Emergency landing of PK770 at Milan Airport

[Abbas Ali]

Terror on PIA’s Milan flight

Airlines of repute try to come out with justifications in assuage the impact of rumors and misgivings of passengers following an accident, which could have fatal consequences. PIA the national airline of Pakistan failed to fulfill its obligations to passengers by only trying to cover up the anguish and physical trauma experienced by passengers on board a Boeing 777 on July 3, when it was due to land at Milan.

The aircraft and passengers were subjected to extremely bad weather and the pilot failed to avoid it though other aircrafts successfully had.

Boeing 777, we are told, has a state of the art technology with latest electronic gadget, designed to forewarn pilots of weather and other impending dangers. Educated viewers, who watch the National Geographic reproduction of aviation accidents are aware that accidents occur primarily because of human error, be it the pilot’s incompetence or technical faults left unattended.

Passengers on board Milan flight caught in severe weather and the deafening sound of hail were shouting and panicking all through the experience which could have been avoided instead of the criminal negligence of going through it. Reports by Milan electronic and print media reported serious damage to the aircraft structure and equipment which will cost the airline several million dollars. The aircraft is expected to remain dysfunctional for many weeks, which will further add to the losses of PIA, already plagued with mismanagement, incompetence, pilferages and political interference.

There seem to be serious flaws in training and selection of crew assigned to fly an expensive aircraft like 777, which carries over 300 passengers. What else can be said about a pilot who fails to avoid visibly bad weather detectable by radar and successfully avoided by scores of other aircrafts in circuit. Why is PIA letting experienced pilots, on whom the airline has invested billions of rupees on training, leave for other airlines?

Raw pilots with a mere CPL or engineers trained by PIA owe it to the airline. The most experienced pilots should be selected on such flights so that passenger lives and security are ensured and not subjected to such torment in future.

SHAHZAD KHALIL
U.A.E.

Source: DAWN - Letters

[ConnieMan]

I'm shocked and speechless now if all what has been said in above post is true!!

All at this time i would say is "They still had to live and breath as there lives were spared"...

[zerbaer]

Guess the parking costs alone are about Euro 13,000 a day. Boeing team has been with the a/c at PK behest to fix it. Understand the insurance company for PK is upset as they did not ask Boeing to salvage & would prefer to have the job done (themselves) by less pricey, other than Boeing, sources they have available. This issue can extend the grounding & add fuel to the burning unscheduled costs & losses.

[stylo4444]

Any idea of which flight crew was in control of this flight? I'm a bit stunned at how a 777 pilot wasn't able to avoid something like this but perhaps there is more to the puzzle that we are not aware of.

[Moin]

Take my word for it. There will still be those (in denial) who will try to blame the a/c and not the pilots. I won't be surprised if the cost to repair this a/c would be so great that it would end up being written off and parted out.

[PIA711HVY]

Can we post the names?

[Abbas Ali]

^ I think the incident can be discussed without posting crew names here.

In such cases, sometimes information like crew names is misused by some who take opportunity to defame or disgrace crew instead of professionally discussing the actual incident and how it happened. So, I wouldn’t approve posting of names here.

Also, I believe posting names would be inappropriate until such information is released to news media & general public viewing by the airline or investigation authorities.

Abbas

[zerbaer]

The first inspections done by Boeing confirmed aircraft condition to be not good enough to attempt ferry flight to Boeing facilities in Washington!

[raihans]

The first inspections done by Boeing confirmed aircraft condition to be not good enough to attempt ferry flight to Boeing facilities in Washington!

some sort of heavy loss, what will be feasible for BHX, repair or write-off?

[zerbaer]

Raihans - can't say whether or not salvage is feasible, we don't have details necessary to form an opinion. In any case, the a/c is insured & it is a straight forward insurance claim. So, in effect, the assessment to salvage or not, doesn't squarely apply to PIA discretion. I am not sure if a percentage of lost revenue due to long grounding is covered by the insurance terms.

There are quit a few instances where PIA a/c sustained substantial damage & the planes were restored by Boeing/Airbus covered via insurance. The B747 which landed without lowered & locked landing gear in ISB was restored. A300 BAZ ran off the runway, I think also in ISB, was fixed. Then there have been ones with lesser damage like B737 which ran off the taxiway in KHI & got stuck in the mud while the captain continued to use power to get back on tarmac. Then there are A310 incidents, all of which got fixed under insurance coverage. The annual insurance premium, of-course goes up as the number of claims rise.

[raihans]

Thank you zerbaer for the information. I wish that AP-BHX shall get back to its duty as early as possible.

[Abbas Ali]

PIA Aircraft Damaged While Landing In Italy

Tuesday, July 15, 2008
By Saad Hasan

KARACHI: A dangerous mishap in handling of a Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) aircraft has again brought to fore the incompetence, which has marred the performance of the airline.

One of PIA’s latest Boeing 777s, carrying 269 passengers besides 17 crew members, was badly damaged while descending for a landing at Milan, Italy, on July 3. It suffered major structural damage and is still grounded there.

