MaxAvSafety: Wkly WW Commercial Accident/Incident Report

MaxSez: Provided as Professional Knowledge Gained. Pls add missing/unreported , details, first person accounts, photo, videos and antidotal data below to enhance this Topic;

Saturday Jul 8th 2017
Accident Thomson B752 near London on Jul 8th 2017, smoke injures 3 cabin crew
Friday Jul 7th 2017
Incident Swift Air B733 near Miami on Jul 7th 2017, cargo smoke indication
Incident Spirit A319 at Dallas on Jul 7th 2017, hydraulic problem
Incident Aeromexico B737 at Ciudad Juarez on Jul 5th 2017, hydraulic failure
Incident GoJet CRJ7 at Chicago on Feb 17th 2015, runway incursion, departing aircraft takes evasive action
Accident American B763 at Chicago on Oct 28th 2016, rejected takeoff, fire at right hand wing due to uncontained engine failure
Incident Germanwings A319 at Klagenfurt on Jul 6th 2017, bird strike
Thursday Jul 6th 2017
Incident Iceland B752 at Keflavik on Jul 6th 2017, rejected takeoff due to de-icing issue
Incident KLM B738 at Amsterdam on Jul 5th 2017, left main gear did not retract
Incident Delta B763 near Berlin on Jul 5th 2017, hydraulic problem
Incident Georgian CRJ1 near Fort Wayne on Jun 26th 2017, loss of cabin pressure
Incident Mahan A343 at Dusseldorf on Jul 6th 2017, burst tyres on landing
Accident Spicejet DH8D at Hubli on Mar 8th 2015, runway excursion on landing
Accident Lufthansa A333 at Munich on Jun 21st 2017, strong odour causes injuries to cabin crew and affects passengers
Accident Jet2.com A332 at Tenerife on Jun 27th 2017, burst two tyres on landing
Accident Delta A321 at Atlanta on Jun 23rd 2017, tail strike on landing
Wednesday Jul 5th 2017
Incident ANZ B772 over Tasman Sea on Jul 5th 2017, captain incapacitated
Incident Map AT42 near Belem on Jul 4th 2017, dropped panel in flight
Tuesday Jul 4th 2017
Incident Frontier A320 near Kansas City on Jul 2nd 2017, cracked windshield
Incident AirAsia X A333 at Coolangatta on Jul 3rd 2017, bird strike
Monday Jul 3rd 2017
Incident Tuifly B738 near Athens on Jun 30th 2017, electrical problems
Incident Sun Express B738 near Cologne on Jun 30th 2017, engine fault
Incident Allegiant MD83 at Springfield on Jul 3rd 2017, engine shut down in flight
Incident LGW Walter DH8D at Florence and Dusseldorf on Jul 3rd 2017, burst tyre on departure
Incident Qatar B773 near Zurich on Nov 19th 2016, smoke on the flight deck
Incident Horizon DH8D at Belgrade on Jul 2nd 2017, bird strike
Incident Skywest CRJ7 at Denver on Jul 2nd 2017, engine fire on landing
Incident Delta B712 at Atlanta on Jun 29th 2017, runway excursion on landing
Sunday Jul 2nd 2017
Incident Finnair A319 near Helsinki on Jul 2nd 2017, bird strike
Incident Lufthansa A319 at Frankfurt on Jul 1st 2017, odour in cockpit
Incident My Indo B732 at Wamena on Jul 1st 2017, burst both tyres on landing
Incident Saudia A333 at Cairo on Jun 30th 2017, bird strike
Incident France A320 near Paris on Jun 30th 2017, loss of communication
Incident Europa E195 at Zurich on Jul 2nd 2017, very bad smell in cabin
Incident Edelweiss A320 at Zurich on Jul 2nd 2017, engine shut down in flight
Friday Jun 30th 2017
Incident Condor A321 at Bourgas on Jun 30th 2017, bird strike
Incident Jetblue A320 near Atlantic City on Jun 28th 2017, smoke in cockpit
Incident Republic E175 at Toronto on Jun 20th 2017, runway incursion
Incident Blue B734 at Bucharest on Jun 29th 2017, engine shut down in flight
Accident Emirates A388 over Arabian Sea on Jan 7th 2017, wake turbulence sends business jet in uncontrolled descent
Incident Indigo A320 at Patna on Jun 30th 2017, rejected takeoff due to engine stall prompts evacuation
Accident Asiana B772 at San Francisco on Jul 6th 2013, touched down short of the runway, broke up and burst into flames
Thursday Jun 29th 2017
Incident Easyjet A320 at Inverness on Jun 29th 2017, bird strike
Incident Delta B752 near Memphis on Jun 29th 2017, possible issue with an engine
Incident Qantas A388 near Sydney on Jun 29th 2017, engine oil leak
Incident Nouvelair A320 at Monastir on Jun 27th 2017, bird strike
Incident Westjet B737 near Winnipeg on Jun 16th 2017, unusual odour in cabin
Incident Canada E190 near Winnipeg on Jun 19th 2017, frozen automation
Incident THY A321 at Bucharest on Jun 22nd 2017, overran runway on landing
Incident Qantas B744 at San Francisco on Oct 6th 2016, bird strike
Incident Finnair A319 at Helsinki on Oct 28th 2016, crew corrects ATC mistake
(AvHerald)

