Форум

avherald.com

Страницы: 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Автор Сообщение


Stanislav

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 12.09.2014 в 20:57
Сообщений: 6969
Блог: Блог пользователя
Регистрация: 12.11.2011

  (0)  
Добавлено: 14.10.2012 20:11
Accident: Corendon B738 at Antalya on Oct 14th 2012, smoke in cockpit and cabin
By Simon Hradecky, created Sunday, Oct 14th 2012 09:48Z, last updated Sunday, Oct 14th 2012 10:12Z

A Corendon Airlines Boeing 737-800, registration TC-TJK performing flight 7H-773 from Antalya (Turkey) to Trondheim (Norway) with 189 passengers and 7 crew, was being pushed back from the gate at Antalya, when smoke appeared in the cockpit and soon after in the cabin prompting the captain to initiate an evacuation of the aircraft via slides. 27 passengers were taken to hospitals, two of them received serious injuries (fracture of leg, fracture of arm), 25 passengers received minor injuries, all injuries were the result of the evacuation.

The airline confirmed the aircraft was evacuated because of smoke in the cockpit. The aircraft was removed from service due to minor damage received during the occurrence. 27 passengers were taken to hospitals.

A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration TC-TJJ reached Trondheim with 157 passengers and a delay of 4 hours.

Passengers reported a number of passengers were exiting the aircraft through the overwing exits but had no way to get down and were standing on the wings. When yelling occurred, that the aircraft was on fire, those passengers standing on the wings jumped down, the injuries resulted from these jumps. The smoke had started in the front of the cabin appearing like coming from one of the crew lockers.

TC-TJK during the emergency (Photo: Corendon Airlines)





Stanislav

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 12.09.2014 в 20:57
Сообщений: 6969
Блог: Блог пользователя
Регистрация: 12.11.2011

  (0)  
Добавлено: 14.10.2012 20:23
Incident: Sriwijaya B734 at Padang on Oct 13th 2012, landed at wrong airport
By Simon Hradecky, created Sunday, Oct 14th 2012 16:08Z, last updated Sunday, Oct 14th 2012 16:15Z

A Sriwijaya Boeing 737-400, registration PK-CKD performing flight SJ-21 from Medan to Padang (Indonesia) with 96 people on board, was supposed to land on Padang's new Minangkabau International Airport, but landed on Padang's former civil, now only military Tabing Airport about 7nm south of Minangkabau International Airport. The landing at about 17:00L was safe.

The airline confirmed the aircraft landed on the old Padang Tabing airport, which had been in use until 2005 and was then replaced by Padang's new Minangkabau Airport (identifiers remained unchanged). Both captain and first officer performed their first approach to Padang. Despite navigation equipment fully functional at both the International Airport and the aircraft both flight crew thought they were seeing their intended destination on overflying Tabing Airport while approaching Minangkabau Airport from the south and performed a visual approach to Tabing Airport.

Tabing Airport, now exclusively used by Indonesia's armed forces, features a runway 16/34 of about 2100 meters/7000 feet length, the Minangkabau International Airport features a runway 15/33 with a length of 2750 meters/9000 feet length.

Map (Graphics: AVH/Google Earth)



sоrter(саша)

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 20.01.2016 в 23:41
Сообщений: 7925
Регистрация: 12.01.2012
  (0)  
Добавлено: 14.10.2012 20:59
Автор: Stanislav
и для (Саши)ControllerА есть интересное

Incident: Lufthansa A388 and Aeroflot A320 at Frankfurt on Dec 13th 2011, loss of separation
By Simon Hradecky, created Friday, Feb 24th 2012 14:56Z, last updated Friday, Feb 24th 2012 14:56Z

A Lufthansa Airbus A380-800, registration D-AIMH performing flight LH-711 from Tokyo Narita (Japan) to Frankfurt/Main (Germany), was on final approach to Frankfurt's runway 25L.

An Aeroflot Airbus A320-200, registration VP-BWD performing flight SU-106 from Frankfurt/Main (Germany) to Moscow Sheremetyevo (Russia), was lined up on runway 25C waiting for takeoff clearance.


Так и заикой можно стать. А где у них 25С полоса находится? У них вообще интересно с полосами, на 25L грубо говоря две полосы, с порогом 25L и 26L. Надеюсь что 25С находится на 25R.
sоrter(саша)

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 20.01.2016 в 23:41
Сообщений: 7925
Регистрация: 12.01.2012
  (0)  
Добавлено: 14.10.2012 21:10
Всё, нашёл, справа от левой 25С.


