Air India flight to London Gatwick crashed in Ahmedabad

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From The BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page)

An Air India passenger plane bound for London Gatwick crashed shortly after taking off in Ahmedabad on Thursday, leaving at least 204 people dead.
The flight was carrying 242 passengers and crew when it was involved in what the airline has called a "tragic accident" in the city in western India.
Ahmedabad's police chief told the BBC that 204 bodies had been recovered, while 41 people were being treated for injuries.
He earlier told news agencies there appeared to be no survivors from the crash, and that some local people would also have died given where the plane came down.

We are primarily a UK^▸ (United Kingdom) rail forum - but just occasionally something as major as this takes place - classified so far as a tragic accident - which goes for comment beyond our narrower sphere of interest.

My thoughts for those who died on board (I understand - stop press - at least one survivor) , those who have died or been injured on the ground. And my thoughts with family, friends and colleagues of those who have perished.  This was a flight into Gatwick - an airport that many of us use, and served by the trains we talk about.  Perhaps "meet and greet" people will have been on their way down, and arrivals planned to carry on on "our" trains.

Over coming time, we will learn what caused the plane to fall out of the sky; out of respect for those who have perished or been bereaved, I am not speculating here.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Thank you for your post, grahame.

I held back from posting, earlier today, as the news continued to develop: this is an awful transport incident, with effects felt locally to us, as you wrote.

My thoughts and sympathies, too, are with all the families, friends and colleagues of those deceased.  A very sad day.

CfN. 

[JayMac]

Some reports are suggesting dual engine failure after take-off (DEFATO) That would help explain why there was a mayday call. It's something that is very noticeable to the flight crew, very quickly. If the plane had been incorrectly configured for take-off (as some have speculated - noting that flaps may have been incorrectly positioned and gear was still down) it's less likely the pilots would've figured out what was wrong in time to diagnose the problem and then communicate. The rule of thumb is: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. There's also some suggestion that the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) was deployed, which would add weight to the DEFATO hypothesis.

A dual engine failure immediately after V2 would most likely occur due to birdstrikes. Other foreign object damage is possible, though less likely to affect both engines. It could also potentially be contaminated fuel, but there have been subsequent take-offs from that airport, so it's unlikely the source of fuel was the problem.

Dual engine failure at, or immediately after, V2. Startled pilots. No positive rate achieved so no "positive rate, gear up" call out and action. Begin the DEFATO checklist, which I suspect is mainly memory items due to the time critical nature of the fault. Continuing aviating. Issue mayday.

If it turns out to be this scenario then the sad reality is that the pilots simply did not have enough of three critical things. Time, altitude, speed. The nearest comparison would be US Airways Flight 1549. But Chesley Sullenberger and Jeffrey Skiles had nearly 4 minutes, 190kts and 3,000ft to play with.

My thoughts and sympathies go to all those affected. 

[TaplowGreen]

From The BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page)

Over coming time, we will learn what caused the plane to fall out of the sky; out of respect for those who have perished or been bereaved, I am not speculating here.

Agreed. Speculation best avoided.

A colleague lost an Aunt and Uncle in yesterday's crash, who (heart breakingly) were en route to attend a funeral in London.

Edited to clarify quoting

[froome]

What seems extraordinary to me is that there was one survivor, whose injuries are not in any way life threatening.

Is this pure luck? Was his seating position, next to the emergency exit, likely to be the prime reason for his survival?

[stuving]

What seems extraordinary to me is that there was one survivor, whose injuries are not in any way life threatening.

Is this pure luck? Was his seating position, next to the emergency exit, likely to be the prime reason for his survival?

The interview he has given was understandably rather incoherent, but did make clear that he had a hole in the fuselage to get out through and was then near ground level and not blocked in. I think that his lack of serious injuries is more of a pure luck thing, to do with the deceleration experienced by that bit of structure, which happened to be unusually benign. I fear that others on the plane may have also been less seriously injured, but were unable to get out before the fire took hold.