11 Likes

It wasn’t me! I promise. 🙄

17 Likes

@Will_A… MaxSez: Significant earlier accidents are reported as there investigations are completed or significant safety of flight issues are developed. This is standard practice by the source. Each entry comes with a complete narrative.
If you have an interest in AvSafty I recommend the Web site “Aviation Safety Network”. It contains both commercial and GA accident reporting to include an archive of prelim and final /complete accident investigations and a historic searchable report library. Regards

4 Likes

These two made news headlines in Finland lol.

I think its amazing how all these things happened, yet nobody was killed. 😱

2 Likes

Wonder what this is about? Thanks for the report max

3 Likes

Any more about the American 763 and the un contained engine failure?

@Insertusernamehere. MaxSend:

Incident: ANZ B772 over Tasman Sea on Jul 5th 2017, captain incapacitated
By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Jul 5th 2017 22:43Z, last updated Wednesday, Jul 5th 2017 22:43Z
An ANZ Air New Zealand Boeing 777-200, registration ZK-OKC performing flight NZ-87 (dep Jul 4th) from Auckland (New Zealand) to Hong Kong (China), was enroute at FL340 over the Tasman Sea about 850nm northnorthwest of Auckland when the crew in consultation with doctors decided to return to Auckland due to the captain feeling increasingly unwell. The aircraft returned to Auckland for a safe landing about 2 hours later.

Passengers reported a call for a doctor on board occurred about 30 minutes into the flight. About 2 hours after departure the aircraft turned around and returned to Auckland.

The airline reported the captain was taking a scheduled rest and was not at the controls when the decision was taken to return to Auckland.

4 Likes

@The_Greatest_Basket. MaxSez: FYI

Incident: Finnair A319 at Helsinki on Oct 28th 2016, crew corrects ATC mistake
By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Dec 15th 2016 18:56Z, last updated Thursday, Jun 29th 2017 16:01Z
A Finnair Airbus A319-100, registration OH-LVD performing flight AY-933 from Helsinki (Finland) to Manchester,EN (UK), was taxiing for departure from runway 22R.

A SAS Scandinavian Airlines Canadair CRJ-900, registration OY-KFB performing flight SK-1706 from Copenhagen (Denmark) to Helsinki (Finland), was on final approach to Helsinki’s runway 22L cleared to land on the runway, when the crew of the A319 received clearance to cross runway 22L. The A319 crew spotted the CRJ on short final and stopped before crossing the hold short line.

Finland’s Onnettomuustutkintakeskus (Accident Investigation Board AIBF) rated the occurrence a serious incident and opened an investigation. Denmark’s HCL have assigned an accredited representative to the investigation.

