Back to Squawk list
  • 48

Bek Air plane with 100 on board crashes just after takeoff in Kazakhstan

Seven confirmed dead after Bek Air flight carrying 100 people crashes into building soon after take off from Almaty airport in Kazakhstan ( 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Highflyer1950 6
You bang the tail twice on takeoff, either the speeds are wrong or aerodynamically....the thing won’t fly ie; contaminated wings. Hard wing aircraft like the F28/100, DC-9-10 are not happy campers with surface contamination.
Rico van Dijk 8
"Those responsible will face tough punishment in accordance with the law," Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev tweeted
What a jerk, I hope he won’t disrupt investigations with this.
John D 8
I saw that too. Nothing like assuming a crime took place before any facts are known.
ADXbear 2
Fokker has a very sensitive wing to Contamination or if the flap/slat settings right?

Let the investigstors determine.
RIP to families..
Highflyer1950 0
Ever seen a Fokker with “slats”?
sharon bias 2
Is the airline maker still in business? They would probably supply the most accurate investigation of the accident. I wouldn't trust anything from the Kazakhstan government. Banging the tail a couple of times would definitely effect aerodynamics. Wonder if the airport has any camera's? Lots of unknowns
Highflyer1950 2
I believe Fokker went into bankruptcy in March 1996. Tail strikes are not uncommon especially when the aircraft is over rotated at Vr on take off. Most hard leading edge aircraft like the Fokker family, some DC-9-10 models with even a little surface contamination will inhibit the wings performance to the point where on rotation, lift may be compromised and the aircraft may liftoff in ground effect but after reaching 50-80’ of altitude the aircraft wing stalls. The other issue is if the wing is contaminated, the tail may also be compromised. An aircraft with a high tail (T-tail) may not show signs of contamination from ground level so as the speed builds on takeoff and the pilot rotates, nothing happens but when the pilot pulls the controls further back at a higher speed the tail bites and pops the nose off the ground very quickly, so quickly that before the pilot can push the control the tail hits the ground. Even the G4 that ran off the runway some time ago (control lock engaged), if only the pilot moved the controls even a little and discovered that nothing was happening, he could have aborted. Much easier to detect a control lock than a contaminated tail plane causing reduced performance! Still too early in the investigation, however!

Peter Fuller 1
According to Wikipedia: F100 takeoff run at full gross needs 5,319 feet of runway; Almaty’s runways are over 14,000 feet. Even allowing for 2,400 foot field elevation, you’d think there would be enough left to abort and stop on the runway after encountering problems at Vr. Just speculating, the investigation will (hopefully) tell all.
Highflyer1950 1
You would think so? I’ve flown out of Almaty. Problem is “if” it was wing/tail contamination that would greatly increase the take off roll and the speed would have been well beyond v2 so the thinking may have been it will get airborne eventually. It was reported that the a/c was deiced but with what, type 1, type 2 or type 4?
Jim DeTour 4
Anyone in England knows the Mirror news agency is only out to yank people around. I wouldn't trust anything they say as fact. Everything on earth would be extinct if all the Mirror news asteroids about to impact the earth stories were true.
Martin Zacharias 3
I think the crash punished everyone.
Nick Blazanovic 1
Looks like it was a Fokker - 100
Nick Blazanovic 1
tomasz dabrowski 1
Phil Caron 1
Flaps & slats. Classic stall with wings rocking. The tail hitting ground twice seem to confirm lack of sufficient lift from the wings.
Iain Girling 1
Suggested tail strike on takeoff. According to rumour control.
tomasz dabrowski 1
Aircraft that have engines mounted on the rear, and a T tail are easier to stall than aircraft with wing mounted engines. Reportedly the tail hit the runway twice. Probably stalled it with steep climb on takeoff.
Highflyer1950 1
Based on what?
tomasz dabrowski 1
Based on what i commented. I have no facts, its only speculation, but i thought i would mention what i know based on the facts that are known right now. I am not an expert at anything, just giving my 2 cents. Thats why i said probably. If you disagree and how more facts please share.
Highflyer1950 1
No, what I meant was what do base your speculation on that aircraft with tail mounted engines and a T-Tail easier to stall?
tomasz dabrowski 2
sorry for being defensive
Maxwell Johnson 0
Thank God it wasn't a Boeing. The Airbus fanbois would be having orgasms.
Don Quixote 1
What's ironic is the 737NG family has a lower hull loss rate than the A320 family.

0.17 versus 0.26 per million.

Although it was introduced into service 9 years prior, still.
mary susan watkins 1
how sad..the pictures from there show a very snowy landscape,but clear skies..i dont know how the Russians investigate crashes,but the photos dont show a fire,but rather the plane in pieces some observers said the tail hit the ground two or three times before the crash...
Wolfgang Prigge 7
Kazakhstan is not part of Russia.
MH370 -2
A Bek Air plane with 95 passengers and five crew members on board crashed near the city of Almaty in Kazakhstan on Friday shortly after taking off, killing at least 14 people
Rico van Dijk 2
Broken link
Wolfgang Prigge 1
It does work for me.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Jim Ward 3
mary susan watkins 2
tramvais..although a lot of people appreciate and enjoy astrological analysis,some as entertainment, and some as a factual basis,i do not think its applicable..


還沒有帳戶嗎? 現在就註冊(免費),設置諸多客制化功能、航班提醒等等!