Turkish Airlines plane crashes at Amsterdam airport

[MrWings]

I do believe de non smoking sign was on and that had a good result.

Minor point but were you being sarcastic? Or is smoking still allowed on some European flights?

[MUSKEG]

I'm not sure what you mean by disolved air? Could you perhaps be talking about disolved water (suspended water) ? Can you disolve air?

[canadafreak]

Thanks Pika, I learn every day

Wow Mr. Wings, yes I was being sarcastic. Maybe not so nice regarding this issue. But that's me, what can you do? In Europe we also have only none smoking on all flights. And even I, as a heavy smoker, think that it is a good thing. Go figure.... I must be mad

[MrWings]

Wow Mr. Wings, yes I was being sarcastic.

I thought so but just clarifying. Sometimes tone doesn't come across so clear on the internets.

[pika]

I'm not sure what you mean by disolved air? Could you perhaps be talking about disolved water (suspended water) ? Can you disolve air?

Disolved air, not water.

http://www.pureflowtechnologies.com/ Refers to diesel fuels but you get the idea.

[canadafreak]

Copy that Mr. Wings!!

[sky's the limit]

Just back into the world of the internet, and I'm looking at photos of this accident and the cockpit seems pretty well intact to me, yet both pilots are dead? Thoughts?

stl

[2milefinal]

In one of the photos there is something sticking out of the top of the fuselage, just behind the flight deck.
I am thinking there was a lot of movement (up) in that some-what smallish cockpit. Poor guys.
RIP
http://www.geenstijl.nl/archives/images ... iphol2.jpg

[pika]

Some thought that the floor of the flightdeck may have come up.

[cyxe]

Just back into the world of the internet, and I'm looking at photos of this accident and the cockpit seems pretty well intact to me, yet both pilots are dead? Thoughts?

stl

Maybe its not nearly as intact inside as it appears to be.

[metal]

Yea, seems like the impact pushed the nose wheel up INTO the cockpit instead of shearing it off, OUCH..

There's been a lot of plane's going down lately. Maybe it's time to start inspecting older planes and get new technology in place to prevent more tragedies in the sky.

Jen Boileau, East Windsor, CT, USA

Oh people....

[canadafreak]

Yeah, this one was really old, 7 years ......... well informed those people
Paint is still wet....

[canadafreak]

Just heard something regarding the death of the flightcrew. It seems (according to the media) they got hit by an instrument panel that came loose in the back of the cockpit...... I have no idea as to what kind of panel that can be but who knows.

[swordfish]

The registration of that aircraft (on the tail) appears to be C-JGE. Is that Canadian-registered?

[imarai]

C-JGE would not be a legitimate registration. It is not complete. TC- is the ICAO approved registration prefix of the nation of Turkey. C-F, CF-, C-G, and C-I, plus three more letters, would indicate an aircraft registered in the nation of Canada.

To name just a few:
G- plus four more letters would be registered in Great Britain.
I- Italy
D- Germany
F- France
PH- plus three more letters would be registered in Netherlands
EI - plus three more letters would be registered in Ireland
HB- plus three more letters would be registered in Switzerland
OH- Finland
VH- Australia
EC- Spain
OE- Austria
N______ United States of America.
plus a number, or a bunch of numbers, or a number and a letter, or a bunch of numbers and two letters, or just one number and two letters, or a number and... Classic pre-WW.II American aircraft may be assigned NC followed by a bunch of numbers, i.e.: NC1234

Examples of contemporary American registrations are as follows:
N1
N1A
N1MA
N12MA
N123MA
N777MA
N77
N777
N7777
N77A
N777A
and on and on and on and on...
Don't get me started on experimental and racing civilian registered aircraft registrations, okay? Thanks.

Visit ICAO's web site for further global aircraft registration prefixes and suffixes.

Where you been hidin' man?

[pika]

T-CJGE

[imarai]

The Boeing 737 that crashed near Schiphol was registered in Turkey. Here is an example:

[sky's the limit]

Turkish pilots say turbulence likely reason for crash



ISTANBUL (Reuters) - Turbulence created by a large plane landing at Amsterdam just ahead of a Turkish Airlines passenger jet may be the most likely reason it crashed, a Turkish pilots' association said on Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT

Five Turks and four Americans were killed when the Boeing 737-800 plane plunged into a field short of the runway at Schiphol airport on Wednesday. Among the dead were three pilots and a flight attendant.

