PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Discuss issues and news related to PIA, Pakistani airlines and Pakistan's civil & military aviation.


TAILWIND
Registered Member
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:52 am

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by TAILWIND » Wed Jan 30, 2019 1:19 pm

inducedrag wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2019 1:33 pm
Flyer1015 wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2019 11:37 am
Will the report be published online like they did for Airblue and Bhoja?
Next generation will be able to read it by the time ATR will be phased out
As per Avherald, on 28 Jan 2019, Nepal's AAIC released their final report US-Bangla DH8D at Kathmandu which took place on Mar 12th 2018, that is within 11 months. Don't know how long would it take for CAA Pak to release their report. It has already been over two years since accident.


Abdulrafeysiddiqui
Registered Member
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:43 pm
Location: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by Abdulrafeysiddiqui » Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:47 pm

When no body have "SAAF NIYAT" to bring out the truth, report won't be coming out. Simple!

arshad.altaf
Registered Member
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 1:24 pm

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by arshad.altaf » Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:06 pm

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday strongly censured the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for its failure to complete the inquiry into the 2016 Havelian plane crash.

Justice Aamir Farooq rejected the CAA’s request for eight more months to complete the probe and ordered the authority to submit the inquiry report by the first week of March.

The court was hearing a petition for a judicial investigation into the accident filed by the mother of the ill-fated flight’s co-pilot.

The directives come 26 months after Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) flight PK-661 from Chitral crashed in the hills of Gagan, some seven kilometres away from Havelian city.

Among the 48 passengers and crew on the Islamabad-bound flight was popular singer-turned-evangelist Junaid Jamshed, two Austrians, and a Chinese national. The plane was an ATR-42 turboprop aircraft.

During the hearing, the court was told that several of the aircraft’s parts were made by French and American firms and the investigation was being delayed because of slow-paced communication with the manufacturers.

On this premise, the CAA presented a request for more time to complete the inquiry which was rejected by Justice Farooq. The judge ordered the aviation authority to finalise the report for submission at the next case hearing, which will be scheduled for the first week of March.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1905410/1- ... ane-crash/

Flyer1015
Registered Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:52 am

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by Flyer1015 » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:27 am

During the hearing, the court was told that several of the aircraft’s parts were made by French and American firms and the investigation was being delayed because of slow-paced communication with the manufacturers.
LOL! This is absolutely untrue. The French and American firms would have given all the requested information and communications a long time ago. Unlike the CAA and SIB in Pakistan, these foreign aviation entities are competent and get the job done.

Now that the judge is demanding the report to be published in one month, it's going to be a rush-job by the SIB and the report will seem ridiculous.

inducedrag
Registered Member
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 11:31 am
Location: n24e57

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by inducedrag » Fri Feb 08, 2019 6:45 pm

Flyer1015 wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:27 am
During the hearing, the court was told that several of the aircraft’s parts were made by French and American firms and the investigation was being delayed because of slow-paced communication with the manufacturers.
LOL! This is absolutely untrue. The French and American firms would have given all the requested information and communications a long time ago. Unlike the CAA and SIB in Pakistan, these foreign aviation entities are competent and get the job done.

Now that the judge is demanding the report to be published in one month, it's going to be a rush-job by the SIB and the report will seem ridiculous.
Send the invistagation team on visit to USA and Europe

TAILWIND
Registered Member
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:52 am

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by TAILWIND » Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:36 am

CAA would never be able to complete this investigations, they neither have the expertise nor the will. As good muslims, we should say fateha for the victims, and accept this crash as an act of fate, and close this tragic chapter.

Flyer1015
Registered Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:52 am

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by Flyer1015 » Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:02 am

TAILWIND wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:36 am
CAA would never be able to complete this investigations, they neither have the expertise nor the will. As good muslims, we should say fateha for the victims, and accept this crash as an act of fate, and close this tragic chapter.
Absolutely not! Fatals of last 13 years: 2006 PIA at Multan, 2010 Airblue in ISB, 2012 Bhoja approaching ISB, 2016 PIA approaching ISB. That's 3 of the biggest airlines (only airlines) with fatal losses in a very short period of time. This is unacceptable by ANY measurable metric. You cannot just accept accidents as fate and close the chapters. We must learn from them, why it happened, and how it can be prevented from happening again. That is how the NTSB and FAA operate in the US here, and Pakistan should learn something as well. Pakistan's aviation safety is a joke. You have the wrong people appointed in the wrong positions. They should be merit based appointments (as opposed to political favors and nepotism). They need to overhaul aviation safety in the entire country from top to bottom.

User avatar
Abbas Ali
Site Admin
Posts: 34612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:52 pm
Location: Pakistan

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by Abbas Ali » Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:24 pm

High court directs CAA to file comments on plea seeking investigation of plane crash

The Sindh High Court (SHC) has directed the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) and others to file comments on a petition seeking a judicial inquiry into the Pakistan International Airlines flight PK-661 crash in which 42 passengers and crew, including singer-turned preacher Junaid Jamshed and his wife, lost their lives.

The petitioner, Syed Iqbal Kazmi, submitted in his petition that an Islamabad-bound flight of the national flag carrier had crashed after it took off from Chitral on December 7, 2016. He submitted that the CAA director-general (DG) had sent a letter to his high-ups in which startling disclosures were made about the functioning of ATR planes.

The petitioner said 20 incidents were recorded wherein the engines of the ATR planes used by the national flag carrier had stopped during flights. Besides, 90 cases of ATR planes’ removal of engines were recorded as well.

