Indian Airlines Flight 605

Last updated

Indian Airlines Flight 605
Indian Airlines Airbus A320 SDS-5.jpg
An Indian Airlines Airbus A320 similar to the one involved in the crash
Accident
Date14 February 1990 (1990-02-14)
Summary Controlled flight into terrain due to pilot error
SiteKarnataka Golf Club, near Bangalore Hindustan Airport
12°56′53″N77°38′52″E / 12.9481°N 77.6478°E / 12.9481; 77.6478
Aircraft
Aircraft type Airbus A320-231
Operator Indian Airlines
IATA flight No.IC605 [1]
ICAO flight No.IAC605 : 28 
Registration VT-EPN
Flight origin Sahar International Airport, Bombay, India
Destination Hindustan Airport, Bangalore, India
Occupants146
Passengers139
Crew7
Fatalities92
Injuries54
Survivors54

Indian Airlines Flight 605 was a scheduled domestic passenger flight from Bombay to Bangalore. On 14 February 1990, an Airbus A320-231 registered as VT-EPN, crashed onto a golf course while attempting to land at Bangalore, killing 92 of 146 people on board. [2]

Contents

The Indian investigative team ruled that the probable cause was the pilots selecting the "Open descent/flight idle" control mode rather than "Glideslope capture", allowing the aircraft to sink far below the correct flight path. They further failed to advance the throttles or pull up even after the radio altitude call-outs, as the aircraft approached landing. [2] The report stated that the crew of Flight 605 weren't aware of the situation and the danger they were facing at the time, resulting in delayed reaction during the descent. [2]

After the crash, the Indian investigation committee issued 62 recommendations to the Indian Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), including a time recording on the air traffic control (ATC) tapes and the formation of several investigative committees specializing in several aviation operational issues. Included in the recommendation was the addition of a crash siren in Bangalore, evaluation of the evacuation doors and slides in Airbus airplanes, and a design change on their instrument knob. The report also urged the government to evaluate every airport in India to prevent similar incidents from occurring. [1]

The crash drew criticism among the Indian Commercial Pilot Association (ICPA) which claimed that the Airbus A320 had severe flaws. They claimed that the aircraft's systems were too confusing and that the crew of Flight 605 was struggling to avert the crash. [1]

Another A320 accident less than two years later (which occurred under similar circumstances) led to design improvements to the flight control unit and numerous safety recommendations. [3]

Aircraft

The aircraft involved was an Airbus A320-231, registered as VT-EPN, serial number 79, had its maiden flight on 15 September 1989. It was delivered to Indian Airlines on 23 December and was around 5 months old. The aircraft had logged around 370 flight hours over 302 flights. The aircraft was equipped with two IAE V2500-A1 engines. [2] [4]

Flight

Take-off and approach

Flight 605 took off from Bombay Airport at 11:58 local time after an hour delay. Prior to this, the aircraft was used for two other flights on the day of the accident, operating as Flight 669 and Flight 670, flying from Bombay to Goa and back. The aircraft was carrying 139 passengers and 7 crew members, including 4 infants. The aircraft's assigned route was on route W17 from Bombay to Belgaum via Karad and W56 from Belgaum to Bangalore. The take-off phase and en route phase proceeded normally. [1] [5]

At 12:53 local time, Flight 605's radar plot appeared on Bangalore's radar. Flight 605 was asked by Bangalore Radar to turn right and make a visual approach to Runway 09. The crew disengaged the autopilot and later changed to the Bangalore Tower after being transferred by Bangalore Radar. [1]

Crash

While Flight 605 was attempting to land, the pilots flew far below the glideslope, and the landing gear touched down on the grounds of the Karnataka Golf Club, approximately 2,800 ft (850 m) from the airport. Most people on the aircraft, including some crew members, thought that the aircraft had touched down on the runway as it was similar to its normal landing. Flight 605 then bounced and shortly later impacted the ground for the second time. The impact caused several people's seat belts to fail, leading people to be thrown from their seats and hit the aircraft's floor. Flight 605 later struck a 12 ft (3.7 m) embankment. Both the engines and landing gear detached from the aircraft. The aircraft then flew over a road and crashed into a grassy, rocky area near the airport. [1]

