Research Paper: Crash of Turkish Airlines Flight TK1951 in Amsterdam

Pages: 7 (2187 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: 1+  ·  Level: College Junior  ·  Topic: Transportation  ·  Buy This Paper

Crash of THY Flight TK 1951

THY Flight TK1951 in Amsterdam

Clearly, there are many possible reasons why the airplane crash landed where it did (luckily, in an remote region). Centering on the particulars which have appeared up to now it is likely to try to theorize the root causes of the misfortune and to clarify why media is reporting many diverse scenarios:

"The crash of THY Flight TK1951 in Amsterdam"

"The crash of THY Flight TK1951 in Amsterdam"

The crash of Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 was a disaster that was unexpected. Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 was a passenger flight which collided in the course of landing to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, in the country of Netherlands, on 25 February 2009. This unexpected accident caused the deaths of nine crew and passengers counting all three pilots. The airplane, a Turkish Airlines Boeing 737-800, smashed straight into a field about 1.5 kilometers (0.93 mi) north of runway 18R, previous to intersecting the A9 motorway coming in, at 9:31 UTC (10:31 CET), having taken off from Istanbul, Turkey. The airplane ripped into three pieces when it collided to the ground. However, when it collided in the field, it never caught on fire (Springer, 2009).

This essay, while not being a wide-ranging report over Turkish Airlines' (THY) disaster communication model, sets out to debate the instant communication efforts of the organization succeeding the collision of the flight TK 1951 on February 25, 2009 near Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport (Springer, 2009). TK 1951 turned out to be THY's third misfortune on global air travel in its history and in the last three decades, turned out to be the only one.

Human Factor

A lot of investigators believe that the pilots were distracted. They had too much going on at the time. In the right seat the co-pilot was getting training for him to make a landing by automatic pilot. The investigators believe that the pilots had spent too much time swapping information among the trainee and the instructor, and not enough was spent examining the real readings which would have warned the crew to the problem in time to override the automatic pilot. Thick fog and low cloud may also have played a part in their failure to realize their actual height. The plane slowed down in to a stall, which is when the alarms sounded. The pilots tried to spool the engines back up, but it was too late.

Maintenance issues were another concern when the sudden crash. About two weeks before the crash took place, a serious encounter had occurred among the union that had something to do with the maintenance workers and the administration of Turkish Airlines. During that time, the union gave a warning to the management of serious failings that were going on in the maintenance system, and that includes insufficient staff to deal with the quick development of the airline fleet, which could put a lot of people at risk in the air

A lot of people would also make argument that design issues also played a major role in the crashing of the plane. Their reason behind all of this is the fact that the plane had a faulty radio altimeter (radalt) (Springer, 2009). Somewhere around 1,950ft altitude, it is believed that one of the two radalts had suddenly gave out a wrong reading which mislead the autopilot into believing the plane was just few feet over the airstrip. Ever since the auto-throttle was also betrothed, which is an effortlessly normal method, the autopilot abridged the engines push to 'idle' or 'retard' mode as which is normally experience right before the plane has a touchdown, excluding this was 2,000 ft. up in the air. Obviously the plane began trying to slowing down.

When it comes the violations of FAA regulations Er arises from the Feb. 25, 2009, crash of a Boeing 737-800 aircraft functioned by Turkish Airlines as Flight TK-1951. The airplane stopped throughout an endeavored method to Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam. The plaintiffs then made an allegement that the faulty design of the airplane is what caused the auto controls to decrease power to the flight idle for the reason that an unsuccessful radio altimeter "told" the auto throttles that the airplane was at minus-8 feet rather than the true altitude of 1,850 feet. (the auto throttles are supposed to be designed to decrease power when the airplane is still on the ground.) the autopilot's unanticipated decrease of power triggered the airplane to crash and stall as stated by plaintiff's allegations.

Boeing made the movement to discharge plaintiffs' lawsuits making the point that plaintiffs were unsuccessful to allege any violation of a federal regulation and standard, which it contended has to be revealed since the Federal Aviation Act anticipated any pertinent standards originate in Illinois products obligation or neglect law. The court had made a rejection in regards to Boeing's argument. The Er court found that there was "no proof that Congress had a well-defined and clear purpose to forestall every one of the State products obligation and negligence laws when it passed the [Federal Aviation] Act." (Green, 2009). The court alleged the following:

The circumstance that Congress did not anticipate state common law morals in aviation tort cases is not to be seen as an oversight. Congress has been fully conscious of the aviation industry's opposition to state-law offense actions that are held against aircraft builders. Congress' reply has been restrained and measured. Congress specifically banded, by a figure of rest, an incomplete group of products liability claims that are in contradiction of manufacturers of a particular class of aircraft in the General Aviation Revitalization Act (GARA) (Green, 2009). This decree, joined with the presence of a "savings clause" in the Act, discloses Congress' intention to preserve the application of traditional tort-law standards in every area of aviation safety outside the restricted possibility of its express preemptive alterations.