Stanislav

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 12.09.2014 в 20:57
Сообщений: 6969
Блог: Блог пользователя
Регистрация: 12.11.2011

  (0)  
Добавлено: 14.10.2012 21:18
Автор: sоrter(саша)
Всё, нашёл, справа от левой 25С.


неверю даешь джепсон схему
sоrter(саша)

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 20.01.2016 в 23:41
Сообщений: 7925
Регистрация: 12.01.2012
  (0)  
Добавлено: 14.10.2012 21:22
Автор: Stanislav
Автор: sоrter(саша)
Всё, нашёл, справа от левой 25С.


неверю даешь джепсон схему

Да я в гугле порылся, на какой то фотке порог обоих полос виден.


Afrika

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 20.08.2013 в 11:50
Сообщений: 1805
Регистрация: 02.11.2011
  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 01:52
Автор: Дима
Автор: Гарнаев Александр Юрьевич
А бывают вещи и "посмешнее" - например нашенские ВВС (ВТА) летая на ИЛ-76 в плотном Европейском УВД, помимо усиленной кабинной бригады с неисчислимыми инспекторами, штурманами, радистами и прочими бортачами - еще умудряется привлекать и отдельных "борт.переводчиков" (которые только способствуют процессу блуждания - сам участвовал в расследованиях/разборах :(((

Обьясню! Это действительно так. Экипажи двойные. Согл РПП. И переводчик пока летает . Сами знаете почему. Но постепенно народец подтягивает свой уровень. Год два и все будет в порядке не беспокойтесь за наше ВТА. А пока отправим вам в АФЛ двух дятлов а то нам они поперек горла уже

А можно-не надо, А?


Гарнаев Александр Юрьевич

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 10.07.2015 в 21:52
Сообщений: 2722
Регистрация: 04.10.2011

livejournal
  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 05:40
Автор: Afrika
А можно-не надо, А?

- из песни слов не выкинешь


Гарнаев Александр Юрьевич

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 10.07.2015 в 21:52
Сообщений: 2722
Регистрация: 04.10.2011

livejournal
  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 05:57 Изменено: 15.10.2012 06:07
Автор: Stanislav
неверю даешь джепсон схему
... пока ближнемагистральники ищут эту схему прилета (Франкфурт) - от
дальнемагистральников репортаж про а/п вылета вышеупомянутого LH-711 (Нарита):
http://facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=355701271145275&set=pb.100001162159539.-2207520000.1350269559&type=1&src=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F412777_355701271145275_353066920_o.jpg&smallsrc=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash3%2F581404_355701271145275_353066920_n.jpg&size=2048%2C1478


Stanislav

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 12.09.2014 в 20:57
Сообщений: 6969
Блог: Блог пользователя
Регистрация: 12.11.2011

  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 07:44 Изменено: 15.10.2012 07:44
Александр Юрьевич, аналогично, (нужна для такого случая джепсон - схемка аэропорта ) чтоб авиаторы и интересующиеся могли сверить (пусть не в масштабе) количество и геометрическое расположение домиков


Гарнаев Александр Юрьевич

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 10.07.2015 в 21:52
Сообщений: 2722
Регистрация: 04.10.2011

livejournal
  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 08:20
Автор: Stanislav
... геометрическое расположение домиков
= неестественные загибы рулежек "Браво" и "Чарли":


Stanislav

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 12.09.2014 в 20:57
Сообщений: 6969
Блог: Блог пользователя
Регистрация: 12.11.2011

  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 08:26
правильно ?





Гарнаев Александр Юрьевич

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 10.07.2015 в 21:52
Сообщений: 2722
Регистрация: 04.10.2011

livejournal
  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 08:27
Правильно !


Stanislav

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 12.09.2014 в 20:57
Сообщений: 6969
Блог: Блог пользователя
Регистрация: 12.11.2011

  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 08:43
скоро мы начнем перенимать практику такого строительства





Stanislav

Сейчас: офлайн
Был(а) на сайте: 12.09.2014 в 20:57
Сообщений: 6969
Блог: Блог пользователя
Регистрация: 12.11.2011

  (0)  
Добавлено: 15.10.2012 10:18
Incident: Singapore A388 near Singapore on Jan 31st 2011, burned wires in forward cargo hold
By Simon Hradecky, created Monday, Oct 8th 2012 11:33Z, last updated Monday, Oct 8th 2012 11:33Z

Singapore's AAIB released their final report without including a formal conclusion to the cause of the serious incident.

