Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako

Post Reply
J31
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1069
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by J31 »

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/12-killed- ... -1.4744563

ALMATY, KAZAKHSTAN -- A jetliner with 98 people aboard struggled to get airborne and crashed shortly after takeoff Friday in Kazakhstan, killing at least 12 people, authorities said.

The Bek Air aircraft, identified as a 23-year-old Fokker 100, hit a concrete wall and a two-story building soon after departing from Almaty, Kazakhstan's largest city and former capital, airport officials said.

The jet's tail also struck the runway twice during takeoff, indicating that it struggled to get off the ground, Deputy Prime Minister Roman Sklyar said.

Fifty-four people people were reported hospitalized with injuries, at least 10 of them in critical condition, officials said.

The cause of the predawn crash was unclear. Authorities quickly suspended all Bek Air and Fokker 100 flights in Kazakhstan pending the investigation.

One survivor said the plane started shaking less than two minutes after takeoff.

"At first, the left wing jolted really hard, then the right. The plane continued to gain altitude, shaking quite severely, and then went down," Aslan Nazaraliyev told The Associated Press by phone.

Government officials said the jet underwent de-icing before the flight, but Nazaraliyev recalled that its wings were covered in ice, and passengers who used emergency exits over the wings slipped and fell.

The weather in Almaty was clear, with temperatures just below freezing. The plane was flying to Nur-Sultan, the capital formerly known as Astana.

Local authorities initially put the death toll at 15, but the interior ministry later revised the figure downward.

Officials in the Almaty branch of the health ministry could not explain why the figure was revised. They attributed the confusion to "agitation" at the site of the crash.

In a statement on its Facebook page, the airport said there was no fire, and a rescue operation began immediately.

Around 1,000 people were working at the snow-covered crash site. Video footage showed the front of the broken-up fuselage rammed against a building and the rear of the plane lying in a field next to the airport.

In Almaty, dozens of people lined up at a local blood bank to donate for the injured.

The government promised to pay families of the victims around $10,000 each.

The Fokker 100 is a mid-sized, twin-engine jet. The company that manufactured it went bankrupt in 1996, and production stopped the following year.

Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev ordered an inspection of all airlines and aviation infrastructure in the country. Eighteen passenger airlines and four cargo carriers are currently registered in Kazakhstan.

Kazakhstan's air-safety record is far from spotless. In 2009, all Kazakh airlines -- with the exception of the flagship carrier Air Astana -- were banned from operating in the European Union because they did not meet international safety standards. The ban was lifted in 2016.
---------- ADS -----------
  

corethatthermal
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by corethatthermal »

Sadly, Third world countries with third world pilots doing third world "procedures" ( rolling the dice and taking off with a contaminated wing ) with an expected third world outcome ! Nothing to see folks!
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by pelmet »

J31 wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:23 am

Government officials said the jet underwent de-icing before the flight, but Nazaraliyev recalled that its wings were covered in ice, and passengers who used emergency exits over the wings slipped and fell.

The weather in Almaty was clear, with temperatures just below freezing.
Keeping in mind that many details are unknown in this accident and preliminary info could be inaccurate......

Never, ever takeoff with contaminated wings on a swept wing jet with what are known as hard wings(no leading edge slats).

Of course someone will say never do that in any aircraft and they are correct. But on hard wing jets like the Fokkers and CRJ200, you will almost certainly crash. Almost every jet crash due to icing was a hard wing jet. The one non hardwing jet crash that I know of, involving contaminated wings was an Air Florida 737 with more than just an ice issue as there was a serious lack of thrust as well.

Not a big deal for the professional pilot but what to do as a pilot who is a pax. A couple of AC guys found out the hard way in the Dryden crash when they saw the problem and did nothing.

