Brazil Air Crash

[Gnomey]

You have probably all heard about the air crash in Brazil where are full loaded 737 came down in the Amazon Rainforest with no survivors. It seems it had a mid-air collision with a Business Jet, attached is an article by one of the passengers on that jet (published on the NY Times website).

BBC NEWS | Americas | Amazon crash pilot passports held
BBC NEWS | Americas | Amazon plane 'black boxes' found
BBC NEWS | Americas | Brazil mourns air crash victims

It is in a zip because the word document was to large to upload, just extract to read.

NY Times Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/03/b...en=e400a2a6d73b9dca&hp&ex=1159934400&adxnnl=0

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Been reading this today. Both aircraft were at 37,000. The biz jet allegedly had its transponder off, but was talking to ATC and ignored an order to descend to 36,000 (ATC would of really bitched bout this since they were in "A" airspace, Airspace above 18,000 feet). Bottom line I can't see how ATC would allow this, even in Brazil. Something is really fishy here.....

 

[Matt308]

I read that they are contemplating charging them with manslaughter. Ooof. Why would they have their transponder off in Class A airspace? It is an ICAO requirement and is not MEL deferrable.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yep!

 

[pbfoot]

The fact it happened in a remote part of Brasil where radar coverage would be possibly non existent I'm not sure but I have worked in areas where there was no radar for the ACC 's Not too different then flying Oceanic when separation of traffic is maintained by time and altitude. did the transponder pack it in or was the lateral and verticle separation comprimised by false reporting by the aircrew or a screw up by ATC it all happens. Remember that all ATC's work without radar more then you might think.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The fact it happened in a remote part of Brasil where radar coverage would be possibly non existent I'm not sure but I have worked in areas where there was no radar for the ACC 's Not too different then flying Oceanic when separation of traffic is maintained by time and altitude. did the transponder pack it in or was the lateral and verticle separation comprimised by false reporting by the aircrew or a screw up by ATC it all happens. Remember that all ATC's work without radar more then you might think.

True, but ATC was in communication with them and allegedly told them to decend from 37,000 to 36,000 ft. With that statement made, how did ATC know they were at 37 if they didn't have radar coverage?

 

[k9kiwi]

By asking.

ATC is in voice contact, no radar, asks for altitude and gets told. Also possibly from last known altitude if they had their transponders on at all during the flight.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

By asking.

ATC is in voice contact, no radar, asks for altitude and gets told. Also possibly from last known altitude if they had their transponders on at all during the flight.

And they would also asked about the transponder (which the aircraft would of gotten a squawk code prior to departure considering they were on an IFR flight plan). If the aircraft was in an area where there was no radar coverage, then the transponder being on or off is a non issue, but considering Brazilian Authorities brought it up it seems that there is something not right here. There should be ATC Tapes of the whole situation, I'd like to hear what they have to say....

The point here if they were flying in "A" airspace, they would of filed a flight plan and would of received a squawk code prior to take off. Had that transponder been turned off or not transmitting ATC would of been asking immediately what the problem was. If radar contact was not possible, then this statement about the transponder being off is a smokescreen...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

By asking.

ATC is in voice contact, no radar, asks for altitude and gets told. Also possibly from last known altitude if they had their transponders on at all during the flight.

In most places you are not flying in "A" airspace without radar contact (Pb did mention that there are some areas where radar contact is unavailable).

 

[pbfoot]

I might be a little out of date but isn't 2000 ft the verticle separation at high level can;t recall giving fl360 the instruction probably would or should be worded "callsign descend to or climb to fl 360 immediatly for traffic avoidance" and did the light guy have his altimeter set at standard or 29.92 and who cleared both aircraft to fl370 initially and the fact the light guy was on a ferry flight from factory did the a/c have a snag

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I might be a little out of date but isn't 2000 ft the verticle separation at high level can;t recall giving fl360 the instruction probably would or should be worded "callsign descend to or climb to fl 360 immediatly for traffic avoidance" and did the light guy have his altimeter set at standard or 29.92 and who cleared both aircraft to fl370 initially and the fact the light guy was on a ferry flight from factory did the a/c have a snag

I think it's 1000'. And good points there - I see no rational reason why the guys in the corporate jet would of switched off their transponder. I think someone really screwed the pooch and it's easy to blame the living....

The plot thickens...

 

[Gnomey]

I think it's 1000'. And good points there - I see no rational reason why the guys in the corporate jet would of switched off their transponder. I think someone really screwed the pooch and it's easy to blame the living....

The plot thickens...

Unfortunately that is the case. Yep, I am now interested to see where this goes.

 

[Matt308]

It was 2000ft (at least in US). But in Class A and RVSM, it is now 1000ft. Don't know about Brazil. Also, nobody has mentioned TCAS. I see lots of talk about transponders, but the aircraft transponder can be Mode A, Mode C or Mode S. Each mode provides different information about the aircraft and flight profile. ICAO requires an Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) for some operations. In the US, TCAS is required and is the means of compliance. With TCAS (depending upon revision), both aircraft would have received either (worst case) a Traffic Adviosry (TA) instructing pilots of traffic location for situation awareness or a Resolution Advisory (RA) instructing pilots for coordinated maneuvers.

