Author Topic: AA crash landed in Jamaica!  (Read 15486 times)

Offline Junior P

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« on: December 23, 2009, 12:15:09 PM »
Is there anymore information on this? I just saw a clip of it on the news
 
737 AA Crash - Heavy rain, dark, some injuries reported so far!



Offline Hollis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 403
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2009, 12:27:39 PM »

Offline Junior P

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2009, 12:45:32 PM »
Thank you!!


Offline joeyb747

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745
  • Nothing Like A 747!
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #4 on: December 23, 2009, 07:33:51 PM »
Vid:

http://www.comcast.net/video/jet-skids-off-runway-in-jamaica/1367260904/Comcast/1367057256/

Story:

"An American Airlines Boeing 737-800, registration N977AN performing flight AA-331 from Miami,FL (USA) to Kingston (Jamaica) with 148 passengers and 6 crew, overran Kingston's runway 12 while landing in heavy rain and poor visibility at 10:22pm local time (03:22Z Dec 23rd). The passengers were evacuated. 44 passengers were taken to local hospitals, 4 of them received serious injuries. The airplane received substantial damage."

From:

http://avherald.com/h?article=424a11b1&opt=0

Metars:
MKJP 230430Z 34011KT 44000 RA BKN014 FEW016CB BKN100 21/13 Q1013 RESHRA
MKJP 230400Z 32014KT 11500 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT028 BKN090 21/18 Q1013 RERA
MKJP 230325Z 32011KT 22000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/19 Q1014 RETSRA
MKJP 230300Z 32008KT 3000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/20 Q1014 RETSRA
MKJP 230228Z 31009KT 5000 TSRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 22/19 Q1013
MKJP 230200Z 30012KT 5000 SHRA BKN014 SCT030 BKN100 22/20 Q1013 RERA
MKJP 230100Z 040033KT 5000 SHRA BKN016 SCT030 BKN100 23/20 Q1013 RERA

Offline joeyb747

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745
  • Nothing Like A 747!
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2009, 09:55:55 PM »
"Before AA331 crashed: Pilot opted against mis-approach"

"THE pilot of American Airlines flight 331, which crashed at the Norman Manley International Airport (NMIA) in Kingston last Tuesday night, opted not to utilise a mis-approach, as suggested by local air traffic controllers, the Observer has learnt."

From:

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Before-AA331-crashed

Article has some pics with it as well.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2009, 09:58:16 PM by joeyb747 »

Offline otto_pilot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #6 on: December 30, 2009, 11:44:25 PM »
What would cause a controller to suggest a missed? Ive never herd of that nor does it seem as though that would happen. A controller would not suggest a missed because of wx, maybe for some other reason though?

Offline delta092b

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2009, 10:45:14 AM »
Could be a few reasons. He noticed the a/c too high or too low on the approach, loss of runway lighting, loss of ILS.

It would be unusual for a controller to just recommend a missed approach though. They normally either instruct "go around" or just advise "in the event of a missed approach....."

Offline otto_pilot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2010, 12:41:33 AM »
For some of the reason you stated it would simply be an instruction to go around  loss of an ILS and runway lighting seem as though they are go around instructions. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that, but from a pilots standpoint it seems as though in those two situations would be unsafe to continue the approach.

Now the a/c too high or low doesn't seem like it would fall under either of those, because if the a/c is to high or low and the pilot feels as though he can not make a stabilized approach to landing he goes missed. I do not believe a controller would intervine with a go around there. again I am mostly unfamiliar with airtraffic controller rules, so i could be wrong.

An in the event of a missed is something i thought was used for something totally different. I thought they used that for low weather situations where a missed was likely. The instruction would sound something like " American 331 in the event of a missed approach climb and maintain 3000 turn right heading 360, when able." By using that instruction if the aircraft does go missed then it cuts out the published missed. Again that is just what i thought, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Now, I do however understand that if the controller feels the aircraft is in an unsafe position he will simply a go around instruction, but i believe it would be an aircraft drastically off the loc or glideslope. What strikes me as odd is the fact that he suggested a missed. What did the controller see? What was his wording of the suggestion?