Search and rescue

After the crash, the aircraft was immediately engulfed in flames Indian Airlines Flight 605 wreckage.jpg
After the crash, the aircraft was immediately engulfed in flames

After the crash, a post-impact fire started and the survivors began to escape from the burning wreckage. Several people managed to get out of the plane from an opening in the aircraft's fuselage. The surviving cabin crew opened the emergency door on the airplane and began to evacuate the survivors. 92 people, consisting of 88 passengers and 4 crew, perished in the crash, while 54 survived, all with injuries. Two people succumbed to their injuries after the accident. [1]

According to eyewitnesses, no fire service units reached the crash site as there was no radio transmitter (RT) communication facility between the tower and firefighting vehicles. A portable radio transmitter was available for communication between the tower and the aerodrome fire station, but was not serviceable on the day of the accident. [1]

Passengers and crew

Flight 605 carried 139 passengers and 7 crew members, consisting of 2 cockpit crew and 5 cabin crew. There were 4 infants aboard the flight. [1]

The pilot who controlled the flight was Indian national Captain Cyril Fernandez at 46 years old. He joined Indian Airlines in 1977 as a pilot and was promoted to the position of co-pilot. Eventually, he became Captain of a Hawker Siddeley HS 748. In 1983, Fernandez obtained a Boeing 737 co-pilot rating, followed by a Captain rating in 1984. Fernandez became the co-pilot of an Airbus A320 in 1989. Fernandez had a total flying experience of 9,307 hours, of which 68 hours were spent on the Airbus A320. [1]

According to the report, Captain Fernandez was under supervision as he was undergoing the first of 10 route checks required for qualification to captain. During the flight, he was seated in the left seat. [1]

The pilot who supervised Captain Fernandez was Indian national Captain Satish Gopujkar at 44 years old. He joined Indian Airlines in 1969 and was employed as a co-pilot on a Hawker Siddeley HS 748 from 1971 to 1981, later flying the plane as a captain. In 1981, he obtained a Boeing 737 co-pilot rating and later, a pilot in command rating in 1983. In 1989, he was promoted as a co-pilot on an Airbus A320. Captain Gopujkar had a total flying experience of 10,340 hours, of which 255 hours were on the Airbus A320. During the flight, he was carrying out the duties of both the co-pilot and the check pilot. [1]

Before Flight 605, Captain Gopujkar was involved in a taxiing incident in Cochin, although he was not blamed for the incident. During Flight 605, he was seated in the right seat. [1]

Casualties

92 people were killed in the crash, including Captain Gopujkar and Captain Fernandez. According to official reports: amongst the 54 injured people, at least 20 had suffered head injuries, 32 suffered lower limb injuries, while 7 sustained thoracic injuries. Details in the report revealed that most of the dead suffered major trauma during the crash. At least 81 victims were revealed to have suffered shock and burn injuries. [1]

The report then stated that several passengers may have been too injured to move, leaving them physically unable to escape from the burning wreckage. They may have survived the impact, but due to the injuries they suffered during the crash, they couldn't escape. The report stated that most people seated near the emergency exits and slides survived the crash. [1]

As most survivors and victims of the crash suffered head and leg injuries, the investigative team stated that those injuries might have occurred to the passengers (and some of the crew) on board as a result of the inadequate leg room. In addition, during the crash, several seats were thrust forward, causing several passengers' head to slam into the back of the seat in front of them. [1]

Investigation

The Indian Ministry of Civil Aviation ordered an investigation into the crash. The Indian AAIB and the Canadian TSB were involved in the investigation. On 19 February, investigators visited the crash site and inspected the wreckage of the aircraft. They noted that the front part of the aircraft was destroyed during its impact with the embankment. A subsequent fire led to the total destruction of the aircraft. [1]

