pauldyson1uk
Full Member
very rare, must be a system error.How rare is it to run out of fuel? Maybe a system error made them think they had enough fuel?
very rare, must be a system error.How rare is it to run out of fuel? Maybe a system error made them think they had enough fuel?
I hope that the club does more than just having a friendly match to raise money. United are the only club in the world who can even begin to grasp what these people are dealing with and what they are going to go through for years and even decades to come. It is not just the club who have to deal with it, it is the whole community.
I hope we do something longer lasting which provides a permanent bond between Manchester United and the people of Chapeco.
No excuse for booking him for that.
Got booked for it.
There was a recording aired on Colombian radio today which they're claiming is the pilot talking to the air traffic control tower. He's asking for an immediate landing but it seems like the control tower are already dealing with an emergency landing. He gets left in the queue. Whether it's real I guess we'll find out in the next few days.
I dont want to be disrespectful , really I dont but why ?
Other team have suffered the in the same way, Torino for one did we do it for them?
Pay repects have help out with money or w
Sorry if it's already been mentioned but Messi has donated $5 MILLION! to the players families. I know it's not a lot to him, but still, that's an outstanding gesture from the best player in the world. Absolutely amazing to see an Argentinian player give so much money to a Brazilian club/players families , especially considering the rivalry between the two South American countries. It's been heart-warming reading about the help that the club and players families are receiving. Makes a real change to be honest.
Actually Argentinians and Brazilians get along pretty well football aside.
PS: I read it was 10 millon.
It's extremely rare. Most of the cases are pilot errors or due to incapacitation due to losing air pressure in the cockpit after a structural damage. Fuel is usually well calculated and has to be double checked (on pilot's checklist as well) as you have to have exactly the needed amount otherwise if you are too heavy you might have issues in the landing approach.How rare is it to run out of fuel? Maybe a system error made them think they had enough fuel?
I thought the pilot had dumped fuel to prevent an explosion?
I remembered that has I was typing it out, thought I had deleted it to be honest.The Torino disaster happened 9 years before Munich mate.
it is Pretty close to it .So I've been flying myself a lot the last couple of days and haven't been able to follow this well.
I am not sure what the rules are in South America but if they follow ICAO then it should be similar to rules I fly under.
Aircraft carries fuel to cover trip fuel (Departure to destination) + Reserve ( 5% of trip) + Alternate fuel ( destination to alternate + 30 mins holding above alternate for 30 minutes) + extra fuel. All of this is equal to BLOCK fuel. The alternate fuel is trip distance for destination to alternate + 30 mins like I said.. This is called Minimum Diversion Fuel. As per regulations you HAVE TO divert to alternate before you hit MDF. There are some provisions for when you can "commit to land" at original destination and continue flying in to your MDF fuel.
30 mins of holding over alternate is also called Final Fuel this is what he says in that ATC transmission. That they are in final, that means they have burned through a lot of fuel to reach that. Normally a pilot first has to declare Minimum fuel if he suspects that any change in the plan of in his time to land will make him eat out of his FINAL fuel. Then a pilot has to declare FUEL EMERGENCY when he is either within the FINAL FUEL amount or suspects he will be before he lands. This is where I think sadly that the pilots messed up. I don't think they declared a proper fuel emergency at the right time which meant that the controller did not understand the severity of their situation. If he had declared it earlier he would have been given absolute priority to land and would have easily landed since he was already close to the airfield.
This is what I can tell from that ATC recording.
it is Pretty close to it .
This is from the ICAO.
Commercial Flights
Per ICAO Annex 6, Part I, section 4.3.6 "Fuel Requirements," airplanes should calculate their required fuel quantity as follows (summary; see below for actual ICAO text):
- Taxi fuel
- Trip fuel (to reach intended destination)
- Contingency fuel (higher of 5% of "trip fuel" or 5 minutes of holding flight)
- Destination alternate fuel (to fly a missed and reach an alternate)
- Final reserve fuel (45 minutes of holding flight for reciprocating engines, 30 minutes for jets)
- Additional fuel (if needed to guarantee ability to reach an alternate with an engine failure or at lower altitude due to a pressurization loss)
- Discretionary fuel (if the pilot in command wants it)
Cheers for that , I would of thought , minimum fuel requirements would be standard worldwide.That's the ICAO rules. Countries don't have to follow them. Each country has their own and so does each company. Like in my company we do not have "commit to land". As a captain, I absolutely HAVE to divert to my alternate if I'm about to hit MDF. Even if I know I'll be on approach soon.
Yeah. And his team mates broke the news to him. Here's the video of how they did it
Would break your heart watching that
It seems like this idea came from the fact there was no explosion, and something one of the survivors said but actually it just ran our of fuel (from the convo with air traffic control).Pilot decided not to land and refuel somewhere? Initial refuelling spot couldn't be used due to the airport being closed at night?
That's what I've read, but also heard he dumped fuel to stop an explosion?
These aircraft incidents are always so difficult for us common folk to understand.
It seems like this idea came from the fact there was no explosion, and something one of the survivors said but actually it just ran our of fuel (from the convo with air traffic control).
That's my take on it.
Stupid stupid reason to die.
So I've been flying myself a lot the last couple of days and haven't been able to follow this well.