The AAIB reported in addition to the preliminary report, that a "ELEC GEN 1 FAULT" message had appeared during engine start for the flight from Singapore to Hong Kong already. The Variable Frequency Generator (VFG) on the electric generator was reset, the fault cleared and the aircraft departed.

During engine start in Hong Kong the fault message occurred again, but did not clear upon resetting the VFG. The engines were shut down and the aircraft towed back to the gate. Maintenance subsequently interchanged the generator control units of engine #1 and APU, tests of both were subsequently satisfactory and the aircraft was released to the flight with no fault message occurring during engine start and departure.

About 45 minutes prior to estimated landing in Singapore the crew received an ECAM message indicating smoke in lavatory LM35. At the same time the purser was in the lavatory LM35 and heard a loud bang, the lights went out in the lavatory and an electrical burning smell appeared. The purser asked two flight attendants to take care of the lavatory while he reported the occurrence to the flight crew. The flight attendants attempted to find any source of heat but did not detect any heat. When the purser returned to the lavatory he saw smoke coming from the base of the wall panel underneath the sink but could not locate the source of the smoke. He discharged a fire extinguisher towards the bottom of the wall panel. Smoke and smell cleared about 10 minutes later. There was no further incident.

None of the 381 people on board were injured.

Maintenance found the feeder terminal block for VFG #1 in the forward cargo compartment underneath lavatory LM35 damaged showing signs of burning as well as on the feeder cables to that block and the insulation around the block. The inner surface of the cover of the block did not show heat damage but some soot. The lightning protection units (LPU) connected to the feeder terminal block showed signs of melting. The burnt components were all replaced, a functional test was concluded satisfactorily and the aircraft was dispatched for a test flight. While the engines accelerated for the test flight on Feb 20th 2011 however a ECAM message "ELEC GEN 1 FAULT" appeared again, the takeoff was rejected.

During subsequent troubleshooting maintenance discovered the main excitation cable was damaged. The cable had been installed since delivery of the aircraft, no work had been performed on it since delivery.

Subsequent checks of the non-volatile memory of the generator control units revealed that a peak amperage of 1511A had been reached with the over-current protection logic inhibiting the output of the VFG with currents above 435A.

Failure analysis of the excitation cable identified the cable had been damaged by arcing between the negative (blue) wire and the shield of the cable.

The LPUs, effectively Zener diodes, would permit any surges of voltage above 270V to flow to the electrical ground in order to protect damage to the electrical system. The damage caused to the LPUs was identified as result of excessive currents through the LPA.

The fire extinguishing agent discharged by the purser had not reached the terminal block.

The AAIB analysed that there was a short circuit between negative wire and shield of the excitation cable which caused voltage output by the VFG #1 to exceed the nominal 143 Vac. The over voltage protection logic however did not trigger due to the negative wire's voltage being above 19 Vdc. The voltage continued to increase until the LPUs, designed to safe guard in case of lightning strikes, conducted for longer than they were designed for, which resulted in a short circuit between the feeder cables attached to the terminal block and electric ground causing excessive currents through the feeder cables. "The design of the lightning protection system was such that it did not prevent the feeder cables from being shorted to the electrical ground when excessive voltage is output by the VFG."

The excessive current through the feeder cables overheated and damaged the feeder block and the LPUs. Eventually the over-current protection triggered and limited the damage.

The electrical arcing at the excitation cable suggests there may have been a prior damage to the cable, this however could not be ascertained.

The AAIB further analysed: "The fire that damaged the feeder terminal block had probably extinguished by itself but it remains a concern that there is no sure way of detecting and extinguishing a fire in that area."

2 safety recommendations were released each to Airbus and EASA as result of the report recommending to review the design the lightning protection system with regards to excessive voltage released by the VFG and review the need of a fire detection and suppression system at the feeder block.

Immediate safety actions included the aircraft manufacturer issuing a notice on Apr 4th 2011 disallowing resetting the generators in case of "ELEC GEN x FAULT" messages. The generator control unit's over-voltage protection logic was redesigned.

The burnt terminal feeder block (Photo: SAAIB)









Страницы: 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Пользователи

Сейчас на форуме 45 посетителей: зарегистрированных 1, гостей 44

федоров юрий борисович    

Недавно были

Шило (Про100й) 15 минут назад Karmanova Maria 32 минуты назад
Горбунов Вадим Николаевич1 час назад Журавлев Василий 2 часа назад
max9283 max9283 4 часа назад 39264 ртс 5 часов назад
изо бредатель 6 часов назад Слюсаров Константин Лукиллианов6 часов назад
Сообщить об ошибке
Поддержка сайта - Яркие решения