US Airways Flight 1702. It looks like there is more to the story

snapthis

Veteran
Dec 23, 2009
4,236
6,907
The European publication calls it tyre, interesting read, nonetheless:
 


Pilots played role in US Airways 1702 crash: FAA

 

By: Jon Hemmerdinger
Washington DC
Source:
02:23 12 Dec 2014



Story updated on 12 December to include correct runway information.
New details about the 13 March crash of a US Airways Airbus A320 at Philadelphia reveal the accident was preceded by series of pilot failures and may have been more serious than a blown tyre, which was initially reported as the cause.
 
Internal Federal Aviation Administration documents obtained by Flightglobal show that prior to take-off the crew failed to enter into the flight computer data it needed to calculate power settings.
 
They also continued the take-off roll amid audible warnings urging them to pull back the throttles. In response to those warnings, the captain said, “We’ll get that straight when we get airborne,” say the documents, which include an FAA accident report and copies of notes taken by FAA inspectors dispatched the scene.
The documents also say the captain flew too soon after taking prescription medications.
The US Airways A320, registration N113UW, crashed at Philadelphia International airport at 18:35 local time as it took off for Fort Lauderdale.
 
All 149 passengers and five crew exited the aircraft via emergency exits. Although no serious injuries were reported initially, one passenger recently filed a lawsuit against US Airways and parent company American Airlines Group, seeking damages for a shoulder injury suffered from using the emergency slides.
In the hours following the accident, US Airways told media outlets that initial reports indicated a blown tyre led the pilots to abort the take-off.
But newly-obtained documents trace the accident to failures made by the pilots during taxiing, and reveal the tyre blew after the captain aborted the take-off just after the aircraft became airborne.
The FAA and National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) declined to comment on the new information, citing the NTSB's ongoing investigations. American Airlines and the Allied Pilots Association, which represents US Airways pilots, declined to comment due to participation in the investigation.
The documents say that, prior to take-off, captain John Powell noticed the aircraft’s primary flight display wrongly indicated 27R as the departure runway.
Co-pilot Lynda Fleming then correctly inputted 27L into the multifunction control display unit, but did not enter take-off V-speeds or a “flex temperature”, which allows the aircraft to take-off at lower-than-maximum thrust. The computer needed those values to calculate takeoff power, and required their re-entry after a runway change.
“The crew failed to accomplish this step and so the aircraft had no data available to compute and perform a flex take-off or display speeds,” say the FAA documents.
As a result, when the captain advanced the throttles for takeoff, a warning chime sounded and a screen displayed “ENG THR LEVERS NOT SET; SET TOGA”, an instruction to set the throttles to take-off/go-around” power.
The copilot, who had 4,784h in A320s, read the first part of this message aloud, but not the instruction to increase power, the report says. The captain, who had 4,457h of A320 time, responded that “the power is set”, adding that he had advanced the throttles to the flex position.
Meanwhile, the aircraft accelerated along runway 27L into a 19kt headwind.
When it reached 80kt, an audible warning sounded “retard, retard, retard”, instructing the pilots to idle the throttles, the FAA report says. The first officer told the captain she had never heard that warning during take-off. “We’ll get that straight when we get airborne,” the captain responded.
The documents give varying indications of how high the aircraft climbed; one inspector says 20ft, another 70ft. Regardless, shortly after take-off the captain aborted.
“The captain indicates that, once the wheels were off the ground, he had the perception that the aircraft was unsafe to fly, and moved the throttle to the idle position, which resulted in the accident,” the documents say.
Inspectors initially found no weight and balance issues with the aircraft, and the flight-data recorder showed no anomalies. However, FAA officials have suggested that gusty, shifting winds could also have played a role, according to local media reports.
Surveillance video reviewed by inspectors showed that, shortly after take-off, the aircraft’s nose dropped and it began to sink. The nose then pitched up and, still sinking, the A320's tail struck the runway, followed by the main gear. The nose gear impacted last.
“Aircraft tail struck the runway, driving the nose landing gear into the runway, causing the [gear] tyres to blow and the [gear] to collapse,” say FAA documents. The rear pressure bulkhead was also damaged.
The aircraft slid 2,000ft (610m) along the runway, stopping on the runway’s left edge, the report says. US Airways declared the aircraft a complete loss with its insurance company.
The FAA’s report also notes that the captain reported for duty that day 45h after taking two prescription medications: midazolam, a sedating drug, and fentanyl, a narcotic used as part of medical procedures.
He took the medications for a stress test performed on 11 March, but did not notify US Airways, says the FAA. It notes that pilots should not fly, after taking the last dose of such medications, for a period equal to five times the medications’ half-life. That period was 60 hours for the captain, the FAA says.
 
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pilots-played-role-in-us-airways-1702-crash-faa-407032/
 

 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12 people

EastUS1

Veteran
Mar 9, 2012
10,198
10,171
snapthis said:
The US Airways A320, registration N113UW, crashed......

 
 
Just what kind of sickly twisted, supposedly "airline people" could even possibly be placing "plus votes" for ANYTHING containing the word crashed?
 
