Asiana flight skids onto grass in Hiroshima

[webfact]

Asiana flight skids onto grass in Hiroshima
News Desk
The Yomiuri Shimbun

TOKYO: -- An Asiana Airlines plane skidded off the runway while landing at Hiroshima Airport in Mihara, Hiroshima Prefecture, at about 8:05pm on Tuesday. Twenty-five passengers and two crew members were slightly injured, it has been learned.

The flight from Incheon International Airport in South Korea appeared to have approached the runway at a lower altitude than usual, by several dozen meters, a Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry source said.

Following the incident, the runway was closed, and as of Wednesday afternoon, it was not known when Hiroshima Airport would resume normal services.

The flight carried 81 people, including a crew of eight. Of the 73 passengers, 46 are Japanese; nine are Chinese; eight are South Korean; two each are from Canada, Sweden and the United States; and one each is from the Philippines, Russia, Singapore and Vietnam, according to the carrier.

Among them was a 58-year-old woman from Hatsukaichi in the prefecture.

“I thought [the plane had gotten] struck by lightning,” she recalled of when she had heard a sudden loud noise for the second time, which was when she thought the airplane had landed.

Hiroshima prefectural police set up an investigation headquarters of 120 officers and began inspecting the site on Wednesday morning on suspicion of professional negligence resulting in injury.

Four officials from the transport ministry’s Japan Transport Safety Board, including an examiner, arrived at the site on Wednesday afternoon. The board plans to question the South Korean pilot of the flight and to examine the plane’s body.

Full story: http://www.asianewsnet.net/news-74132.html

-- ANN 2015-04-16

[NeverSure]

It's a little soon to be speculating and blaming the pilot. The plane was approaching from the opposite direction to what is normal due to winds. Planes always take off and land into the wind.

There was no instrument landing system (ILS) on this alternative end to read out the glide slope of the plane. It had to be seat of the pants. In that kind of wind there could easily be a sudden and strong downdraft that would take the plane too low on short final. Again this plane took out the approach lights so it perhaps had a rabbit but no approach slope indicator.

It takes time to spool up jet engines and get enough power to go around, and if he was on short final he might not have had time or sufficient altitude to stop his descent.

I got all of that just reading the rest of the OP.

[NeverSure]

The airport apparently just has landing lights on 6 meter tall towers on this approach. Apparently they clipped them.

There are reports that there was rain and strong winds which could mean a thunderstorm which could be powerful enough to have severe downdrafts that the plane couldn't overcome at all.

It may also be pilot error in approaching too low but it will probably be a long time before the truth comes out.

[sprq]

Why do reports on such incidents so often say the plane "skidded" off the runway? What evidence is there for skidding? Indeed, how can a plane skid? Only in the way that a car can skid, i.e. after trying to brake the wheels or because of a slick/icy surface. But planes don't brake with the wheels, they brake by using reverse thrust or deploying the flaps.

Failing any evidence of skidding, these reports ought to say something like "veered" off the runway.

[EPICFAIL]

Why do reports on such incidents so often say the plane "skidded" off the runway? What evidence is there for skidding? Indeed, how can a plane skid? Only in the way that a car can skid, i.e. after trying to brake the wheels or because of a slick/icy surface. But planes don't brake with the wheels, they brake by using reverse thrust or deploying the flaps.

Failing any evidence of skidding, these reports ought to say something like "veered" off the runway.

You must be confused in the belief that locking the wheels of a vehicle is skidding. Indeed locking the wheels of a vehicle be it automobile or aircraft could cause a skid but the definition of a skid is not nearly so narrow. To skid includes:

1) To slide along without rotating, as a wheel to which a brake has been applied.

2) To slip or slide sideways, as an automobile in turning a corner rapidly.

3) To slide forward under the force of momentum after foward motion has been braked.

Given the above definitions, it appears that the headline reporting "...skids onto grass..." is likely accurate.

Edited April 16, 2015 by EPICFAIL

[steveyinasia]

Why do reports on such incidents so often say the plane "skidded" off the runway? What evidence is there for skidding? Indeed, how can a plane skid? Only in the way that a car can skid, i.e. after trying to brake the wheels or because of a slick/icy surface. But planes don't brake with the wheels, they brake by using reverse thrust or deploying the flaps.

Failing any evidence of skidding, these reports ought to say something like "veered" off the runway.

You must be confused in the belief that locking the wheels of a vehicle is skidding. Indeed locking the wheels of a vehicle be it automobile or aircraft could cause a skid but the definition of a skid is not nearly so narrow. To skid includes:

1) To slide along without rotating, as a wheel to which a brake has been applied.

2) To slip or slide sideways, as an automobile in turning a corner rapidly.

3) To slide forward under the force of momentum after foward motion has been braked.

Given the above definitions, it appears that the headline reporting "...skids onto grass..." is likely accurate.

Aircraft do use the wheel brakes in tandem with reverse thrust and speed brakes(spoilers) in slowing the aircraft down. If there was a thunderstorm in the area with significant rain, it is possible for a plane to "aqua plane" on the surface of the water therefore rendering the braking ineffective. Anti lock units do limit this from happening however they are not always 100% effective. Flight data recorders will be able to supply the information relating to the system in place at the time.

[RichinThailand]

Why do reports on such incidents so often say the plane "skidded" off the runway? What evidence is there for skidding? Indeed, how can a plane skid? Only in the way that a car can skid, i.e. after trying to brake the wheels or because of a slick/icy surface. But planes don't brake with the wheels, they brake by using reverse thrust or deploying the flaps.

Failing any evidence of skidding, these reports ought to say something like "veered" off the runway.

Planes do have wheel brakes also. They are differential braking...that is the left foot brakes the left wheels and the right foot brakes the right wheels, so you can steer the airplane with the wheels as well as the rudder if you have sufficient speed and the steerable nose wheel with a small steering wheel in the cockpit!!

Also, you can skid sideways, especially landing in any kind of crosswinds.

Applying too much brake pressure to one side, or having a wheel brake lock (after possible damage from contacting the approach lights??) could cause you to skid off the runway.

[arunsakda]

Here is the reported metar at the time of the incident.

RJOA 141108Z VRB02KT 4000 R28/0300VP1800D -SHRA PRFG FEW000 SCT005 BKN012 09/08Q1006 RMK 1ST000 4ST005 6CU012 A2973 1500E FG E-S.

So basically 4000 metres with variable wind 2 knots in light showers with actual runway visibility varying from 300 meters to over 1800 meters This is legal weather to shoot the approach to rwy 28 takes which takes one down to about 430' above ground level. Let"s wait for the report but I'd reckon they lost visual reference below minimums and failed to immediately execute a go around as the tail struck the localizer antenna array 330 metres short of the runway!

(Amazing airport actually, built on top of a shaved down mountain. The approach light system to runway 10 is a steel structure something like I have never seen anywhere else. Must have cost $ millions.)

Edited April 17, 2015 by arunsakda