There are not any signs that wake turbulence caused by the Boeing 757 arranged to land before flight TK1951 had influence on the order of proceedings of flight TK1951. The line-up of flight TK1951occured at a distance of between 7 and 9 nm before the runway threshold deprived of previous 'offer' to the crew, and without instruction to fall away to an altitude lower than 2000 ft. (Green, 2009). This is not in agreement with the Instructions and Rules air traffic control employed by Air Traffic Control in the Netherlands that is founded on the Global Civil Aviation Organization strategies. This technique of lining up the aircraft is utilized for over 60% of all methods on this runway.

A turn-in, although interference occurs somewhere among the 5.2 and6 nm, with no command to fall away to an height below 3000 feet is in deviance of the Global Civil Aviation Organization guideline stipulating that the airplane must be flying level on its last tactic course before the glide slope is interrupted.

In spite of Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States of America had been alert for a long time that the radio altimeter system was producing countless difficulties and was distressing the procedure of other systems, this disorder was not chosen as a safety threat (Green, 2009). Reports of issues that had something to do with the radio altimeter construction that could not be certain by Boeing vindicated a struggle to examine the radio altimeter system and not to mention other linked systems. Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States of America could have documented the detail that the difficulties produced by the radio altimeter system, particularly the prospective for triggering the auto throttle retard flare mode, which was modeled as a safety risk (Green, 2009). Most of the problems regarding the radio altimeter system were not reported. If the producer had possibly received more reports, Boeing might have documented the essential for improved analysis.

Weather

Wind shear could be a possible cause, even if no other aircraft reported it. At the time of the crash, the METAR was reading as the following: EHAM 251025Z 22011KT 3500 -DZ BR OVC007 05/04 Q1027 TEMPO 2500 that is to say wind from 220 at 11 knots, 3500 meters of visibility, overcast at 700 feet, drizzle, mist, temperature 5° C, dew point 4° C, pressure 1027 millibars (Flight Safety Foundation, 2009). This however is really nothing special for Schiphol. If undergoing wind shear those that are the crew members would pick TOGA (Take Off / GO Around) thrust to evade smashing into the ground whereas witnesses were watching the aircraft hit the ground with low energy and depictions of at least one of the engine display the compressor's blades in a shape that was satisfactory, making the point that the engine was wind milling / low regime (Flight Safety Foundation, 2009).

Many say that turbulence could have been the cause of disaster. However, not many actually go along with this theory. "Wake turbulence," an air turbulence which was created by a pair of vortices that were… [END OF PREVIEW]

Four Different Ordering Options:

?
Which Option Should I Choose?

1.  Buy the full, 7-page paper:  $28.88

or

2.  Buy + remove from all search engines
(Google, Yahoo, Bing) for 30 days:  $38.88

or

3.  Access all 175,000+ papers:  $41.97/mo

(Already a member?  Click to download the paper!)

or

4.  Let us write a NEW paper for you!

Ask Us to Write a New Paper
Most popular!

Crash of Japan Airlines Flight 123 Case Study


Crash of United Airlines Flight 173 Term Paper


Financial Analysis of International Airlines Group Thesis


Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 182 Term Paper


Operations Scheduling and Control in the Airline Industry Term Paper


View 1,000+ other related papers  >>

Cite This Research Paper:

APA Format

Crash of Turkish Airlines Flight TK1951 in Amsterdam.  (2013, January 11).  Retrieved May 19, 2019, from https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/crash-turkish-airlines-flight-tk1951/1820933

MLA Format

"Crash of Turkish Airlines Flight TK1951 in Amsterdam."  11 January 2013.  Web.  19 May 2019. <https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/crash-turkish-airlines-flight-tk1951/1820933>.

Chicago Format

"Crash of Turkish Airlines Flight TK1951 in Amsterdam."  Essaytown.com.  January 11, 2013.  Accessed May 19, 2019.
https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/crash-turkish-airlines-flight-tk1951/1820933.