On Jun 29th 2017 the AIBF released their final report in Finnish releasing following findings into the serious incident:

  1. Helsinki Airport had set runway 22L for arrivals and runway 22R for departures in a lively traffic situation. This meant, due to the location of the terminals, that departing aircraft had to cross runway 22L to reach runway 22R.

  2. The aerodrome chart shows the runway crossing points as “hot spots” instruction flight crew to exercise special attention while moving in these areas. The last safety assessment had occurred in 2002, another safety assessment was necessary.

  3. The tower controller, while following the landing traffic, issued staggered crossing clearances behind landing traffic. The attention by the tower controller may be disturbed by outside coordination line calls particularly during busy periods of time.

  4. SK-1706 was already in the roll out on runway 22L and AY-933 was nearing the hold short line at ZG (taxiway G) requesting to cross the runway. The tower controller cleared AY-933 to cross runway 22L although SK-1706 had not yet passed the intersection with taxiway G. There is no safety net available that could alert the controller of an error early.

  5. The tower controller sought to provide a quick service while controlling aircraft and made a mistake in mistaking on which taxiway AY-933 would cross the runway.

  6. The flight crew of AY-933 made their position clear by reporting to be at ZG, the controller however did not take notice of the position ZG and assumed the aircraft was on ZD. Following the incident the standard operating procedures at Helsinki were changed requiring controllers to always spell out the taxiway at which the aircraft were cleared to cross the runway.

  7. The tower controller relied on his vision and did not cross check the position on the traffic management systems prior to issuing the crossing clearance. Helsinki Airport does provide assistance to air traffic control with a ground position and monitoring system, electronic flight strips as well as stop lights. A warning system based on cooperation between those systems is not operative.

  8. The crew of AY-933 found the runway was not clear and queried tower to verify the clearance. Flight crew being obliged to verify the runway is clear provide an additional safety net in case of error by tower.

  9. In accordance with the instructions issued the stop bar lights were extinguished at holding points ZD and ZG. Their use is coupled to the tower instructions to ensure the stop lights are not illuminated in places were crossing clearance just past a landing traffic occur repeatedly. Further development and integration with other systems would be possible and provide an additional safety net.

  10. The controller made an according exeception report to Finavia.

  11. The controller was properly licensed and held the necessary medical certicate. The skill and health of air traffic controllers are regularly monitored.

  12. Finavia has been active in training of human factors related to air traffic control. In recent years emphasis was put on changes due to technical gravity. At the level of the European Union importance of human factors is increasingly emphasized. Eurocontrol has identified human activity as a key success factor in aviation safety management.

  13. Air Traffic Controller, Air Traffic Control Superiors, the Risk Management Unit as well as the crew of AY-933 did not consider the occurrence a serious incident, however, the investigation considered the occurrence a serious incident. Definition of a serious incident varies with EU regulations, ICAO runway safety and Eurocontrol runway safety action plans.

The AIBF reported that one aircraft was approaching the hold short point ZY on taxiway Y, two in a row (AY-841 being the second aircraft) were approaching the hold short point ZD on taxiway D. The controller issued the landing clearance to SK-1706. The first aircraft on taxiway D was given a conditional crossing clearance to cross past the landing traffic.

A short time later AY-933, after SK-1706 had touched down and was rolling past the intersection with taxiway D but ahead of the intersection with taxiway G, reported approaching holding point ZG, the controller cleared the aircraft to cross runway 22L and hold short of holding point WD (holding point on taxiway D ahead of runway 22R) suggesting the controller believed the aircraft was on taxiway D (instead of G). The flight crew of AY-933 noticed the runway was not clear, queried tower and stopped short of ZG.

The AIBF analysed that although lively the traffic scenario at Helsinki was a normal morning in good visibility. Runway 22L was used for arrivals, runway 22R for departures. Three runway 22L crossing points were in use to permit departing aircraft reach runway 22R, on each of the crossing points multiple aircraft could have been waiting for crossing. In an attempt to permit as many aircraft cross the runway as possible before the next landing would block the runway, air traffic control issued crossing clearance as soon as the landing traffic had gone past the relevant taxiway (staggered crossing clearance) or used conditional crossing clearance past the landing traffic.