He argued that after the occurrence of such incidents in the past, it was the constitutional obligation of the cabinet division secretary, the CAA DG and the PIA chairman to refrain from purchasing outdated planes, using them and risking the lives of passengers and crew. He alleged that the respondents violated the Article 9 of the Constitution as well as the civil aviation rules.

Kazmi pleaded to the SHC to conduct a judicial inquiry into the PK-661 plane crash to fix the responsibility on the officials responsible for it, prosecute them and order compensation of the legal heirs of the victims of the crash. He requested the court to direct the respondents to ground all the planes currently being used by the national flag carrier and order their inspection by the CAA or any other independent investigating agency or department.

A division bench of the SHC headed by Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar directed the CAA and other respondents to file comments on the petition by April 11 and adjourned the hearing.

Source: The News
Dil Dil Pakistan... Jaan Jaan Pakistan

See you at:
Image

smhusain_1
Registered Member
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:16 pm
Location: Brampton, Ontario, Canada

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by smhusain_1 » Tue Apr 16, 2019 8:21 am

The aircraft suffered an engine malfunction, a broken turbine blade, on the left engine in flight (# 1 engine). This caused a shut down of the engine and also contributed to the erratic behaviour of the propeller of that engine. This condition may have caused a not flyable condition on the remaining engine because of the nature of high drag generated by the dead engine propeller; it may not have feathered, that is aligned itself to the airstream to reduce the drag on the aircraft. Normally in case of an engine failure in such airplanes, the propeller auto feathers, aligning itself to the airstream to prevent drag automatically. The other engine (# 2) could not overcome this condition to develop sufficient speed to prevent a stall. The stall warning sounded during these last moments.

What the pilots could have done?

This is merely speculative. I remember when reading of the accident about the higher temperature at altitude (ISA + 5 or 10). The air is rarified here and the power which is available at sea level is not available in its entirety.

The aircraft had an obstacle clearance from the terrain of at most 1500 to 2000 feet. The suddenness of the emergency allowed the speed to decay.

A gradual descent towards lower terrain could have been attempted, but it seems that the aircraft was out of control for such afterthoughts to have been attempted.

The Fokker F-27 and likewise this aircraft, the ATR 42-500 can safely fly on one engine, though a controlled descent would have been in order here because of the lowered density of the air.

User avatar
raihans
Registered Member
Posts: 4444
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 5:09 pm
Location: Kuwait

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by raihans » Wed Apr 17, 2019 1:25 am

thank you for input on the occurrence, very tragic indeed it was, however, with your vast flying experience, please shed some more light if it was avoidable in anyway even with these circumstances? And any simulation has been run in simulator to see if the flight was possible to continue to OPRN or even clear the terrain area while landing at any leveled area if not able to made up to OPRN?
smhusain_1 wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 8:21 am
The aircraft suffered an engine malfunction, a broken turbine blade, on the left engine in flight (# 1 engine). This caused a shut down of the engine and also contributed to the erratic behaviour of the propeller of that engine. This condition may have caused a not flyable condition on the remaining engine because of the nature of high drag generated by the dead engine propeller; it may not have feathered, that is aligned itself to the airstream to reduce the drag on the aircraft. Normally in case of an engine failure in such airplanes, the propeller auto feathers, aligning itself to the airstream to prevent drag automatically. The other engine (# 2) could not overcome this condition to develop sufficient speed to prevent a stall. The stall warning sounded during these last moments.

What the pilots could have done?

This is merely speculative. I remember when reading of the accident about the higher temperature at altitude (ISA + 5 or 10). The air is rarified here and the power which is available at sea level is not available in its entirety.

The aircraft had an obstacle clearance from the terrain of at most 1500 to 2000 feet. The suddenness of the emergency allowed the speed to decay.

A gradual descent towards lower terrain could have been attempted, but it seems that the aircraft was out of control for such afterthoughts to have been attempted.

The Fokker F-27 and likewise this aircraft, the ATR 42-500 can safely fly on one engine, though a controlled descent would have been in order here because of the lowered density of the air.
Raihan SR Bakhsh

flickr.com/photos/raihanshahzad
EY-B77W, A345, A320, A319, EK-B773, B77W, A388, FZ-B738, GF-L1011, B732, A332, A320, A319, KU-A343, AB6, A310, A320, NL-A320, PK-B707/720, B733, B772, B77L, AB4, A310, A320, QR-A320, A321, A333, A359, B788, WY-B738, B739, A333

TAILWIND
Registered Member
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:52 am

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by TAILWIND » Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:18 am

In the absence of investigation report, all we can do is guess, yet an engine failure in descent phase added with auto-feather malfunction, is not a catastrophic event. However commenting from the comfort of one's laptop and managing an emergency from the cockpit with a stricken engine are two absolutely different things.
Hope the elusive report see daylight some day.

smhusain_1
Registered Member
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:16 pm
Location: Brampton, Ontario, Canada

Re: PIA ATR Flight PK-661 Crashes Near Havelian

Post by smhusain_1 » Wed May 08, 2019 4:42 pm

An engine failure with no auto feather on that is cause for concern in any mode of flight; besides trying to maintain control of the aircraft on single engine, the dead engine’s propeller is preventing any forward speed due to a high drag unfeathered condition, and possibly preventing forward flight. The #1 engine is the critical engine which is another cause for concern regarding VMCA; forgotten the theory! The air density is lowered; the temperature is greater than ISA, the height above terrain. All these factors interplay. The suddenness of the event can also be remarked upon.
Should we hang up our thinking or speculation just because we were not present in the cockpit?