A Boeing 757 heavy aircraft appeared to have landed on the same runway just two minutes before the Turkish Airlines (THY) plane, the Turkish pilots' association (TALPA) told a news conference.

"Wake turbulence," an air turbulence created by a pair of vortices trailing in the wake of an aircraft's wing tips, could have hit the descending Turkish plane, preventing it from continuing to fly, the group said.

TALPA Vice Chairman Mete Dane demonstrated flight TK 1951's approach to Schiphol and said the reason why it had suddenly lost altitude pointed to wake turbulence.

The Schiphol control tower should issue full information about planes landing on the runway, the landing intervals, and what communication took place, he said.

A Dutch Safety Board spokesman said wake turbulence was one of the options its investigators were looking at.

"We look at all options and we certainly are not excluding this one," spokesman Fred Sanders said.

It was not clear if a Boeing 757 had actually landed just before the Turkish Airlines plane, he said.

A Schiphol spokeswoman declined to comment on any speculation while the cause of the crash was being examined.

BLACK BOXES EXAMINED

TALPAS's Dane said: "We do not have exact information about the distance between the planes and we do not know if our plane has been warned about the situation. But according to the records we have seen, no mention of it is made."

"We want Dutch Aviation Authorities to be neutral and release all information, including any which might relate to them."

Experts are examining the flight recorders from the plane, which are now in Paris, where French authorities are providing technical assistance. The Dutch Safety Board expects to present a preliminary conclusion of the investigation next week.

A THY plane carrying some of those injured in the crash arrived in Istanbul on Friday.

The company said the pilots who died were Captain Hasan Tahsin Arisan, Murat Sezer, Olgay Ozgur and flight attendant Ulvi Murat Eskin.

(Additional reporting by Harro ten Wolde in Amsterdam and Paul de Bendern in Istanbul)

(Writing by Alexandra Hudson; Editing by Angus MacSwan)

[pika]

I call bs on that article...

[sky's the limit]

I call bs on that article...

I'm certainly leaning that way too......

stl

[swordfish]

+1

A 757 is not a "heavy" - somewhat heavier than a 738 I imagine but no biggie at 115k tonnes.

The "T" is not visible in many of the pictures of the crash aircraft...?

[imarai]

Due to the configuration of the wing, especially in the landing configuration, a laden Boeing 757-300 is well known for producing turbulence normally associated with aircraft in the heavy category. Several nation's air traffic controllers are required to provide "heavy" spacing following a Boeing 757.

[jetmech]

That 737-800 is not that much smaller than a 757. If anything it just sits lower to the ground. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a Driver, but in order for wake turbulence to come into effect, would the 737's approach not have to be lower than the 757's, and would he not have to touch down on the runway earlier than where the 757 landed?

[Puddle Jumper]

Due to the configuration of the wing, especially in the landing configuration, a laden Boeing 757-300 is well known for producing turbulence normally associated with aircraft in the heavy category. Several nation's air traffic controllers are required to provide "heavy" spacing following a Boeing 757.

You are quite right in what you say. Here's a link to a NASA report on wake turbulence, and it clearly quotes the 757 as being major problem in particular. http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/Concept2R ... ortex.html

I only learnt about the 757’s wake turbulence whilst following one on approach. The controller had no idea about the 757’s wake turbulence either, and vectored me in behind it on a normal medium spacing. The Captain of the 757 came straight on the radio and advised us both to give him at least heavy separation because of the 757’s unique wake turbulence - thankfully I believed him and backed off!

Also, if I'm correct in assuming the wind was fairly calm at Schiphol that day, could this have been the perfect conditions for this very situation to occur, and would the turbulence have been bad enough to cause both engine to flame out too?

[Puddle Jumper]

That 737-800 is not that much smaller than a 757. If anything it just sits lower to the ground. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a Driver, but in order for wake turbulence to come into effect, would the 737's approach not have to be lower than the 757's, and would he not have to touch down on the runway earlier than where the 757 landed?

Wake turbulence sinks and moves out. However, if the wind is light and in the right direction, it can hold vortices in the same position laterally.