Nevermind, since I see an almost identical posting from a west pilot on another chat room. For the folks at American, well, meet your new "friends" from AWA. A gentle suggestion is to never turn your unprotected backs towards some of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
OP
snapthis

snapthis

Veteran
Dec 23, 2009
4,236
6,907
EastUS1 said:
 
Just what kind of sickly twisted, supposedly "airline people" could even possibly be placing "plus votes" for ANYTHING containing the word crashed?
 
Nevermind, since I see an almost identical posting from a west pilot on another chat room. For the folks at American, well, meet your new "friends" from AWA. A gentle suggestion is to never turn your unprotected backs towards some of them.
 
I never believed the company's version of events, this article raises some serious questions. Did you miss this part of the article? "When it reached 80kt, an audible warning sounded “retard, retard, retard”, instructing the pilots to idle the throttles, the FAA report says. The first officer told the captain she had never heard that warning during take-off. “We’ll get that straight when we get airborne,” the captain responded."
 
There is a bulletin about this warning.
 
Rather than dwelling on the word crash, dwell on the word, truth. I think the company owes us the truth so we can learn from it and something like this does not happen again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12 people

EastUS1

Veteran
Mar 9, 2012
10,198
10,171
snapthis said:
 
I never believed the company's version of events, this article raises some serious questions. Did you miss this part of the article? "When it reached 80kt, an audible warning sounded “retard, retard, retard”, instructing the pilots to idle the throttles, the FAA report says. The first officer told the captain she had never heard that warning during take-off. “We’ll get that straight when we get airborne,” the captain responded."
 
There is a bulletin about this warning.
 
Rather than dwelling on the word crash, dwell on the word, truth. I think the company owes us the truth so we can learn from it and something like this does not happen again.
 
Oh? So now you're really just a noble crusader for the "word truth"?...Seriously?  Were your fine friends that posted all the "plus votes" for a crashed airplane equally pristine in virtue and intent?  Are the other west idiots that felt the need to gloriously post this sorry accident's details all over the world wide net also noble "knights" seeking only the "truth"? Sigh! What pathetically attempted and utterly pitiful spin. I'll necessarilly stick with: "A gentle suggestion is to never turn your unprotected backs towards some of them." The problem here, with people like yourselves, is that you clearly can't even begin to see how very obviously you evidence your personal character to others.
 
"Rather than dwelling on the word crash, dwell on the word, truth." So which kills more people, crashes or the truth? You had personally best hope it's always the former, versus the latter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people

robbedagain

Veteran
Oct 13, 2003
11,126
2,689
Visit site
I have to wonder  how could the pilots miss the audible warning?  is it a loud voice from the computer?    could the medication(s) possibly have impaired the judgment of the captain to continue the take off only to abort after the plane is airborne?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people

Glenn Quagmire

Veteran
Apr 30, 2012
4,832
4,426
Posting an article turns this into an east vs. west issue? Where was that conclusion drawn?

It seems that there is only one person who chose that option.

Factual events from an accident are just that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14 people

EastUS1

Veteran
Mar 9, 2012
10,198
10,171
Glenn Quagmire said:
Posting an article turns this into an east vs. west issue? Where was that conclusion drawn?

It seems that there is only one person who chose that option.

Factual events from an accident are just that.
 
Unless you're equally pretending yourself just a concerned, but somehow clueless "innocent" in noble search of the "truth" GQ, you would know that the events and errors causing that sad crash have been well known for months now. Given that; exactly WHAT possible purpose is served by joyously posting such to every living person on earth with internet access?
 
While the two scenarios in NO way coincide: These same fine seekers of "truth" even did their utmost to pathetically and disgustingly try to discredit Capt Sullenberger and FO Skiles after the "Miracle on the Hudson." Quotes from this forum alone towards that ineptly intended purpose can't even be counted.
 
We've but two possible ways to reasonably go here:
 
1) Anyone of the sorry sorts of "snapthis" are simply lying by pretending wholesale ignorance of what's been fully known for a long time now, and just ecstatically wetting themselves over the obvious failures of two of their "fellow pilots" in PHL on that day, OR:
 
2) Such sorry creatures, necessarily already WELL aware of the facts for months now, simply feel some sad need to broadcast the misfortune of their "fellow pilots" to the entire world, for their own, purely sick purposes.
 
From another chat board: http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/american-us-airways-merger/85424-new-report-crash.html   "What's not shocking?" 
WD at AWA: "I guess the fact that its information we had internally for sometime."
 
I'll naturally let any and all readers decide for themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people

EastUS1

Veteran
Mar 9, 2012
10,198
10,171
snapthis said:
 
I think the company owes us the truth so we can learn from it and something like this does not happen again.
 