At the time of the occurrence four aircraft were waiting to cross runway 22L. The first two received conditional crossing clearances (past the landing traffic), the third however mistakenly received a crossing clearance despite still being ahead of the landing traffic because the controller confused the taxiway the aircraft was on. This confusion was probably caused by AY-841, behind the first aircraft waiting at ZD, approaching holding point ZD at the same time as AY-933 approached ZG, the controller thus assumed the aircraft on ZD was calling and as the landing traffic had already gone past taxiway D cleared the caller to cross the runway. However, the crew had indicated they were approaching ZG, but this did not change the controller’s perceiption, who also reasoned that the first aircraft at ZD had already received a conditional crossing clearance and overtaking was not possible.

Immediately after issuing the crossing clearance the controller recognized his mistake and wanted to correct the mistake, however, the crew was already calling to query the crossing clearance. The controller in response corrected the mistake. The AIBF pointed out that in such a scenario a risk of radio traffic congestion exists that could prevent correcting such a mistake.

In this case the safety net via the flight crew worked, flight crew are obliged to verify the runway is clear prior to entering the runway and the flight crew did not cross the hold short line although cleared to do so.

The controller was experienced and quick in decision making. Visibility was good. The controller was therefore relying on his vision and on the image of aircraft rolling. The strong impression of the rolling aircraft on D caused the controller to not take into account, that the crew was reporting to be taxiway G. In this traffic situation the position report by the aircraft was insufficient. Air Traffic Control not only requires technical know how but also the capability of demanding data processing and decision making. The aim is to proactively control aircraft so that surprises do not occur. Maintaining situational awareness is essential for safety, however, it is also essential for air traffic control to accelerate traffic. For aircraft taxiing flexibility and speed using contingent runway crossing clearances appear to be the unofficial practice with the aim to avoid stops during taxi.

The controller had arrived for work at 07:00. At 08:50 she had been working for over an hour in busy traffic and was soon to be relieved for a rest. It is possible that the nearing rest period influenced concentration momentarily. In addition three calls to coordinate the launch of weather balloons, unrelated to the controller’s main task, were handled by the controller in an already busy period of time. Although those calls did not have any direct impact on the occurrence, they might affect the controller’s concentration.

The AIBF then analysed the possibility of creating additional safety nets by improved stop bar lighting, introduction of a runway incursion detection system and the safety management in general.

The AIBF analysed that about three weeks after the occurrence the standard operating procedures were changed to require air traffic controllers including the taxiway in runway crossing clearances.

2 Likes

@Rodney_Buckland… MaxSez: FYI

Accident: American B763 at Chicago on Oct 28th 2016, rejected takeoff, fire at right hand wing due to uncontained engine failure
By Simon Hradecky, created Friday, Oct 28th 2016 20:47Z, last updated Friday, Jul 7th 2017 14:17Z
An American Airlines Boeing 767-300, registration N345AN performing flight AA-383 from Chicago O’Hare,IL to Miami,FL (USA) with 161 passengers and 9 crew, was accelerating for takeoff from O’Hare’s runway 28R at about 14:50L (19:50Z) when the crew rejected takeoff at high speed reporting “stopping on the runway”, tower acknowledged with “Fire”, subsequently adding fire from the right hand wing, the crew requested the trucks. The aircraft slowed and came to a stop with the right hand engine (CF6) ablaze, a large black plume of smoke rising above the aircraft. The crew initiated an emergency evacuation via slides. 19 passengers and one flight attendant received injuries, one serious and 19 minor injuries, in the evacuation and were taken to hospitals. The aircraft received substantial damage, the fuselage skin melted aft of the right hand wing, the outboard part of the right hand wing melted and is down on the ground, the inner part substantially burned.

On Oct 28th 2016 The FAA reported the aircraft blew a tyre prompting the crew to reject takeoff.