It is a difficult situation to be in and in some aircraft, as shown on a recent A320 video on Russia, things may very well work out OK. But if you are in a hard wing jet and it appears that they are going to takeoff with contaminated wings, you might want to create a serious issue in the cabin because your life is in serious danger.
---------- ADS -----------
  

FICU
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:37 am

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by FICU »

After a cold clear night and flaps, spoilers, and ailerons out to the winglets covered in thick opaque hoar frost, of course the stab would be as well, and no mention of de-icing from the Captain's PA I let the FA know to notify the pilots during push back about the state of the wings. After another PA from the Captain suggesting the wings were fine but would be checked by the FO I thought we'd be spraying. FO comes out and only walks back far enough to see the forward part of the wing, assumed he was looking for cold soaked fuel frost in this operator's exempted box.

Captain makes another PA saying it's all good and push back continues . I call the FA again and get her to look at the frost on the wings. Push back stops and an agitated Captain makes another PA saying we would be spraying.

This of course after the initial PA boasted about us getting to destination ahead of schedule.

F*ck OTP and spray!

You never know if Transport might be in the back.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by pelmet »

Correct about TC potential. We had a guy get in trouble with a TC guy because he had some leading edge ice from the approach on his wings for the takeoff.

Plus, people love to video things these days and a media outlet can be interested in making a story out of it. I had one time where the liquid droplets on the wing at 1 degree apparently froze and discovered from the cabin crew that there was a local reporter who was known for previously writing some unfriendly stories about our carrier on board and was trying to get the guy beside her to take pictures. Said that we had done it intentionally and that our coincident use of wing anti-ice after departure, which apparently removed some of that ice, was part of our pre-existing plan to depart with ice on the wings.

I ended up following that news station online for a few weeks waiting for a story but never saw one.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5142
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

I would suggest the reason you don't take off with contaminated wings is not because "Transport might be on board" it is because there is no safe amount of contamination and there are sadly many examples of smoking holes due to this fact.

If in doubt about the state of critical surfaces, them there is no doubt; it is time to de-ice
---------- ADS -----------
  

Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5142
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Big Pistons Forever wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 9:45 am
I would suggest the reason you don't take off with contaminated wings is not because "Transport might be on board" it is because there is no safe amount of contamination and there are sadly many examples of smoking holes due to this fact.

If in doubt about the state of critical surfaces, them there is no doubt; it is time to de-ice
Sorry for the thread drift :oops:
---------- ADS -----------
  

Capt. Underpants
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 265
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 5:04 am

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by Capt. Underpants »

pelmet wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 12:19 pm

Keeping in mind that many details are unknown in this accident and preliminary info could be inaccurate......

Never, ever takeoff with contaminated wings on a swept wing jet with what are known as hard wings(no leading edge slats).
I thought the F100 wing was upgraded to include leading edge slats.
---------- ADS -----------
  

J31
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1069
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by J31 »

Capt. Underpants wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 12:13 pm
pelmet wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 12:19 pm

Keeping in mind that many details are unknown in this accident and preliminary info could be inaccurate......

Never, ever takeoff with contaminated wings on a swept wing jet with what are known as hard wings(no leading edge slats).
I thought the F100 wing was upgraded to include leading edge slats.
I was thinking that also but.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fokker_100

The F28 Mark 0100 “Fokker 100” is based on the Fokker F28 Mark 4000 re-engined with two Rolls-Royce RB.183 Tay high by-pass ratio turbofans and a fuselage stretched by 18.83 ft (5.74 m). Its wing is wider by 9.8 ft (3.0 m), has new flaps and larger ailerons, and extended leading and trailing edges improve aerodynamics and increase the wing chord. The landing gear is strengthened and has new wheels and brakes, and the horizontal stabilizer is widened by 4.6 ft (1.4 m). Maximum weights are increased while fuel capacity, max speed and ceiling remain the same, and passenger capacity went from 85 to 109. The flight deck went digital with a flight management system, an autopilot/flight director including CAT III autoland, thrust management system, electronic flight instrument displays and full ARINC avionics.[3]

The new wing was claimed to be 30% more efficient in cruise, while retaining the simplicity of a fixed leading edge.
---------- ADS -----------
  

BMLtech
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 4:37 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by BMLtech »

I had also thought the F100 had slats, along its the later variants of the F28, but apparently only 2 F28mk6000 were built with slats. As is well documented, these “hard wing” designs are much more susceptible to stalling due to surface contamination. if you have ever looked at the wing of an F28, it almost looks like it’s bolted on upside down at the root.
As a side note, an interesting hard wing design is the Russian IL62, it features a fixed drooped leading edge on the outer wing panel. I guess they traded a drag penalty for better low speed performance and simplicity.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by pelmet »

Big Pistons Forever wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 9:45 am
I would suggest the reason you don't take off with contaminated wings is not because "Transport might be on board" it is because there is no safe amount of contamination and there are sadly many examples of smoking holes due to this fact.
I would disagree. If I were on a newer model 737 and saw frost on top of the wing, I would suspect that the captain is legally taking off with all the required approvals in order.