Initial inspection

Investigators then inspected the flight controls of Flight 605, viz. the rudder, the ailerons, the trimmable horizontal stabilizer, the flaps and slats, and several other flight controls. However, they didn't find any abnormalities on these controls. Control failure was ruled out as a possible cause of the crash. According to investigators, they also ruled out terrorism as a cause of the crash, as there were no signs of an onboard explosion during the approach and there was no evidence of explosives on board. [1]

FDR and CVR analysis

After the discovery of the FDR and the CVR, investigators decoded and analyzed its contents. [1]

Investigators made an analysis based on both flight recorders as follows: Flight 605 was approaching Bangalore Airport in 'open descent' mode. In this mode, the aircraft engines are at the idle throttle. People would notice this since the engines seem to turn silent, and the plane appears to be sinking gradually. [1]

The crew of Flight 605 disengaged the autopilot when sighting the runway of Bangalore Airport. They later made contact with Bangalore Tower. At 01:40 pm local time, the aircraft display indicated that the plane's altitude had been just under 5000 feet and its approach path was 600 ft higher than the normal glide path. [1]

Captain Fernandez noticed this and requested for a go-around. He would climb to 6,000 ft (1,800 m), do another circle and come back better aligned to the normal glide path. The check pilot, Captain Gopujkar then responded to his request: "Do you want a go around? Or do you want vertical speed?" Captain Fernandez chose to proceed with the vertical speed option. If the pilots had proceeded with the go-around, the emergency that was to follow could have been averted. [1]

Since the plane was a little higher than the normal glide path, Captain Fernandez asked for a higher descent rate of 1000 ft/min, instead of the normal rate of 700 ft/min. This faster descent increased the aircraft speed to 275 km/h (148 kn; 171 mph) — higher than the recommended speed of 240 km/h (130 kn; 150 mph) — but it helped the aircraft regain the normal glide path. The aircraft was also now in the vertical speed mode — the correct mode for landing. [1]

Captain Gopujkar then checked the landing checklist. After completing the checklist, he asked the cabin crew to be seated at their stations. Realizing that the aircraft had regained its normal glide path, Captain Gopujkar reported at 01:42 that he had now selected a "700 ft rate of descent". However, instead of choosing the vertical speed knob, he accidentally chose the altitude knob. So, instead of inputting an order for a 700 ft (210 m) rate of descent to the Airbus A320, he made an order to put the aircraft on an altitude of 700 ft. [1]

The cockpit of an Airbus A320. The ten control knobs are shown. Cockpit View PR-AVP A320-214 msn 4891 (6349154954).jpg
The cockpit of an Airbus A320. The ten control knobs are shown.

The vertical speed knob and the altitude knob are located next to each other and have a similar design. This might have led to the confusion. [1]

Because of Captain Gopujkar's action, the aircraft went back to the 'open descent' mode, causing the throttle to be in the idle position. The absence of engine power on the aircraft led to a decrease of the aircraft's speed, and the plane began descending more quickly. Despite the impending disaster, the crew of Flight 605 seemed to be unaware of it. [1]

The plane's radio altimeter then sounded: "400 ft". This probably alerted Captain Gopujkar in some way because he suddenly observed: "You are descending on idle open descend eh, all this time!". And as the altimeter called out "300 ft", Captain Gopujkar asked: "You want flight directors off now?". Captain Fernandez confirmed that his flight director had been put off, Captain Gopujkar's however, hadn't. If both the flight directors had been put off at that point, the plane would have gone to the speed mode, sensing that speed was dropping, and enough engine power could have been generated for a possible recovery even at that late stage. [1]

The plane continued to hurtle downwards. When the plane was only 135 ft (41 m) from the ground, Captain Fernandez suddenly realized the gravity of the situation and exclaimed: "Hey, we're going down!". Captain Gopujkar, himself stunned now, could only respond with "Oh, shit!" Those were his last recorded words. Captain Fernandez then ordered an immediate TOGA (Take-off Go-around). However, this action was too late. The aircraft did lift from the ground, however, it failed to clear a 12 ft (3.7 m) embankment and crashed. Investigators stated that if this action had been taken 2 seconds earlier, the disaster could have been averted. [1]