Irrespective, each aircraft certificated under Federal Regulation Part 25 (JAR 25 for the Europeans) would be required to have a cockpit voice recorder in accordance with the operating rules. The voice recorder has 2 hours of continuous recording of all PTT initiated communication, as well as area mic of the cockpit environment.

If ATC instructed either aircraft for a flight level change, it will be in crash survivable memory for the 737 and will certainly be on the Embraer. Assuming the 737 VCR did not survive (unlikely), recordings may be lost still. The only way that the Embraer might not have the recording is if the recorder was faulty (it happens more often than you think) or the pilots pushed the cockpit intitiated bulk erase feature. While that would be an aggregious act by the pilots, it has been done before.

 

[pbfoot]

I tend not to guess to much about air incidents I've guessed wrong more then once something sounds screwed up with ATC if the aircraft were at the same altitude and in the same vicinity you would instruct both aircraft to change altitude one up ...one down and determine the cause of the conflict later "pull the tapes" all the search radar tapes and voice tapes but there are so many variables and we have access to about 25% of the info

 

[Chief]

Is there a draw back to having the transponder on the whole flight? Just wondering.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Is there a draw back to having the transponder on the whole flight? Just wondering.

ATC knows where you are at all times by having it on - basically it's the law to have one in class "A" airspace (above 18,000 feet) or within a 30 mile ring of a class "B" airspace (airspace around a "Big" airport), explained in simple terms....

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I tend not to guess to much about air incidents I've guessed wrong more then once something sounds screwed up with ATC if the aircraft were at the same altitude and in the same vicinity you would instruct both aircraft to change altitude one up ...one down and determine the cause of the conflict later "pull the tapes" all the search radar tapes and voice tapes but there are so many variables and we have access to about 25% of the info

You hit the nail on the head my friend!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

This in today...

RIO DE JANEIRO (AFP) - Six days after a mid-air collision over the Amazon jungle killed 154 people in Brazil's worst air tragedy, a raft of key questions about what caused the disaster went unanswered.

A small business jet, with two US pilots, and a GOL airline's Boeing 737 collided; the smaller plane managed to land safely, but the GOL jet's passengers and crew perished on the jungle floor.

Brazilian authorities on Wednesday detained two US pilots to face possible manslaughter charges. Joseph Lepore and Jan Paladino were the pilot and co-pilot of an Embraer Legacy 600 business jet that collided last Friday with a Boeing 737 belonging to GOL airline at 11,200 meters (37,000 feet).

A judge in Mato Grasso state, where the GOL plane crashed, ordered their passports confiscated.

GOL revised the death toll in the crash from 155 to 154 people killed, saying it had counted one passenger twice.

Investigators want to know why the Legacy's anti-collision system failed to work, and why the pilot had turned off the plane's radio.?????

The radio was working, for they used it to issue a mayday call and eventually to find the military airport they landed at. According to police, the pilot was out of the cabin when the radio signal was interrupted.

Among the looming questions: Was the tragedy a result of pilot error by someone flying the Legacy? Was it caused by a Brazilian air traffic controller? Or was there a mechanical malfunction?

Authorities believe only the full investigation, which they said should take about 90 days, will tell.

The Boeing's "black boxes" were found seriously damaged, and were sent to Canada to be examined by experts.

Lepore and Paladino have been questioned twice by Mato Grosso police. They made their emergency landing at the Serra do Cachimbo military base there.

In Washington, the State Department said the United States was following the probe.

"We have been in touch with the Brazilian Government about this issue and also have been, through our consular officials, talking with the individuals involved," said Tom Casey, a State Department spokesman.

"But my understanding is they are not charged with any criminal violations. This is simply part of a standard procedure that the Brazilians are applying under their law as they proceed with the investigation," he said.

Other questions up in the air include: Why did the anti-collision system not work at the moment of impact? Why did the system start working again later? Why was the Legacy in the air route reserved for the GOL jet? Why did communication between the Legacy and the control tower in Brasilia fail?

According to the flight plan, the Legacy left from Sao Jose dos Campos, in Sao Paulo state, ans was supposed to drop to 36,000 feet on its way into Brasilia headed for Manaus, capital of Amazonas state, where it was supposed to have a stopover en route to the United States.

The pilots told police they lost contact with the Brasilia control tower minutes before the impact, raising the hypothesis of a problem with the Brazilian-made Legacy's anti-collision system.

Embraer, which makes the Legacy, on Thursday declined to comment on an ongoing investigation.

Meanwhile, some 200 Brazilian troops remained on the ground picking through bits and pieces of the aircraft and recovering victims' remains, in an operation that is slow and difficult in the jungle. Remains of about 50 people have been moved out so far, authorities said Thursday.

 

[Matt308]

Does Brazil rely upon ATCRBS and Primary Radar or is Brazil an ADS-B country? Hmmm. I can't believe only the latter, but perhaps over the jungle? Lots of space.

 

[evangilder]

Mysterious stuff. The wording on this question kind of made me laugh: "Why did the anti-collision system not work at the moment of impact?" If they collided, then it wasn't working before the impact either!