Crash: MyCargo B744 at Bishkek on Jan 16th 2017, impacted terrain on go around

[TheGreenGoblin]

Was rummaging through the ever excellent Avherald and found this report yesterday. I don't think this accident pinged on ops-normal's radar at the time, probably because these guys fly from the unfashionable part of the airport, being freight jockeys, but the report makes for interesting, thought, provoking reading.

http://avherald.com/h?article=4a38d07d/0001&opt=0

The catalogue of errors and the capture of the false glide slope reads like a text book case of every way to foul up an ILS approach.

[barkingmad]

Summary = failure of energy management?

See 737NG overruns passim?

[Boac]

I'm afraid, BM, this has nothing to do with your excessive speed' 'crusade' for the 737-800. As tgg says, it was a completely botched ILS approach with a completely botched g/a.

[barkingmad]

“at a considerably higher flight altitude....” = excess energy, potential in this case.

737NGs speed corrections and failure to bleed off, if at all = excess energy, kinetic in this case.

Therefore failure of energy management. Please tell me which bit of applied maths I’ve got wrong?

We’re they using a ‘gate’ as a matter of routine and also a check of energy management?

[Boac]

I thought your 'issues' with the 800 (whatever they were) were to do with its higher approach speeds and over-runs not botched ILS and g/a? This was a 747! It never 'over-ran'. This was not simply a case of 'failure of energy management' but failure of piloting and command skill.

We’re they using a ‘gate’ as a matter of routine and also a check of energy management?

well, i think I saw they BRIEFED it and then ignored it!

[barkingmad]

The foundations for this as well as many other excess energy accidents started at the ToD. Having perused the entire report it is a catalogue of potential and kinetic energy surpluses.
Yes there are systems handling failures and the 74’ as described here seems to have inherited some of the interesting logic which affected the ‘Classic’ series of which I have some experience.
But excess altitude at the “gate” meant that this was never going to work out. Some action to dissipate the energy so’s they could attack the G/S from below would have meant a successful intercept and without a systems failure they would probably be enjoying life today.
Yes I have linked this excess energy accident with 73NG overruns but why else doe one end up in the rough at the far end of the landing strip instead of intact and serviceable on the strip?

[Boac]

why else doe one end up in the rough at the far end of the landing strip instead of intact and serviceable on the strip?

- incompetence?

[AtomKraft]

lf I recall correctly, the glide intercept here occurs around 1500' AGL. Got to get it all set up nice and early, before catching the glide.