Sigh! The depth of self-"righteous" lying BS there's almost impossible to even imagine. Since when does "the company" play the role of the DOT/FAA?...And how is it that with your fellows (or perhaps yourself) elsewhere posting: WD at AWA: "I guess the fact that its information we had internally for sometime" that you can now even pretend such "noble" and presumably "concerned" ignorance of the events? Did you take a multi-month vacation to another planet or something? ;)
 
Go ahead "snapthis", just try to even start explaining your motives for posting this thread....? You can pretend that you had NO prior information on a crash's causes within your very own airline, and are completely dependent on what "the company" tells you, in which case you're a pathetic excuse for a professional pilot, or you're left with the "noble" but somehow "stupid-and-hopelessly-ignorant" umm..."defense" or perhaps it's something else. What would/could that "something else" really be?
 
Again: "WD at AWA: "I guess the fact that its information we had internally for sometime."...BUT...it's now necessary to nobly post it for the traveling public and the whole world to see, so "we can learn from it and something like this does not happen again."?...Seriously? Sigh!..Did you manage to even type that with anything remotely approaching a straight face? And again: "For the folks at American, well, meet your new "friends" from AWA. A gentle suggestion is to never turn your unprotected backs towards some of them."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

EastUS1

Veteran
Mar 9, 2012
10,198
10,171
EastUS1 said:
 
Go ahead "snapthis", just try to even start explaining your motives for posting this thread....?
 
"For the folks at American, well, meet your new "friends" from AWA. A gentle suggestion is to never turn your unprotected backs towards some of them."
 
P.S. It's long been characteristic of the AWA/"spartan" crowd to be entirely incapable of anything by way of reasoned argument other than "plus" or "minus" votes in response. Note all those (5 now enthusiastic "plusses") apparently in favor of: "The US Airways A320, registration N113UW, crashed..." I suspect far more "plus votes" would've been freely forthcoming had I not pointed out the infantile idiocy inherent in such.
 
"For the folks at American, well, meet your new "friends" from AWA..." and may God help you with any attempts at sanely dealing with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

Bob Owens

Veteran
Sep 9, 2002
14,274
6,112
Family fights are the ugliest.
 
East vs West with the pilots makes our Base vs Line dissagreements look like nothing.  
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people

EastCheats

Veteran
Mar 12, 2012
1,944
6,141
EastUS1 said:
Unless you're equally pretending yourself just a concerned, but somehow clueless "innocent" in noble search of the "truth" GQ, you would know that the events and errors causing that sad crash have been well known for months now. Given that; exactly WHAT possible purpose is served by joyously posting such to every living person on earth with internet access?
 
While the two scenarios in NO way coincide: These same fine seekers of "truth" even did their utmost to pathetically and disgustingly try to discredit Capt Sullenberger and FO Skiles after the "Miracle on the Hudson." Quotes from this forum alone towards that ineptly intended purpose can't even be counted.
 
We've but two possible ways to reasonably go here:
 
1) Anyone of the sorry sorts of "snapthis" are simply lying by pretending wholesale ignorance of what's been fully known for a long time now, and just ecstatically wetting themselves over the obvious failures of two of their "fellow pilots" in PHL on that day, OR:
 
2) Such sorry creatures, necessarily already WELL aware of the facts for months now, simply feel some sad need to broadcast the misfortune of their "fellow pilots" to the entire world, for their own, purely sick purposes.
 
From another chat board: http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/american-us-airways-merger/85424-new-report-crash.html   "What's not shocking?" 
WD at AWA: "I guess the fact that its information we had internally for sometime."
 
I'll naturally let any and all readers decide for themselves.
I have two thoughts:

1) I think they have decided, Ace, MINUS 20. What does this have to to do with America West or the pilot dispute?


2)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 people

EastUS1

Veteran
Mar 9, 2012
10,198
10,171
EastCheats said:
I have two thoughts:

1) I think they have decided, Ace, MINUS 20. What does this have to to do with America West or the pilot dispute?


2)
 
You wouldn't understand. It's an issue of character. Take yours for example, being one that obviously finds childish delight in the crash of a passenger laden, company aircraft. Your "Attached Thumbnail"
is particularly hilarious in that regard...Grow up.
 
"What does this have to to do with America West....?" Good question. Perhaps it's just something in the water out in PHX, but I'll leave others to judge for themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

EastCheats

Veteran
Mar 12, 2012
1,944
6,141
EastUS1 said:
You wouldn't understand. It's an issue of character. Take yours, for example, being one that obviously finds childish delight in the crash of a passenger laden, company aircraft. Your "attatched thumbnail" is particularly hilarious in that regard...Grow up.
 
"What does this have to to do with America West....?" Good question. Perhaps it's just something in the water in PHX, but I'll leave others to judge that for themselves.
You don't get it, do you? This thread has nothing to do with America West so take it to the pilot forums you View attachment 10527
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 people

EastUS1

Veteran
Mar 9, 2012
10,198
10,171
EastCheats said:
You don't get it, do you? This thread has nothing to do with America West so take it to the pilot forums you
attachicon.gif
image.jpg
 
Sorry. My mistake. I see this thread's inception was clearly intended to now magically discover the details, already long known by any concerned pilot, about an unfortunate aircraft loss, as well as for such fine professionals as yourself to laugh at it and post cute little pictures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people