Court's findings

The High Court of Karnataka reported that the accident was caused by the pilots failing to realize the gravity of the situation and failing to respond by immediately advancing the throttles, even after the radio altitude callouts of "Four Hundred," "Three Hundred" and "Two Hundred" feet, despite knowing that the plane was in idle/open descent mode. [1]

Controversy

India's investigative team concluded that pilot error was the cause of the accident, which was supported by Airbus Industrie. However, the India Commercial Pilot Association (ICPA) disputed the report, claiming that a design flaw on the Airbus A320 was the cause of the crash. [6]

The ICPA stated that the senior Captain of the flight, Captain Gopujkar, would not have made the series of mistakes described in the official report, and stated that there was no proof that he made the faulty setting (since the flight data recorder did not record such mistakes). The association also believed that the engines went to idle power because of a major system defect, and that, even when Gopujkar tried to shut his director off, it didn't respond. They also claimed that the time lag of 0.5 seconds for the auto-thrust controls to act proved to be disastrous. [6]

At the time, the Airbus A320 was relatively new, having just been launched in 1988. Its main difference from other aircraft was that it used fly-by-wire (FBW) technology. In a conventional aircraft the pilot was in direct contact with the actuator; so if the pilot opened the throttle more, the actuator immediately gave the pilot more power. In the A320, however, the pilot's command is first directed to an onboard computer — and the actuator responds only when the computer determines that it is okay to do so. [6]

Before the crash of Flight 605, an Airbus A320 had been involved in another crash, Air France Flight 296Q. The official investigation had determined that the cause of that crash was pilot error. However, the pilot had blamed the plane's fly-by-wire system for the crash. This claim had caused a major controversy about the Airbus A320. [7]

Aftermath

Less than two years after the crash of Flight 605, the A320 suffered another fatal accident when Air Inter Flight 148 crashed in France killing 87 people. The cause was also a CFIT like 605. The investigation of Flight 148 harshly criticized the Airbus A320's cockpit design. In response, changes were made to the Flight Control Unit panel display; the French aviation safety authority issued 34 recommendations. [3]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian Airlines</span> Division of Air India Limited

Indian Airlines was a state-owned airline in India that later became a division of Air India Limited before ultimately ceasing operations. It was based in Delhi and focused primarily on domestic routes, along with several international services to neighbouring countries in Asia and limited flights to the Middle East and Southeast Asia. It was a division of Air India Limited after the merger of eight pre-Independence domestic airlines.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pilot error</span> Decision, action or inaction by a pilot of an aircraft

In aviation, pilot error generally refers to an action or decision made by a pilot that is a substantial contributing factor leading to an aviation accident. It also includes a pilot's failure to make a correct decision or take proper action. Errors are intentional actions that fail to achieve their intended outcomes. The Chicago Convention defines the term "accident" as "an occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft [...] in which [...] a person is fatally or seriously injured [...] except when the injuries are [...] inflicted by other persons." Hence the definition of "pilot error" does not include deliberate crashing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Air France Flight 296Q</span> Aviation accident at Habsheim Air Show

Air France Flight 296Q was a chartered flight of a new Airbus A320-111 operated by Air Charter International for Air France. On 26 June 1988, the plane crashed while making a low pass over Mulhouse–Habsheim Airfield as part of the Habsheim Air Show. Most of the crash sequence, which occurred in front of several thousand spectators, was caught on video.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gulf Air Flight 072</span> 2000 aviation accident

Gulf Air Flight 072 (GF072/GFA072) was a scheduled international passenger flight from Cairo International Airport in Egypt to Bahrain International Airport in Bahrain, operated by Gulf Air. On 23 August 2000 at 19:30 Arabia Standard Time (UTC+3), the Airbus A320 crashed minutes after executing a go-around upon failed attempt to land on Runway 12. The flight crew suffered from spatial disorientation during the go-around and crashed into the shallow waters of the Persian Gulf 2 km (1 nmi) from the airport. All 143 people on board the aircraft were killed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Armavia Flight 967</span> 2006 plane crash in the Black Sea off Sochi, Russia

