Iran: ATR 72-500 down

An open discussion of aviation safety related issues.

Moderators: FrankM, el, Dmmoore

User avatar
monchavo
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:21 am

Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby monchavo » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:58 am

Sixty-six people are feared to have been killed in a passenger plane crash in the Zargos mountains in Iran.

The Aseman Airlines plane, en route from Tehran to the south-western city of Yasuj, came down near the city of Semirom in Isfahan province.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43103192

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4678
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby 3WE » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:37 pm

While we wait for initial reports- it’s seeming like ATRs are death traps (at least in relative terms). The nasty icing behavior seems to be a ‘flaw’. Is there more?
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Not_Karl
Posts: 2385
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby Not_Karl » Sun Feb 18, 2018 3:47 pm

Still not in AVHerald.
it’s seeming like ATRs are death traps (at least in relative terms).
All aeroplanies are deathtraps in Iran. They had just bent an F100 two days ago... Maybe they should ban all aeroplanies.
I blame A_____a.
Junior Janitor, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Environmental Poisoning Assurance department.

"I think, based on the types of aircraft listed, you're pretty much guaranteed a fiery death."
- Contemporary Poet flyboy2548m to a Foffie.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1817
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby Gabriel » Sun Feb 18, 2018 4:05 pm


User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4678
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby 3WE » Mon Feb 19, 2018 1:50 pm

While we wait for initial reports- it’s seeming like ATRs are death traps (at least in relative terms). The nasty icing behavior seems to be a ‘flaw’. Is there more?
The comment section at Av Herald said 22 fatal accidents from about 1500 ATRs build vs 6 fatal accidents from about 1250 Dash-8s.

I blame the French.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Rabbi O'Genius
Posts: 732
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:37 am
Location: Clamart

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby Rabbi O'Genius » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:15 pm


The comment section at Av Herald said 22 fatal accidents from about 1500 ATRs build vs 6 fatal accidents from about 1250 Dash-8s.

I blame the French.
....and the French probably blame the Italians

Wikipedia says
The ATR 72 is a twin-engine turboprop, short-haul regional airliner developed and produced in France and Italy by aircraft manufacturer ATR (Aerei da Trasporto Regionale or Avions de transport régional), a joint venture formed by French aerospace company Aérospatiale (now Airbus) and Italian aviation conglomerate Aeritalia (now Leonardo S.p.A.).
......never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. – John Donne

User avatar
KPryor
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:34 pm

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby KPryor » Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:10 pm

Well, they won't crash if you keep them on the ground I guess.
https://news.aviation-safety.net/2018/0 ... -accident/
I went to prison for murder, but I stayed for the chili!

elaw
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby elaw » Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:34 am

Iran Air has recently taken delivery of brand new ATR 72-600 aircraft. Flights with these aircraft are not suspended.
...because one hasn't crashed yet. Tune in next week when...
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4678
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby 3WE » Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:08 pm

Iran Air has recently taken delivery of brand new ATR 72-600 aircraft. Flights with these aircraft are not suspended.
...because one hasn't crashed yet. Tune in next week when...
Indeed.

The pilots will have to receive type specific training on how to not_pull up relentlessly on a -600 since the -200 procedure differs on how to not pull up relentlessly.

AND

Suddenly, all your pilots are “low time in the specific type”

:shock:
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
KPryor
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:34 pm

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby KPryor » Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:35 pm

On Mar 11th 2018 Iran's AIB released their preliminary report in Persian reporting that according to FDR and CVR the aircraft had been handed over to Yasuj Tower, the autopilot was set to 15,000 feet. Descending through 15,600 feet the crew activated the anti-ice systems. The aircraft levelled off at 15,000 feet on autopilot, the crew set the QNH to 1021 and maintained 15000 feet for about one minute. Then the engines were reduced to idle, the speed reduced to 200 KIAS with the angle of attack increasing, the engines get slightly accelerated. The speed continued to decrease and reached 129 KIAS (minimum maneouvering speed 132 KIAS), the pitch reaches 15 degrees nose up, the engines accelerate to 67% torque. The altitude target is set to 14,000 feet and the aircraft begins to descend at about 600fpm. The speed further reduces to 117 KIAS, a stall warning activates, the crew disengages the autopilot, the aircraft rolls 20 degrees to the left, the pitch reduces to about 9 degrees nose down. Descending through 14200 feet at 137 KIAS the autopilot gets re-engaged, the aircraft rolls right by 12 degrees, the pitch increases to 5 degrees nose down. A GPWS warning "TERRAIN AHEAD! PULL UP!" activates, the autopilot is disengaged, the GPWS warning continues for 12 seconds until impact.

The AIB continued that there was no technical malfunction of the aircraft, the engines operated in accordance to pilot inputs, all aircraft systems supplied the crew with valid data. Due to the cloud cover the crew remained unaware of the mountains ahead until 2 seconds before impact and rolled the aircraft sharply left in order to avoid the terrain.

I stole this info from AVherald.com. Full story at https://avherald.com/h?article=4b511c15&opt=0
The AIB stated that the crew should have maintained 17,000 feet in accordance with the flight plan, however, descended the aircraft to 15,000 feet followed by a target altitude of 14,000 feet on the autopilot contrary to flight rules. In addition, while the crew was permitted to conduct the flight with the weather data available at the time of departure, the latest weather information provided by Yasuj Tower indicating clouds up to 15,000 feet prohibited the approach to Yasuj according to company procedures due to cloud cover present at the aerodrome, the crew should have diverted to Shiraz or Isfahan planned as alternate aerodromes. Pilot discussions according to the CVR confirm the presence of cloud up to 15,000 feet confirming the accuracy of the weather report by Yasuj Tower. Although the aerodrome was still more than 10km away the crew appeared to be confident the area would be in visual meteorologic conditions. The AIB warns that all of this is first interpretation of first investigation results and is not to be taken as cause of the accident.
I went to prison for murder, but I stayed for the chili!

User avatar
ocelot
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:26 pm

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby ocelot » Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:32 am

That airspeed profile looks an awful lot like the one from the Lubbock FedEx crash in the other thread...

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4678
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Iran: ATR 72-500 down

Postby 3WE » Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:51 pm

That airspeed profile looks an awful lot like the one from the Lubbock FedEx crash in the other thread...
...I know it's silly, but maybe I will start ranting on aviation fora everywhere about the need for a new low-speed warning system...since we know these forums are where the outside world can come up with smart ideas for the insiders to adopt!

It has to be something that grabs your attention without causing startle factor.

Something that says, "Hey dudes (dudettes) you are getting a bit slow there". Don't panic and pull up relentlessly, NOR slam the coal levers full forward, but you better take a peek at the ASI and start managing things and giving airspeed a little attention...

(Asiana remains as the poster-child here- not that this one and FedEx and Colgan and [...] don't fit the bill too.)

And no, I'm not talking about the existing stall warning system...it seems that system is not good enough. We need a second warning (admittedly it's related) that gives pilots somewhat more of a heads up.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.


Return to “Aviation Safety Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests