Dozens die in Madrid plane crash

[Bounty]

At least 45 people have been killed after a passenger plane swerved off the runway at Madrid's Barajas airport, Spanish officials say.

Several more were hurt when the Spanair plane bound for Gran Canaria left the runway with more than 150 passengers on board, just after 1445 (1245 GMT).

There were reports of a fire in the left engine during take-off. TV footage showed smoke billowing from the craft.

Helicopters and fire trucks were called out to dump water on the plane.

Spanish journalist Manuel Moleno, who was near the area when the accident happened, told the BBC the plane had "crashed into pieces".

"We heard a big crash. So we stopped and we saw a lot of smoke," he said.

There are conflicting accounts about the number of deaths, with some reports suggesting most of the passengers on the plane may be dead.

Mr Moleno said he had seen as many as 20 people walking away from the wreckage.

The situation at the airport was chaotic, he said, with travellers desperately trying to call relatives on their mobile phones.

BBC journalist Stephanie McGovern, who is also at the airport, said the airport was closed - but that planes had taken off

The plane, which was destined for Las Palmas in the Canary Islands, came down during or shortly after take-off, local media say, quoting aviation authorities.

It skidded off the runway at terminal four into fields, says the BBC's Steve Kingstone in Madrid.

"Spanair regrets to confirm that its flight number JK 5022 from Madrid to Las Palmas de Gran Canarias was involved in an accident at Madrid, at 1445 hours local time today," the airline said in a statement.

The aircraft was a MD82, a plane commonly used on short trips around Europe, aviation expert Chris Yates told the BBC.

He said Spanair, a subsidiary of Scandinavian carrier SAS, had a very good safety record. Reports say it was the first crash at Barajas airport, some 13km (8 miles) out of central Madrid, since 1983.

People concerned for relatives or friends who may have been on board the plane should call Spanair's helpline on: +34 800 400 200.

I expect the situation to get clearer in the following hours. Right now there's little information beyond the flight number; no cause or final casualty count.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

What's the safety record for this airline?

[cosmicalstorm]

100+ dead if Swedish newspapers are to be believed

[Bounty]

What's the safety record for this airline?

As far as I know, this is its first accident in the 22 years it's existed. The company is a subsidiary of SAS, and they too have a pretty solid safety record.

[Murazor]

I seem to remember that there was a victim-less scare a couple of years back, when a flight headed for the Canary Islands that had to return to Madrid because one of the engines was visibly leaking fuel in mid-air.

It might have been an Iberia flight, however, and definitely Spanair doesn't have a particularly hideous track record in security matters, even if the SAS announced last year that it was leaving the company.

For those who might find something informative in a listing of the aircraft of the company, Spanish Wikipedia reports that they have:

32 MD-82/83/87.
18 Airbus A320-232.
5 Airbus A321-231.
3 Boeing 717.

But it seems that the number is getting worse and worse. The Spanish media were reporting seven fatalities around three o'clock, but half an hour ago they jumped up to fourty and according to Wikipedia, the Red Cross suggests that this could go up to over a hundred dead.

Fuck. Three weeks ago I was living about six kilometers away from the crash-site. Fuck. This isn't going to be like the 77 crash in Tenerife, but it is the worst plane crash Spain has suffered in a rather long while.

[Bounty]

75 confirmed dead by the latest count. The plane's total complement was 172 or 175 depending on what source you trust, so the theoretical body count could be as high as that.

[Murazor]

75 confirmed dead by the latest count. The plane's total complement was 172 or 175 depending on what source you trust, so the theoretical body count could be as high as that.

The news over here reported about twenty people confirmed as injured, but not killed in the crash. If they got that right, the maximum is going to be around 150.

[Bounty]

The unofficial death toll now stands at at least 100, up to 150.

[Edi]

170+ passengers, 26 confirmed rescues as of the 20:30 main news, so it's looking like 140+ dead.

[Broomstick]

Yhis isn't going to be like the 77 crash in Tenerife

Well, thank goodness for that, because Tenerife is still the all time highest fatality count in an civilian aviation accident*

No doubt they are still looking for survivors who may not be able to walk away. Unfortunately, some injured may die in the hospital later if their injuries are severe enough.

In any case, terrible news.

* The death toll for 9/11 was significantly higher, but that wasn't an accident, it was a deliberate.

[Bounty]

The BBc article has been updated. This is now officially one of the worst European air disasters in history, with 140+ (my paper says 146) confirmed dead. 28 survivors confirmed, many of them critical.

[The Nomad]

Crap, my mother and brother came back from Spain yesterday. Chilling thought.

[Bounty]

Crap, my mother and brother came back from Spain yesterday. Chilling thought.

I know what you mean; one of my friends was travelling over Spain today, and before I knew where the crashed flight was going I was scared shitless. Never been happier to get that "we landed safely" SMS before, I can tell you that.

[Lord Pounder]

No updates on why the pilot swerved like that?

[Bounty]

Everything seems to point to engine failure. El Pais is said to have reported the pilot had previously aborted a take-off and returned for engine repairs, but I only know this second-hand.

[Broomstick]

Death toll risen to 153, and 19 are injured.

Take off is a bad time for engine problems. Well, really, any time is a bad time for engine problems, but take offs worse than other flight phases. However, this is more likely more than just a simple engine failure, as that is usually a manageable emergency even at take off.

