By Simon Hradecky, created Sunday, Jan 29th 2023 23:30Z, last updated Sunday, Jan 29th 2023 23:35Z
http://www.avherald.com/h?article=504714d8&opt=0
A CAA Compagnie Africaine Aviation Airbus A320-200, registration 9S-ABM performing flight BU-415 from Mbuji Mayi to Kinshasa N'Djili (DR Congo), departed Mbuji Mayi's runway 34 when most of the left hand elevator separated from the aircraft. The aircraft climbed out, the captain decided to continue the flight to Kinshasa requesting only right hand turns, climbed to FL300 enroute, performed a low pass at Kinshasa to have the aircraft assessed from the ground and subsequently, again using right hand turns only, positioned for another approach and landing on Kinshasa's runway 24 about 90 minutes after departure.
The separated part of the Elevator was recovered from the aerodrome in Mbuji Mayi.
According to local sources there was no collision or abnormal contact of the aircraft, it just looks like a structural failure as result of fatigue.
The aircraft's left remaining elevator seen in Kinshasa:
http://avherald.com/img/caa_a320_9s-abm ... 0129_1.jpg
The aircraft's separated part of elevator recovered in Mbuji Mayi:
http://avherald.com/img/caa_a320_9s-abm ... 0129_2.jpg
Reader Comments: (the comments posted below do not reflect the view of The Aviation Herald but represent the view of the various posters)
@Bilge
By Strebav8or on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 16:09Z
Inspection criteria, additonal weight, needed maintenacne, Minimum Equipment Lists....rarity of catastrophic events.
all reasons they will not install cameras on the fuselage of aircraft
question from a sailor
By Bilge on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 14:42Z
I've wondered that with the advent of very small cameras with communication abilities, why aircraft manufacturers don't put a few on aircraft to cover critical areas, such as both wings/engines, the tail from both sides and critical interior areas.
Not expensive in the grand scheme of things and these days very little weight.
Airbus interest
By FredrikHAD on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 13:34Z
Proteus: "Airbus certainly won’t take the word of a casual observer that “fatigue” has anything to do with it."
Absolutely, and if it was indeed fatigue, that would also be an Airbus concern if it was related to the materials used or manufacturing methods. Sure, there are 1000's of A320s flying all day long and we haven't seen any similar fatigue events (as I'm aware of), but there's always a first one and this _may_ be the first in a series, however unlikely it may be.
Regarding choice of continuing or not, perhaps there were two bad choices to choose between and perhaps the extent of the damage was not known. Then again, the Mbuji Mayi crew could have reported the find to the pilots, we don't know that.
/Fredrik
@Mike
By Hans R. on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 12:45Z
Thank you for pointing that out. Now it starts to make sense for me. It looked really strange for me to continue the flight instead of landing ASAP, especially because the accident happened during take-off and it was obviously unclear if there was any more structural damage at the Aircraft.
Nevertheless a dangerous flight.
Fortunately with a safe landing.
And yes: Airbus should take a Look on this Event.
Professionals
By DB126 on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 12:19Z
Some of the comments here (like so many other posts) reflect ignorance, or at best distrust, of the those who have all the data/information and training to make the best decisions. Are they perfect? Absolutely not; none one is. Sometime the choice is poor and we learn from it. That said, knee jerk rationalists rarely make the grade on identifying the best option.
@Richard King
By pau on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 12:11Z
Fly to destination may be is only 40 minutes more than coming back , and landing runway is double lenght and wider .
Algo give your time to do all checks .
considering the airplane was not out of control, This was the best option , for sure .
Congratulations my Captain !
By Gasman on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 10:49Z
What cockpit indications and what control problems would the flight crew be presented with?
How much could they narrow things down to assess the situation inflight?
Elevator
By Whoops on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 09:09Z
Second photo shows the O/B hinge fitting still attached to the elevator so would point to a hinge line failure more than an elevator structural failure.
If a hinge fitting fractured the elevator flutter could tear itself apart.
Personally I would land this ship ASAP
Airbus Interest
By Proteus on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 08:39Z
Airbus will be interested in this occurrence. It is a very unusual failure and could point to a manufacturing issue. They are probably aware of the serial number of the failed part and will be able to identify the manufacturer concerned and any possible batch problem. That’s the way issues like this are dealt with. (What happened? Why? What should we do about it?) Airbus certainly won’t take the word of a casual observer that “fatigue” has anything to do with it.
@Mike
By Jay on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 08:14Z
Agree with you other comments mike, but 6000ft being the shortest possible for A320? Eh?
I'll have to report myself for landing on a 5000ft runway many times with a full passenger load...
@Mike
By Brian Johnson on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 07:53Z
Good points and analysis. Nevertheless, there was a high risk of loss of control. Since they requested only right hand turns, they obviously experienced control issues. I wonder could they have known the full extent of the damage - that most of the elevator had actual detached itself from the aircraft? Anyone know what sort of warnings they might have received?
@ (anonymous)
By (anonymous) on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 06:13Z
> Wow if I were airbus I'd like to keep an eye on it
What should Airbus do? They have no leverage to force a carrier to do things according to the book.
Local authorities could and should keep an eye on the carrier. Only that things aren't going that well when it comes to the DRC. All of DRC's carriers are on the EU Air Safety List Annex A "banned for operating within the Union" for lack of oversight by DRC's air safety authorities.
Not that being banned in the EU has an effect of locally operating carriers. It is kind of a symbolic gesture to highlight a problem, but almost no one cares about.
Why continue to flight
By Mike on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 05:51Z
I imagine they had a hard choice.
Land back immediately on a runway described on wikipedia as "an asphalt surface measuring 1,999 by 45 metres (6,558 ft × 148 ft) with poor quality pavement.[" when minimum requirement for the plane is only 500 ft less, and your going to have to be landing mainly using the trim and with probably not very good emergency services.
Or fly to the destination where its a 15,000 ft runway, where you can do a very long landing and one imagines has the best emergency services of any field the country.
Probably doing the risk calcs the 2 hours extra time without elevator control vs the v challenging landing on a short field without elevator control would say they did the right thing.
Why??
By Richard King on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 05:01Z
Seriously?!?!?!?!?? Continue the flight after bits of the aircraft have fallen off? This is commercial aviation in 2023.
Maybe the pilots imagined themselves to be in 1943, flying a crippled bomber back to base in England after a bombing run over Germany ... Somebody give them a medal! (sarcastic)
By (anonymous) on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 04:48Z
Why the F would you go into the flight levels with this?!
By Hans R. on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 01:20Z
He continued to fly to Kinshasa? - Ok...
Fortunately this was the only part at this Aircraft with a Fatigue problem.
By (anonymous) on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 00:42Z
Wow if I were airbus I'd like to keep an eye on it
Why?
By DWN on Monday, Jan 30th 2023 00:37Z
why only right-hand turns?
By (anonymous) on Sunday, Jan 29th 2023 23:35Z
13.8 year old aircraft at time of incident. What type of maintenance or fatigue checks/replacements do aircraft get for the elevators and rudder?
PP
