What's new

PIA plane crash near Model Colony Karachi with 93+ on board

.
Unless the tree jumps in the middle of the road, it's always the driver who is at fault if it hits the tree because the driver did something wrong or did not do something right, you can't blame it on the weather.


The final investigation would reveal the truth, but so far what's out in the public, looks like the initial descent was way too sharp and too far (right in the middle of the runway).

Looking at the pic showing damaged cowlings on both engines and no damage to the nose gear /nose gear door, probably the pilots either forgot to extend in a hurry as the plane had already overshot (first touch down halfway through the runway) or the gear was faulty and did not open.

If the pilots did extend the nose gear and it did not open, then the pilot should have not attempted to land halfway through the runway and done a go-around asking tower to watch/confirm the nose gear.

From the TC and pilot discussion already posted, the controller did ask if he was going for a belly landing? that means there was some issue with the nose gear and controller knew it, or else why would he ask that?

If there was an issue with the nose gear, then the sharp decent may explain that the pilot wanted to bump the nose gear out by intentionally doing a touch and go at a sharp angle but probably miscalculated and came in too sharp and bumped the engines on the runway in the process, and since he came in too sharp, it was difficult to gain speed and momentum again in a short time and since the engines were damaged (which he probably didn't know when he took off again but found out later when failed to attain the altitude controller asked him to maintain).

Since he was already at only 2000 feet with both engines dead and he took two turns, losing height at every turn he just crashed well short of the runway.

Allah knows best what happened and so many innocent people lost their lives. May ALLAH forgive them all and have mercy on their souls. Lately, there have been quite a few aviation accidents in Pakistan be it national or private carriers, and I am not sure how good the investigations were. But instead of shying out of the embarrassing outcome of the investigation, a professional and fair investigation should be done and the reasons found out. And more importantly, in light of these findings, laws, guidelines and procedures must be updated and training imparted to whoever/whatever is found lacking to avoid losses in the future.

And while the investigation is in process, there must be a total ban on all information leakage and anyone found guilty of breaching the trust and involved in criminal activity of leaking information in bits and pieces to cause confusion should be dealt with properly.
And what about the instruments onboard and on ground especially the people who manned the control tower it's very convenient to blame the dead isn't it
An airliner is not a bus and a Pilot is not a bus driver they the pilots heavily rely on instruments onboard and instruments and people on ground so
 
Last edited:
. .
Read the full post.
An example is just that an example to stress the point not to draw parallels.
I didn't blame anyone. I tried to discuss all points so far in public knowledge.
Equipment does fail and it's beyond the pilot's control, but there are procedures for such situation but the final decision is taken by the man on the steering, and that man would always be responsible for the outcome of that decision regardless of the good intentions.

Maybe he was trying to save the plane by giving it a try and not deciding to belly land in the first go? good intention but a disastrous outcome. Maybe he could have belly landed in the first go, ruined the plane but saved 100 lives?
Who knows? What has happened has happened. It is very easy for me or anyone else to sit behind a screen to write whatever, but nothing matters, what mattered was the decision and judgement of the decision-maker at that time, in that situation and he would be responsible for that. There is no other way about it.


And what about the instruments onboard and on ground especially the people who manned the control tower it's very convenient to blame the dead isn't it
An airliner is not a bus and a Pilot is not a bus driver they the pilots heavily rely on instruments onboard and on ground so
 
Last edited:
.
Read the full post.
An example is just that an example to stress the point not to draw parallels.
I didn't blame anyone. I tried to discuss all points so far in public knowledge.
Equipment does fail and it's beyond the pilot's control, but there are procedures for such situation but the final decision is taken by the man on the steering, and that man would always be responsible for the outcome of that decision regardless of the good intentions.

Maybe he was trying to save the plane by giving it a try and not deciding to belly land in the first go? good intention but a disastrous outcome. Maybe he could have belly landed in the first go, ruined the plane but saved 100 lives?
Who knows? What has happened has happened. It is very easy for me or anyone else to sit behind a screen to write whatever, but nothing matters, what mattered was the decision and judgement of the decision-maker at that in that situation and he would be responsible for that. There is no other way about it.
Please read my post no790 of this thread for an alternative explanation and possibility.
 