I'm sure we'll have more details later. Right now the priority should be on helping the injured and making sure everyone is accounted for.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Isn't it standard operating procedure to check on the engines before flight? Or did they miss something?

[Edi]

We had more details in the headline news yesterday evening already and in this morning's paper. Paraphrased, the first takeoff had been postponed due to mechanical problems, the plane was inspected and nothing was found. During the second attempt, the engine that malfunctioned actually caught fire just as the plane was lifting off the ground. The plane crashed from between 1 to 3 meter height, broke in two and caught fire.

So they caught fire at a phase where there was too much speed to abort as the plane was already lifting and not enough to get clear. They've found the black box of the plane, but haven't gotten anything out of it yet.

[Broomstick]

Isn't it standard operating procedure to check on the engines before flight? Or did they miss something?

Of course engines checks are SOP. Even while going down the runway they are monitoring the engine systems, but - this is an important concept - shit can break at any time.

[Broomstick]

Not much information on the crash, but here's my thoughts, keeping in mind that MUCH of this is speculation at this point and subject to change with additional facts:

Engine function is checked on initial start up, prior to the start of the take-off run, and monitored during take-off so as to get as much warning as possible about possible problems. During the take-off run with any multi-engine airplane there is a key speed, the minimum controllable airspeed with less than all engines functioning speed - on analog instruments this is indicated with a blue line, thus, it is often called "blue line speed" and may even be represented that way still on certain electronic read-outs - that the plane MUST be above in order to retain control in the event engine failure. My understanding is that you aren't supposed to rotate (pull the nose up to start leaving the ground) until you have hit at least that airspeed.

If, however, the engine quits right at the point the airplane is first lifting off, or just before or just after it, it is possible that the airplane could drop below that critical airspeed. If that happens the airplane may still leave the ground, it will fly, but it will not be controllable. One of the indications of that is a swerve to one side - such as we saw here. That's because the working engine is pulling its side of the airplane forward, while the other side is lagging behind, which results in a curved line of travel. If the situation continues the airplane will most likely flip upside down and crash. Needless to say, that is not considered survivable.

There is a brief, very brief, window of time where a pilot MIGHT be able to do something about dropping below blue line with fewer than all engines running because, if you're only just under blue line, you won't lose ALL control immediately (just a hell of a lot of it). You can attempt to trade altitude for speed, essentially using gravity to boost your speed, IF you have altitude to begin with - which clearly these poor folks did NOT have. If you're almost on the ground (which is the case here) you can attempt to land, but frankly, airliners don't land well off-pavement. It is, however, the option with the highest chance of anyone surviving. It also seems to be the case here, with either a landing or a belly-slide, and apparently there were some survivors.

It is also possible that when the engine went it actually did come apart and it's possible that flying parts severed some control lines. There is some precedent for such occurances, although they are rare, and if that is the case there wasn't shit the pilots could do besides ride it down. In which case the landing/bellyslide was due to chance positioning, but I think it more likely they actually had some control. Uncontrolled, the tendency would have been for the airplane to roll as well as turn, which would have resulted in a wing striking it first, then a cartwheel. I think someone was keeping that machine level and trying for a landing/bellyslide.

I might have mentioned before I was on an airplane that had an engine malfunction just past rotation on take-off, including flying debris and smoke coming off one wing, but obviously we survived it. There was a massive yank to one side, but in my case the pilot was able to maintain sufficient control over the airplane to avoid a crash. It was a MOST unpleasant experience, however, and I can imagine what those poor folks in Spain went through. In my case, perhaps my pilot was going just a little faster so the speed never dropped below the critical level. Or perhaps the pilot in Spain did not react fast enough to the emergency. Or there could have been other extenuating circumstances.

[Bounty]

The problem that stopped the plane on its first take-off attempt is said to be an overheating of a vent underneath a cockpit window - this is translated from a Dutch source, so it may not be entirely correct. Nothing on the BBC site yet.

[Broomstick]

Whatever was wrong on its first take-off attempt (really, it seems to have been found before they got to the runway) may or may not have anything at all to do with what actually caused the accident.

[Broomstick]

This is somewhat of a necro, but it is updating the thread. From the BBC:

Wing flaps failed' on Spain jet

The aircraft crashed into the ground just moments after take-off

The wing flaps on a plane that crashed in Madrid last month did not open properly during take-off, Spanish media have reported.

Investigators found that the pilots were unaware of the problem because a cockpit warning alarm did not go off, several Spanish newspapers said.

The Spanair plane plunged to the ground shortly after take-off, killing 154 people on board.

It was the deadliest air crash in Spain in 25 years.

Cockpit recordings

Reports in the Spanish media suggest that the Spanair jet may have stalled during take-off because the wing flaps were not properly deployed.

The flaps make it easier for aircraft to get off the ground at take-off speeds.

Investigators have not released any official statement on the disaster, but Spanish media say the issue of the wing flaps came from analysis of the cockpit voice and data recordings.

The Spanish Interior Minister, Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba, told Spanish television the government would not comment until the investigation into the crash had been completed.

"In my experience an accident doesn't happen for a single reason," he said.

"We are going to wait for the report to be finished to find out what happened because there are many theories," Mr Rubalcaba added.

The Spanair jet had aborted a previous take-off attempt.

It was preparing to fly to Las Palmas in the Canary Islands, when the pilots reported a problem.

Technicians discovered a fault in a temperature gauge on the aircraft.

So, it may have been mechanical problems after all, but wing surfaces and not engine problems....?