Armavia Flight 967 was a scheduled international passenger flight operated by Armavia from Zvartnots International Airport, Zvarnots in Armenia to Sochi, a Black Sea coastal resort city in Russia. On 3 May 2006, the aircraft operating the route, an Airbus A320-200, crashed into the sea while attempting a go-around following its first approach to Sochi airport; all 113 aboard were killed. The accident was the first major commercial airline crash in 2006. It was Armavia's only fatal crash during the airline's existence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Philippine Airlines Flight 137</span> 1998 aviation accident

Philippine Airlines Flight 137 was a scheduled passenger flight from Ninoy Aquino International Airport in Manila to Bacolod City Domestic Airport in Bacolod.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">S7 Airlines Flight 778</span> 2006 aviation accident

S7 Airlines Flight 778(S7778/SBI778) was a scheduled domestic passenger flight from Moscow to Irkutsk, Russia. On 9 July 2006, at 06:44 local time, the Airbus A310-324 aircraft operating the route overran the runway during its landing in Irkutsk. The aircraft failed to stop and crashed through the airport's concrete perimeter fence, struck rows of private garages and burst into flames, killing 125 people.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lufthansa Flight 2904</span> 1993 passenger plane crash in Warsaw, Poland

Lufthansa Flight 2904 was an Airbus A320-200 flying from Frankfurt, Germany to Warsaw, Poland that overran the runway at Okęcie International Airport on 14 September 1993.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">TAM Airlines Flight 3054</span> 2007 plane crash in São Paulo, Brazil

TAM Airlines Flight 3054 (JJ3054/TAM3054) was a regularly scheduled domestic passenger flight operated by TAM Airlines from Porto Alegre to São Paulo, Brazil. On the evening of July 17, 2007, the Airbus A320-233 serving the flight overran runway 35L at São Paulo during moderate rain and crashed into a nearby TAM Express warehouse adjacent to a Shell gas station. The plane exploded on impact, killing all 187 passengers and crew on board, as well as 12 people on the ground. An additional 27 people in the warehouse were injured. This crash surpassed Gol Transportes Aéreos Flight 1907 as the deadliest aviation accident in Brazilian territory and in South American history and was the deadliest involving the Airbus A320 series until the bombing of Metrojet Flight 9268 in 2015 which killed 224.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Air Inter Flight 148</span> 1992 plane crash in the Vosges Mountains, France

Air Inter Flight 148 was a scheduled passenger flight from Lyon Satolas Airport to Strasbourg Airport in France. On 20 January 1992, the Airbus A320 operating the flight crashed into the slopes of the Vosges Mountains, France, near Mont Sainte-Odile, while on a non-precision approach at Strasbourg Airport. Eighty-seven of the 96 people on board were killed, while the remaining nine were all injured.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">TACA Flight 390</span> 2008 aviation accident in Honduras

TACA Flight 390 was a scheduled flight on May 30, 2008, by TACA International from San Salvador, El Salvador, to Miami, Florida, United States, with intermediate stops at Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula in Honduras. The aircraft, an Airbus A320-233, overran the runway after landing at Tegucigalpa's Toncontín International Airport and rolled out into a street, crashing into an embankment and smashing several cars in the process.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">XL Airways Germany Flight 888T</span> 2008 aviation accident in the Mediterranean Sea

XL Airways Germany Flight 888T (GXL888T) was an acceptance flight for an Airbus A320 on 27 November 2008. The aircraft crashed into the Mediterranean Sea, 7 km off Canet-en-Roussillon on the French coast, close to the Spanish border, killing all seven people on board. The subsequent investigation attributed the accident to incorrect maintenance procedures that allowed water to enter and freeze in the angle-of-attack sensors during flight, rendering them inoperative, combined with the crew's attempt to perform a test at a dangerously low altitude.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turkish Airlines Flight 1951</span> 2009 aviation accident

Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 was a passenger flight that crashed during landing at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, the Netherlands, on 25 February 2009, resulting in the deaths of nine passengers and crew, including all three pilots.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Airblue Flight 202</span> 2010 aviation accident

