Istanbul : 737 Skids Off Runway and Breaks Up

MoeJay

Building runways on flat ground, EMAS, run off areas are all fine and well...

Do a cursory search for overruns over at the avherald website and see that there are a large number of these incidents that take place where crews attempt a landing in conditions that are questionable to say the least...

Which begs the question why are so many crews making poor decisions to continue when the safer option is to delay or divert? Do they all just have poor judgement or is there something else going on...?

How many other approaches and landings are made on a daily basis where the crew "get away with it"?

What is it that makes crews press on when the safer option is to go around?

Fritzbox

Here is a video of the crash:

Tenzor07

MoeJay wrote: »

Which begs the question why are so many crews making poor decisions to continue when the safer option is to delay or divert? Do they all just have poor judgement or is there something else going on...?
How many other approaches and landings are made on a daily basis where the crew "get away with it"?
What is it that makes crews press on when the safer option is to go around?

If you think about it, low cost carriers only make money when their aircraft are flying and full of passengers, they need the aircraft to make quick turnarounds on very tight schedules, get the luggage and the passengers off quick, and the next ones boarded, missed schedules/slots can become expensive so they make no profit on a flight....

BeardySi

Banzai600 wrote: »

i get the fuselage was under immense forces, but WHY have a runway on an embankment ?

that to me is sheer idiocy(?).

Because many places don't have a few km of flat land aligned in a direction that's favourable for wind/obstacles etc.

The alternaltive would be to put the runway in a hole, which I'm sure you'll agree is a far more idiotic proposal.

I see there is a question mark over communications between ATC in Turkish with a crew where the FO did not speak Turkish, with a change of wind direction communicated on final approach. Aviation safety oversight is not the best in Turkey.

Many airports in the world have no safe overruns. Indeed in Ireland Sligo Airport is one such with sea at both ends, Donegal has humpy ground at either end. The idea is to take-off and land within given runway limits.

Andrew33

Banzai600 wrote: »

looks iffy to say the least...







fair enough, like i said, i know nout re landing a plane. but even still, pilot error may be the case, but you need a run off, safe area, thats what im getting at

The runway IS the runoff. I don’t know the figures but most aircraft could land in HALF the runway length if the approach is correct. The other half is the safety margin.

vicwatson

Andrew33 wrote: »

Why were they landing with a strong tail wind? As another poster said, should have been an abort.

Does ATC not demand the direction? genuine question

Tenzor07

Have a listen to the comms of this incident

faoiarvok

vicwatson wrote: »

Does ATC not demand the direction? genuine question

ATC will decide what the “active” runway is, based on the wind, but the Captain is ultimately responsible for the safe conduct of the flight. If they’re not happy, they should request to use the other end. ATC should try to facilitate them, but it could lead to a significant delay. If that means they have to divert, so be it, go somewhere else and live to fly another day.

1123heavy

Andrew33 wrote: »

The runway IS the runoff. I don’t know the figures but most aircraft could land in HALF the runway length if the approach is correct. The other half is the safety margin.

Jets must be able to land within 60% of the Landing Distance Available (LDA) and props must be able to land within 70% of the LDA.