Offline captray

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
  • G4 in Czech Republic
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2010, 06:58:59 AM »
I would wait for the Jamaican Authorities and the NTSB to release their reports, before speculating on what happened.

Offline otto_pilot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2010, 07:10:29 AM »
No speculating here at all. The only metion of 331 is in the event of a miss EXAMPLE. I would personally just like to know a solid reason ATC would suggest a missed, and not just issue a go around. 

Offline Casper87

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2010, 01:13:44 PM »
I wouldn't read too much into the rubbish that journos publish. People can easily be misunderstood and the media will blow a quote way out of proportion.

We obviously don't know what was said between the controller and pilot, however I doubt the controller 'suggested' that the aircraft execute a missed approach. It's either safe to land or it isn't. If either the controller or the pilot feels that it is unsafe to land, then someone will make a more positive decision, not just a 'suggestion.'

As captray said, the NTSB report will explain the facts.

C

Offline otto_pilot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2010, 02:14:06 AM »
Your right that is sort of what i was getting at. Suggestions from controller to pilot don't happen its an instruction or a question. The media lack of understanding leads to a lot of bad reporting on aviation.

kea001

  • Guest
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #13 on: January 03, 2010, 08:44:46 AM »
FAA watching American Airlines closely after botched landings
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/01/01/american.airlines.tsa/index.html



Offline dellyjm

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: AA crash landed in Jamaica!
« Reply #14 on: January 08, 2010, 11:36:45 AM »
More info along with FDR

http://go-jamaica.com/news/reenactment-updated.html

American Airlines flight 331 landed halfway down runway

AP

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

KINGSTON, Jamaica — An American Airlines jet that overshot a Jamaican runway and split apart last month touched down nearly halfway down the runway, well past its target, investigators said today.

Oscar Derby, director-general of the Jamaica Civil Aviation Authority, said it was not yet clear if that point of landing was a factor in an accident that injured dozens of passengers.

The plane's wheels made contact at around the 4,000-foot (1,220-metre) mark and the plane bounced once on the wet runway before the brakes engaged, Derby said. The target mark for the Boeing 737-800 was within the first 1,500 feet (457 metres) of the 8,910-foot (2716-metre) runway.

Investigators said they are still considering potential factors including pilot error or mechanical failure.

"We will be going to the analysis phase to rule out those things that are not factors and narrow down further to what is the probable cause," Derby said.

Tim Wagner, a spokesman for the Fort Worth, Texas-based airline, said it does not dispute the landing place on the runway but said that the general rule is to land within 3,000 feet (915 metres) or the first third of a runway, whichever is shorter. He said he was reluctant to comment further because the investigation is at an early stage.

Flight 331, which took off from Washington's Reagan National Airport and had stopped in Miami, skidded off the runway as it landed in Kingston in heavy rain on the night of December 22. The fuselage cracked open in two places, the left main landing gear collapsed and the nose was crushed as the plane lurched to a halt on a rocky beach 40 feet (12 metres) from the Caribbean Sea.

All 154 people aboard survived. Ninety-two were hurt, none of them with injuries considered life-threatening.

A controller at Norman Manley International Airport advised the flight crew of a tail wind and offered an alternative runway, but the crew was cleared for landing after repeating its request for the first runway, according to the preliminary investigation. Derby said the tail wind was not unusually strong.

There is no indication the captain or co-pilot had any concerns about the approach, said Christopher Bickford, the chief investigator for the island's aviation authority.

After descending through the cloud cover, the crew saw the runway when the plane was between 700 feet (215 metres) and 1,000 feet (300 metres). The plane was traveling at 186 miles per hour (300 kph) when the wheels made first contact. It sped off the edge of the runway at 72 miles per hour (115.87 kph) before plowing through a perimeter fence, according to data from a flight recorder.

Bickford said the tires, braking system and the rest of the wreckage will be sent to the United States for further examination.