Airblue Flight 202 was a scheduled Pakistani domestic passenger flight from Karachi to the nation's capital of Islamabad. On 28 July 2010, the Airbus A321-231 jet airliner serving the flight crashed into Margalla Hills, north of Islamabad's Benazir Bhutto International Airport, killing all 146 passengers and six crew on board. It is the deadliest air accident to occur in Pakistan to date and the first fatal crash involving an Airbus A321.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Germanwings Flight 9525</span> 2015 deliberate airliner crash in France

Germanwings Flight 9525 was a scheduled international passenger flight from Barcelona–El Prat Airport in Spain to Düsseldorf Airport in Germany. The flight was operated by Germanwings, a low-cost carrier owned by the German airline Lufthansa. On 24 March 2015, the aircraft, an Airbus A320-211, crashed 100 km north-west of Nice in the French Alps, killing all 150 occupants.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Air Canada Flight 624</span> 2015 aviation accident

Air Canada Flight 624 was a scheduled Canadian domestic passenger flight from Toronto Pearson International Airport to Halifax Stanfield International Airport in Halifax, Nova Scotia. During heavy snow and poor visibility, at 00:43 ADT on 29 March 2015, the Airbus A320-211 landed short of the runway and was severely damaged. Twenty-six people were injured.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Asiana Airlines Flight 162</span> 2015 aviation accident

Asiana Airlines Flight 162 was a regular short-haul international passenger flight from Incheon International Airport near Seoul, South Korea, to Hiroshima Airport in Hiroshima, Japan. On 14 April 2015, the Airbus A320-232 aircraft touched down short of the runway, struck the localizer array, skidded onto the runway on its tail, and spun 120 degrees before finally coming to a rest on the grass, opposite the terminal building. The aircraft suffered substantial damage to the left wing and engine. Of the 82 people aboard, 27 were injured, one seriously.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pakistan International Airlines Flight 8303</span> Aircraft crash in Pakistan, 22 May 2020

Pakistan International Airlines Flight 8303 was a scheduled domestic flight from Allama Iqbal International Airport in Lahore to Jinnah International Airport in Karachi, Pakistan. On 22 May 2020, the Airbus A320 crashed into Model Colony, a densely populated residential area of Karachi only a few kilometres from the runway, while on a second approach after a failed landing attempt with landing gear not extended. The aircraft was badly damaged in the first belly landing, with both engines flaming out during the go-around. Of the 91 passengers and 8 crew on board the aircraft, 97 were killed, and two passengers survived with injuries. Eight people on the ground were also injured in the accident, one of whom later succumbed to her injuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LATAM Airlines Perú Flight 2213</span> 2022 aviation accident

LATAM Airlines Perú Flight 2213 was a scheduled domestic passenger flight in Peru from Lima to Juliaca. On 18 November 2022, the Airbus A320neo was taking off from Jorge Chávez International Airport when it collided with a fire engine that was crossing the runway, killing two firefighters and injuring a third, who died of his injuries seven months later. 40 passengers were injured. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair and written off, making it the first hull loss of the Airbus A320neo family.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 "Final report". Directorate General of Civil Aviation. Archived from the original on 4 December 2021. Retrieved 4 December 2021.
  2. 1 2 3 4 Accident description at the Aviation Safety Network
  3. 1 2 Ranter, Harro. "ASN Aircraft accident Airbus A320-111 F-GGED Strasbourg-Entzheim Airport (SXB)". aviation-safety.net. Aviation Safety Network. Archived from the original on 18 March 2005. Retrieved 1 July 2019.
  4. ↑ "VT-EPN Indian Airlines Airbus A320-231". www.planespotters.net. 23 March 2021. Retrieved 8 April 2024.
  5. ↑ "Indian Airlines VT-EPN (Airbus A320 - MSN 79)". AirFleets.net. Archived from the original on 4 December 2021. Retrieved 4 August 2021.
  6. 1 2 3 "Dispute over findings". India Today. Archived from the original on 2 February 2017. Retrieved 27 January 2017.
  7. ↑ "Air France Flight 296". ASN. Archived from the original on 2 February 2017. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.