For those who do this without approval, there is a possibility that they have taken off illegally many times successfully with frozen contamination adhering to the wings and then thought they could get away with it in a new type that they were unfamiliar with that turned out to have nasty characteristics in such a situation. Almost certainly the case in Dryden.

There are different ways to look it. One is, the idea that(approvals aside) you never takeoff with frozen contamination on the critical surfaces with no further discussion required. This is by far the safest method for a pilot to follow.

Another is the reality that certain individuals to this day still do illegally takeoff with frozen contamination on the wings. They are not going to listen to authority and there is a good chance that they will get away with not being punished and continue to operate this way. If these people are made aware of how much more dangerous it is on a swept hardwing jet than their previous type, it could prevent a tragedy.

I suspect small group of individuals who are defined as anti-authority, take certain increased illegal risks that has an overall result in a relatively higher amount of accidents. Until there is a method created to not have them doing this, increased knowledge seems like the most effective method for dealing with this.
---------- ADS -----------
  

GRK2
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 5:04 am

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by GRK2 »

If I were on a newer model 737 and saw frost on top of the wing, I would suspect that the captain is legally taking off with all the required approvals in order.

Ummmm, can you clarify this statement? I am quite sure that knowingly taking off with ANY frost on top of the wing won't satisfy the legality of clear critical surfaces.

Maybe you just misspoke?
---------- ADS -----------
  

J31
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1069
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by J31 »

GRK2 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 12:59 pm
If I were on a newer model 737 and saw frost on top of the wing, I would suspect that the captain is legally taking off with all the required approvals in order.

Ummmm, can you clarify this statement? I am quite sure that knowingly taking off with ANY frost on top of the wing won't satisfy the legality of clear critical surfaces.

Maybe you just misspoke?
The Boeing 737NG is susceptible to frost forming on the upper surface of the wing due to cold wing fuel. After flight in cold temperatures the top of the wing may frost up in warm humid air during ground operations. Thus Boeing has flight tested and approved takeoffs with light frost in a certain area of the upper wing. There is a black outline that the frost may be present under certain outside air and fuel temperatures. With no precipitation it is safe and legal to depart without deicing.
---------- ADS -----------
  

GRK2
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 5:04 am

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by GRK2 »

Thanks, Appreciate the info. I learned something today! :D
---------- ADS -----------
  

GARRETT
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:46 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by GARRETT »

GRK2 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 12:59 pm
If I were on a newer model 737 and saw frost on top of the wing, I would suspect that the captain is legally taking off with all the required approvals in order.

Ummmm, can you clarify this statement? I am quite sure that knowingly taking off with ANY frost on top of the wing won't satisfy the legality of clear critical surfaces.

Maybe you just misspoke?
Boeing 737NG FCOM:
Takeoff with CSFF on upper wing surfaces is allowed provided all of ​the following conditions are met:​•​ The CSFF on the wing tank upper surfaces is only within the ​lines defining the permissible CSFF area with no snow, ice or​ ​frost​ on the leading edges or control surfaces​•​ Ambient air temperature is at or above +4°C, +39°F​•​ There is no precipitation or visible moisture (rain, snow, drizzle,​ ​or fog with less than 1 mile visibility)​•​ Tank fuel temperature is at or above -16°C, +3°F.​If all of the above conditions are not​ met, all snow, ice and frost on the ​upper wing surfaces must be removed using appropriate ​deicing/anti-icing procedures.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=ht ... egUIARDUAQ
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by pelmet »

Airbus used to allow some upper wing frost on the A310 as well and had plans for other types of the fleet as well but decided not to pursue this avenue.