The airline reported an engine malfunction prompted the crew to reject takeoff. Seven passengers and one flight attendant received minor injuries and were taken to hospitals.

On Oct 28th 2016 The NTSB reported a tyre blew out resulting in a fire. Investigators have been dispatched on site, an investigation has been opened.

Gossip from Chicago suggested, a number of right hand main tyres burst after the aircraft hit a foreign object on the runway, debris penetrated the right hand inner fuel tank causing a substantial fuel leak and resulting fire.

On Oct 29th 2016 the NTSB reported that an examination of the right hand engine revealed the #2 stage high pressure turbine disk had failed, ejecting parts of the disk, which landed in an UPS warehouse about 2920 feet from the aircraft. So far about 90% of the disk have been recovered including another piece that was found 0.3nm from the accident site. The damage to the fuselage was limited to windows and cosmetic interior, there was no fire inside the cabin. The cause of the engine failure is not yet known. There were 20 minor injuries as result of the evacuation.

On Oct 31st 2016 the FAA reported that the aircraft experienced a right hand engine failure during the takeoff run and stopped on the runway, the occupants evacuated via slides, 10 people received unknown injuries. The right side of the aircraft was damaged by fire. The occurrence was rated an accident.

The flight was cancelled.

On Nov 4th 2016 the NTSB reported the aircraft entered runway 28R at taxiway N5 and was accelerating for takeoff through 128 KIAS 6,550 feet past the runway 28R threshold with the engines at takeoff power, when the right hand engine failed, two seconds later the power levers were retarded at 134 KIAS and brake pressures began to increase as autobrakes activated and speedbrakes automatically extended. The aircraft came to a full stop about 25 seconds later 9,225 feet past the runway 28R threshold with a pool fire below its right hand wing fed by a fuel leak. The right hand engine’s stage 2 high pressure turbine disk had fractured into at least 4 pieces, one piece went through the right hand wing, over the fuselage and into a UPS warehouse. The majority of the disk was collected and sent to Washington for lab examination, results so far show one of the fractures showed indications of fatigue cracking initiated at an internal inclusion near the forward side of the hub’s inner bore.

The NTSB continued the disk at accumulated 10,984 cycles with a limit of 15,000 life cycles.

On Mar 24th 2017 the NTSB reported there was one serious and 19 minor injuries. The investigation is ongoing.

1 Like

Thanks. That’s pretty interesting to read.

1 Like

@Aussie_Cockatoo
Basically it’s whenever an update for the incident/accident comes out

2 Likes

There really should be a site for GA incidents.

1 Like

Well just imagine all of those incidents lol

Also @Maxmustang could you possibly tell me what happened with this incident:

Allegiant MD83 at Springfield on Jul 3rd 2017, engine shut down in flight

2 Likes

@Reedgreat. MaxSez: For all WW accidents to include GA see. “Aviation Safety Network” by web search or “aviation-safety.net”. Regards

1 Like

@AllegiantAir… MaxSez: As requested;

Incident: Allegiant MD83 at Springfield on Jul 3rd 2017, engine shut down in flight
By Simon Hradecky, created Monday, Jul 3rd 2017 22:10Z, last updated Monday, Jul 3rd 2017 22:10Z
An Allegiant McDonnell Douglas MD-83, registration N864GA performing flight G4-679 from Springfield,MO to Orlando Sanford,FL (USA) with 153 people on board, was in the initial climb out of Springfield’s runway 14 when the crew advised they might need to declare emergency, it looked like they lost an engine (JT8D). The aircraft stopped the climb at 3000 feet and began to position for an approach to Springfield’s runway 14. The crew subsequently did declare an emergency advising it looked like they lost the left engine. The aircraft landed safely on Springfield’s runway 14 about 30 minutes after departure and taxied to the apron.

1 Like

Check this link out:

http://www.asias.faa.gov/pls/apex/f?p=100:93:0::NO

2 Likes

This has been showing up soo many times on the latest reports

(I know you don’t write this)

That’s horrible. Full report?

Already reported in full ^ look up to my ask, then max replies

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.