The aircraft, which is equipped with modern weather avoidance system and state-of-the-art technology, during the descent went through a severe hailstorm, something that could have been avoided had onboard facilities been properly used, officials in the airline told The News.

“The aircraft’s exterior body and windscreen have been damaged due to the hailstorm,” PIA’s Public Affairs Division said in a written reply. “An assessment is being done and Boeing company will inform accordingly.”

While PIA has not given complete details of the damage caused to the aircraft, which was inducted into the fleet a year ago, information available with this correspondent explains the severity of the incident.

The aircraft’s nose radome, which houses the weather radar, was badly damaged, the pressurisation system packs inlet totally destroyed and leading edge flaps on both wings severely dented. There are other perforations, dents on the fuselage and major rivets undone. Both the outer panes of the cockpit front windshields were broken, impairing visibility of both pilots.

“It’s not normal to lose visibility by getting the windscreen damaged of a big aircraft,” said a senior PIA engineer. “It is sheer incompetence on the part of the pilots.” The engineer who wished not to be named for fear of wrath of the management said the Boeing 777 (AP-BHX) avionics are capable of gauging the intensity of weather from miles away.

The aircraft, which was coming from Paris, landed at Milan on autopilot and with aid of the on-board navigation system, which coupled with Milan airfield’s reliable instrument landing system avoided a crash. Experienced pilots all over the world are trained to avoid all sorts of weather conditions, which not only cause inconvenience to passengers, but can damage an aircraft severely, leading to a serious accident.

Contrary to PIA’s version, sources say the aircraft had 179 passengers after taking off from Paris, while the total seating capacity is about 300 passengers, which points out that the aircraft was far below the take off weight and landing weight limits.

It was being flown by Capt Ahsan ur Rahman and First Officer Khalid Azmat. This flight was being operated with multiple crew comprising three pilots, because of the extended flight time. According to PIA, Capt Ahsan is a highly experienced pilot with 21,645 hours of total flying experience, whereas First officer Khalid has 8,779 hours of experience.

“PIA has had a lot of problems lately with pilot career planning, which is normally based on the most experienced crew flying the most-heavy aircrafts,” said an airline official. Aviation experts say that it must be investigated whether the aircraft’s weather avoidance system was not used properly or whether it was not functioning properly.

PIA has lately been facing problems due to lack of experienced and qualified engineers. Over 200 engineers left the airline to seek better prospects, disregarding the fact that it was PIA which trained them for the airline’s benefit. The airline is now faced with the looming prospect of raw pilots trained by the airline, gaining experience and then leaving the airline for better emoluments.

In spite of restrictions imposed by PIA which seek to discourage such engineers and pilots from leaving at will after gaining experience, the human resource has been flowing out on recommendations of powerful groups.

Source: The News

[Abbas Ali]

Some more photos of damaged PIA Boeing 777-240ER (AP-BHX) sent by forum member Ammad.





















Thank you Ammad for sharing.

[CPH-PAKiz]

OHH NOOO what do they done to BHX ...

inshallah ill fly soon aqain

[raihans]

Any body with an iota of aviation background would substantiate that thunderstorms can be vicious. The on board weather radar is programmed to pick up embedded CB's as they say in aviation lingo. Avoidance is the basic premise however it's a well known documented and experienced fact that hail can be encountered as far as 20 nautical miles from a storm whilst flying in clear conditions, similarly lightening can also be encountered in clear air whilst flying in vicinity of thunderstorms.

At times a perfectly servicable on board weather radar depending upon interpretation of the displayed images can be mis read. NO pilot in his right mind flies through a CB regardless of how macho one is. These things can happen as there can be a number of mitigating circumstances. Depending on ATC radars as some have weather suppressors assistance can be sought, however once inadvertently if entered a CB, the best course of action is continue straight ahead maintaining wings level and should break out, turning is not the best option.

HAIL

If you manage to miss the wind shear, ice, tornadoes, microbursts and lightning, the threat of hail
always looms.

Hail can be (and often is) thrown into clear -air as far as 10 miles from a large thunderstorm. And
you cannot see it coming. Happily, if you avoid thunderstorms by a suitable margin, you will avoid
any hail damage. Isn't that a nice coincidence?

The aircraft, which is equipped with modern weather avoidance system and state-of-the-art technology, during the descent went through a severe hailstorm, something that could have been avoided had onboard facilities been properly used, officials in the airline told The News.

The engineer who wished not to be named for fear of wrath of the management said the Boeing 777 (AP-BHX) avionics are capable of gauging the intensity of weather from miles away.

I am getting confused in the above quoted statements while comparing the statements of R.F. and inducedrag. Is it a media who is not aware of proper aviation/meteriological knowledge? And what about the engineer, i agree about his statement but that is the case for weather and in case of hail, as stated by inducedrag that it cannot be seen coming....

Can anyone please shed some more light and if possible, what was the approx. position of aircraft from the hailstorm whilst on apprach? Whether it was within 10 ~ 20 nautical miles? (Comparing the statements of R.F. and inducedrag that hail can be encountered from 10 nm to 20 nm away from the hailstorm)