http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Takeof ... _Frost.pdf
---------- ADS -----------
  

Gino Under
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:06 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by Gino Under »

De-icing the Russian way. Modern A320 with slats. Piece of cake.
This is what happens when your crews don’t get it.
Just because it may work from time to time isn’t the measure of a successful takeoff.

https://youtu.be/5GIU94dg1ek

Gino Under
---------- ADS -----------
  

trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4590
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by trey kule »

would suggest the reason you don't take off with contaminated wings is not because "Transport might be on board" it is because there is no safe amount of contamination and there are sadly many examples of smoking holes due to this fact.
That statement is, in my opinion, one of the reasons people take off with contamination.
Why? Because they have taken off with a bit of frost or contamination and the plane flew just fine.

So mother TC gets ignored...and one day....unfortunately, some pilots find out the hard way that contamination does effect performance..

My suggestion to TC and others who state this... instead of making a statement that pilots might, through experience find to be wrong, state what is really the case....as a pilot you really have no way of knowing how the wing contamination will effect the performance....on this flight. The only way to be absolutely sure is to completely remove all contamination and see that it does not reoccur.

I am not being pedantic here. Giving sorta wrong info is not good.

As to the comment about third world companies, procedures.......I dont think the accident at Fond du Lac was all that long ago....seems to me the deicing equipment was something like a mop and bucket, and a step ladder . Third world pilots, company, procedures! Fond du lac, like Dryden, is in Canada.

TC would rather preach than actually go out and see how some of these operators are actually operating.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Everyone is a genius in hindsight

corethatthermal
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by corethatthermal »

A long time ago, I took off in an Aeronca super-chief with a thin covering of light snow all over the wing ( RWY lots long enough to abort etc ) Did a circuit and landed. I looked on the wing top,,,snow still there, I was able to blow it off with my mouth !!! Talk about a learning experience ,, Now, yall dont try any of this okay !
---------- ADS -----------
  

Capt. Underpants
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 265
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 5:04 am

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by Capt. Underpants »

trey kule wrote:
Mon Dec 30, 2019 7:35 am
TC would rather preach than actually go out and see how some of these operators are actually operating.
Send a note to your MP. Inspectors would be happy to do more operational surveillance but Ottawa won’t give them the money to do it.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Fokker 100 Crash in Almaty, Kazakhstan Dec 26,2019

Post by pelmet »

"Bek Air was grounded after the accident and has repeatedly appealed to authorities to allow the airline to restart operations.
The airline recently issued, extraordinarily, purported audio conversations between accident investigators and the first officer of the flight, who initially survived the accident but subsequently passed away on 28 January, shortly after the discussion.
Bek Air says the recordings were captured by the airline’s employees who were present at the time.
The transcript of the discussion includes question on how the crew checked the surface of the wings for ice, following suggestions that no check was conducted.
But the first officer apparently replies that he made a tactile check in three places, pointing out that he was able to check the front of the wing – which was “clean and dry” – more easily because he was taller than the captain.
He says the de-icing of the stabiliser – and only the stabiliser – was the captain’s decision, because it could not be checked from the ground.
The first officer also says that the aircraft was able to track the runway centreline during the departure but had passed the V1 decision speed when problems emerged, and the crew therefore did not consider aborting the take-off roll.
Control difficulties began, he says, after the nose-wheel lifted. He retracted the landing-gear, but only on the second attempt – and after a second call from the captain – because the aircraft was rolling sharply."


The top of the wings should be checked for frost, not the leading edge as it doesn't always get down to the leading edge. Where I have been flying, part of the walkaround is to check the wings/top of the engine from the cabin. Might find frost and there has been cases of damage(delamination and small broken piece) that were visible from the cabin windows.

This aircraft was de-iced...on the tail only as a precaution as they couldn't see the top part of it. They should have looked at the top part of the wing or better yet for an aircraft super-sensitive to frost in frost producing conditions.....a ladder for a tactile check.

Animation and video of the accident below....



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvKRTo9xdsk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qYW-hlWUd4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vmkzrh ... =emb_title
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”