I am not sure what the rules are in South America but if they follow ICAO then it should be similar to rules I fly under.
Aircraft carries fuel to cover trip fuel (Departure to destination) + Reserve ( 5% of trip) + Alternate fuel ( destination to alternate + 30 mins holding above alternate for 30 minutes) + extra fuel. All of this is equal to BLOCK fuel. The alternate fuel is trip distance for destination to alternate + 30 mins like I said.. This is called Minimum Diversion Fuel. As per regulations you HAVE TO divert to alternate before you hit MDF. There are some provisions for when you can "commit to land" at original destination and continue flying in to your MDF fuel.
30 mins of holding over alternate is also called Final Fuel this is what he says in that ATC transmission. That they are in final, that means they have burned through a lot of fuel to reach that. Normally a pilot first has to declare Minimum fuel if he suspects that any change in the plan of in his time to land will make him eat out of his FINAL fuel. Then a pilot has to declare FUEL EMERGENCY when he is either within the FINAL FUEL amount or suspects he will be before he lands. This is where I think sadly that the pilots messed up. I don't think they declared a proper fuel emergency at the right time which meant that the controller did not understand the severity of their situation. If he had declared it earlier he would have been given absolute priority to land and would have easily landed since he was already close to the airfield.
This is what I can tell from that ATC recording.
Yes you are right , it was an Avianca B707.Isn't that what hapoened to a Columbian airliner that ran out if fuel while holding over NY in the late 80's?
So I've been flying myself a lot the last couple of days and haven't been able to follow this well.
I am not sure what the rules are in South America but if they follow ICAO then it should be similar to rules I fly under.
Aircraft carries fuel to cover trip fuel (Departure to destination) + Reserve ( 5% of trip) + Alternate fuel ( destination to alternate + 30 mins holding above alternate for 30 minutes) + extra fuel. All of this is equal to BLOCK fuel. The alternate fuel is trip distance for destination to alternate + 30 mins like I said.. This is called Minimum Diversion Fuel. As per regulations you HAVE TO divert to alternate before you hit MDF. There are some provisions for when you can "commit to land" at original destination and continue flying in to your MDF fuel.
30 mins of holding over alternate is also called Final Fuel this is what he says in that ATC transmission. That they are in final, that means they have burned through a lot of fuel to reach that. Normally a pilot first has to declare Minimum fuel if he suspects that any change in the plan of in his time to land will make him eat out of his FINAL fuel. Then a pilot has to declare FUEL EMERGENCY when he is either within the FINAL FUEL amount or suspects he will be before he lands. This is where I think sadly that the pilots messed up. I don't think they declared a proper fuel emergency at the right time which meant that the controller did not understand the severity of their situation. If he had declared it earlier he would have been given absolute priority to land and would have easily landed since he was already close to the airfield.
This is what I can tell from that ATC recording.
The team flew from Sao Paulo to Santa Cruz on a commercial flight, then switched to the chartered aircraft.
Brazil's O Globo reported that because of a delayed departure, a refuelling stop in Cobija, on the border between Brazil and Bolivia, was abandoned because the airport did not operate at night.
The pilot had the option to refuel in Bogota, but headed straight to Medellin.
"The pilot was the one who took the decision," Gustavo Vargas, a representative of Lamia, which operated the plane, was quoted as saying in Bolivian newspaper Pagina Siete. "He thought the fuel would last."
Approaching Medellin, the pilot asked for permission to land because of fuel problems, without making a formal distress call.
But another plane from airline VivaColombia had priority because it had already reported mechanical problems, the co-pilot of another plane in the air at the time said.
The pilot of the crashed plane is heard asking urgently for directions to the airport before the audio recording ends.
Freddy Bonilla, another aviation official, said regulations stipulated that aircraft must have 30 minutes of fuel in reserve to reach an alternative airport in an emergency, but "in this case the plane did not have" it.
What a stupid fecking reason to die.
I speak Portuguese, he clearly states they are on their way to Medellín.I dont speak portugese/brazilian but I dont this that video was shot before the crash -- based on the seating configuration, thats not a BAe146.
Maybe that's what some of these spoilt brats need. The issue is whether Chapecoense deserve to be turned into a spoilt Bentley bootcamp.Even if we are talking about Spanish/Portuguese speaking academy kids going on loan, it will still not be fair on the kids who are already in Europe and their plans for own future. Best will be for bigger clubs from South America loaning players and the clubs from Europe offering monetary assistance that will be required in rebuilding.
That may well be the case , but the aircraft was not a 146, they do not have center seating , a 146 has a central walkway with seat either side , that vid looks like an airbus..I speak Portuguese, he clearly states they are on their way to Medellín.
That may well be the case , but the aircraft was not a 146, they do not have center seating , a 146 has a central walkway with seat either side , that vid looks like an airbus..
This is the inside of a 146.
Good point.The video might've been from their first flight (commercial) to Santa Cruz where they switched to the chartered plane.
Short haul flights in Brazil are usually Airbus, probably a first leg and not the plane that crashed. Doesn't make the video any less heart-breaking or relevant.That may well be the case , but the aircraft was not a 146, they do not have center seating , a 146 has a central walkway with seat either side , that vid looks like an airbus..
This is the inside of a 146.