.
I quote:

Narrative Type: NTSB PRELIMINARY NARRATIVE (6120.19)

The pilot reported that he began his descent in the airport traffic pattern when another airplane announced its position in the vicinity of the airport. The pilot turned his attention to the traffic and located it visually. The traffic collision avoidance system (TCAS) annunciated in the proximity of the other airplane. The turn to the base leg was made after passing the traffic. During the base and final legs, the gear warning horn annunciated and the pilot stated he had mistaken it for the TCAS. The pilot landed with the gear retracted and the airplane sustained substantial damage to fuselage supporting structure.

The pilot reported he was wearing noise cancelling headphones during the flight but did state he was able to hear the gear warning horn annunciate.

After the accident, the airplane was placed on jacks and the landing gear was extended using the airplane's own systems and there was no indication of abnormal operation.

The pilot reported no preimpact mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation.
Narrative Type: NTSB PROBABLE CAUSE NARRATIVE
The pilot's failure to extend the landing gear prior to landing, which resulted in substantial damage to the fuselage during landing.
Contributing to the accident was the pilot's diverted attention to another airplane in the vicinity and that he inaccurately perceived the gear warning horn annunciator as the TCAS annunciator.
End quote..


Its highly unlikely that the pilot forgot to deploy landing gear.. putting the plane in landing mode will sound off warnings or blinkers at certain altitude if gear is not released.

Furthermore as quoted above no landing gear NO BOUNCE.. the PIA plane would have scrapped the termac all the way to the stop....
 
.
When your instruments fail you absolutely,
And you hit the ground without your wheels hanging, there's no time to follow procedures only your trained instincts work
and they did what they had to do it's a gamble sometimes it pays off some times
It's ends up a bitch so
 
Last edited:
.
Again from what's out in the open, I don't think there was anything wrong with the plane other than a sticky nose gear. In case of equipment failure for height and speed, there are always redundant systems onboard the plane, even if that was the case (which it was not because the communication between TC and Pilot, did talk about altitude, the pilot knew what his altitude was) speed and altitude are monitored by the traffic controller and can be easily communicated to the pilot.


Please read my post no790 of this thread for an alternative explanation and possibility.
 
. .
The pilot's failure to extend the landing gear prior to landing, which resulted in substantial damage to the fuselage during landing.
The engines sustained most of the damage
not the fuselage.
BD0B8548-D347-40AC-A48F-CDD57D79C555.jpeg


Look at this video.
Three sets of engine scraping marks on the runway.
Meaning both engines hit the runway three times.
How did that happen?


That shows that the pilots were confident regarding the deployment of their landing gear.

Again from what's out in the open, I don't think there was anything wrong with the plane other than a sticky nose gear. In case of equipment failure for height and speed, there are always redundant systems onboard the plane, even if that was the case (which it was not because the communication between TC and Pilot, did talk about altitude, the pilot knew what his altitude was) speed and altitude are monitored by the traffic controller and can be easily communicated to the pilot.
On a good day yes in a perfect storm situation no
 
. . .
U are 'it required to fast when traveling
Talking about ATC, although the airblue crash(also in Ramadan) was due to the fault of the exhausted pilot who was fasting - leading to poor judgement and essentially killing all on board.
 
.
Aren't we discussing PIA 8303 specifically? What storm was there on that day?
Don't go on different tangents just for the sake of argument.
I had a point of view, if you don't agree, let's agree to disagree and move on rather than dragging the discussion in an irrelevant direction.


The engines sustained most of the damage
not the fuselage.
View attachment 635217


That shows that the pilots were confident regarding the deployment of their landing gear.


On a good day yes in a perfect storm situation no
 
.
Aren't we discussing PIA 8303 specifically? What storm was there on that day?
Don't go on different tangents just for the sake of argument.
I had a point of view, if you don't agree, let's agree to disagree and move on rather than dragging the discussion in an irrelevant direction.
A perfect storm means
    • an especially bad situation caused by a combination of unfavourable circumstances.
      "the past two years have been a perfect storm for the travel industry"
Definitions from Oxford Languages
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom