the time. They are built for that. There were experienced pilots at the helm. But yes, the decision to fly was taken in Kaohsiung, not Penghu. Yet, the airport was open for business.
It’s not the passengers that is at fault. It’s whoever that gave the go ahead and the pilot who still flew even though it’s a typhoon.
A-men to that last post. The typhoon, its final outer bands of rain and wind associated, had not yet cleared Penghu. The rain squalls were clearly visible even on civilian radar.
Why would you want to attempt a journey under those conditions? 2 aircraft got lucky (Eva & Far Eastern), but I’m just adding those to my don’t-trust list. In fact, I wouldn’t trust any Taiwan plane company if you know there’s bad weather around. Just don’t take the flight.
The jury is out as to how culpable the pilot was. I suspect he didn’t have much choice in the matter at KHH. He either takes off or faces the consequences from his superiors.
If the conditions were dangerous enough to cause concern I’d take the consequence than crashing and burning any day.
Yep, that is heartless, and a very, very stupid, ill thought out comment.
Even the pilots are under extreme pressure to make the flight, from their bosses. When they get to a situation where you have to land in bad weather or divert, there is pressure to land. A diversion costs the company money and passengers complain. However, better to have complaining passengers rather than complaining relatives.
There is a lot of psychological pressure to get the plane in under these conditions. Even pilots can become impatient. If you are a pilot, you don’t want to divert and an accident will never, ever happen while you are at the controls. There is paperwork to complete, and you’ll end up making an inconvenient stopover.
That’s humans for you.
That’s so incredible stupid.
I remember still September 28, 2008.
I was on the return flight from Beijing to Taipei over Hong Kong.
Typhoon approaching, I asked in Hong Kong whether the flight is cancelled.
Airline assured me, no problem, we will bring you safe to Taiwan.
3 times tried the pilot to land in Taoyuan, then gave up and returned to Hong Kong.
Several people got sick and needed medical treatment in Hong Kong.
If an airline says it’s safe to travel, then who else should I trust?
The guilt is with the airline.
Tom
One thing that really surprised me was that this morning, just about 12 hours after the crash the airline announced how much they will pay the victims’ families. Very odd, as if that is really important while they still search the wreckage.
The insurance. 19 people on board had policies. And anyways the airline will have to pay, sooner or later.
Remember the big buhaha when the parents of the MRT attacker sold their house?
Seems a thunderstorm had been hovering near Penghu airport and on pprune.org someone had commented (and i had posted it here previously ) wondering why an attempt was even made to land when one of those was about. CB (thunderstorm) are very hazardous to aircraft. They can tear an airplane apart in midair and can cause severe windshear if near a runway.
Seems CB enroute may have just brought down an Md83 in North Africa today.
straitstimes.com/news/asia/e … 8-20140724
Taiwan’s civil aviation authorities said the weather on Wednesday had been suitable for flying and they were trying to determine the cause of the crash. “There were nine flights on the same route between 2 p.m. and 7 p.m. yesterday. Only the TransAsia flight crashed,” said Jean Shen, director of the Civil Aeronautics Administration. “The weather reports showed it was totally OK for landing. We can not say for sure what went wrong at this point. The flight safety committee has opened an investigation … they will complete an official report within a year.”
Yeah they can’t say for sure what went wrong yet…except it wasn’t the weather during a typhoon, and it’s not their fault.
But if 2 of those 9 planes crashed instead of just 1, that might change their opinion on the cause.
Interesting.