• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Airbus A320 with 107 people aboard crashes in residential area of Karachi in Pakistan

Monsterkillah

Member
Aug 12, 2018
3,027
4,306
555
It is believed the plane tried to land up to three times before the crash happened

A Pakistan International Airlines Airbus A320 passenger plane carrying more than 100 people today crashed into a residential area of Karachi.

Photos show plumes of billowing smoke after the Pakistan International Airlines plane smashed into the residential area.

Pakistan's aviation authority Abdul Sattar Khokhar said: 'We are trying to confirm the number of passengers but initially it is 99 passengers and eight crew members.'

More photos have emerged from residents showing rubble and debris strewn across the area.

The Airbus had been flying from Lahor to Jinnah before it went down in the Model Colony area as it began its final approach to land at Karachi airport.

Witnesses said the Airbus A320 appeared to attempt to land two or three times before crashing in a residential area near Jinnah International Airport.

The crash comes just days after the country began allowing commercial flights to resume.

RIP for the victim and family
 
Nov 29, 2016
1,929
923
435
Fuck, thats awful. I wonder why it had to make so many attempts at landing? Cross winds or technical problem?
 

chilleverest

Member
Jan 11, 2018
348
641
405
There is a vid up on liveleak showing blurred images including communication between atc and crew. Nothing graphic. Rip.
 

donfonzie

Member
Aug 23, 2015
149
206
345
Fuck, thats awful. I wonder why it had to make so many attempts at landing? Cross winds or technical problem?
Technical problems, both engines caught fire.

My heart goes out to all the people on the plane and on the ground. RIP.
 
Last edited:

Thaedolus

Member
Jun 9, 2004
9,442
2,065
1,700
Both engines? How does that even happen these days?
Engine and landing gear problems? Some sort of explosion can cause issues with controlling both. Hydraulic or electrical lines severed, etc. Explosive decompression can cause it, or uncontained engine failure, or a bomb....
 
Aug 26, 2018
1,430
1,714
445
As an ex flight attendant what pisses me off about this news is how the media (local media mostly) are reporting this. They keep mentioning the number 99 or 100. Yes thats PAX but why are you not mentioning extra 10 crew who were on that flight and died as well. They should say 108 or 110 people have died in the crash but for some reason they keep the crew out of the equation which is insulting.

Thaedolus Thaedolus

Actually nush nush pointed out a good question. Most planes today are dual engined. An engine failure can slow down the flight time of the aircraft but can still fly with only one engine to its destination. Having both engines catch fire and failing is unheard off in modern aviation. Unless it was man made mistake as an engineer fucked up big time or malitiously, only other thing I can think off is they ran into a flock of birds but that is so damn rare that birds would be caught in both engines. And even when they are, its not like in the movies where the bird always brings a plane down. Depending on size and entry point, mostly the bird would be turned into slush in 1 second as if nothing happened. But both engines? Something is not right here.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
  • Like
Reactions: zombrex and nush

haxan7

Volunteered as Tribute
May 9, 2016
4,960
8,123
785
Both engines? How does that even happen these days?
I watched a video a month or so ago showing the extensive daily maintenance that the crew at Dulles International has to do every day to keep the grounded planes in flight ready condition for when the lockdowns ended.

Seemed like a really intense job. My guess is the maintenance crews let something slip on the plane that crashed. I remember thinking to myself after watching that vid there’s no way I’m getting back on a plane until air travel was back to normal for a long time.
 
Last edited:

Scotty W

Member
Sep 29, 2019
514
570
320
I watched a video a month or so ago showing the extensive daily maintenance that the crew at Dulles International has to do every day to keep the grounded planes in flight ready condition for when the lockdowns ended.

Seemed like a really intense job. My guess is the maintenance crews let something slip on the plane that crashed. I remember thinking to myself after watching that vid there’s no way I’m getting back on a plane until air travel was back to normal for a long time.
This is probably the reason.
 

MilkLizard

Member
Feb 28, 2011
1,397
58
975
35
www.thecronos.tv
As an ex flight attendant what pisses me off about this news is how the media (local media mostly) are reporting this. They keep mentioning the number 99 or 100. Yes thats PAX but why are you not mentioning extra 10 crew who were on that flight and died as well. They should say 108 or 110 people have died in the crash but for some reason they keep the crew out of the equation which is insulting.

Thaedolus Thaedolus

Actually nush nush pointed out a good question. Most planes today are dual engined. An engine failure can slow down the flight time of the aircraft but can still fly with only one engine to its destination. Having both engines catch fire and failing is unheard off in modern aviation. Unless it was man made mistake as an engineer fucked up big time or malitiously, only other thing I can think off is they ran into a flock of birds but that is so damn rare that birds would be caught in both engines. And even when they are, its not like in the movies where the bird always brings a plane down. Depending on size and entry point, mostly the bird would be turned into slush in 1 second as if nothing happened. But both engines? Something is not right here.
While I agree with you I doubt an Airbus 320 had 10 crew members. More like 5, maybe 6 max. Not that it changes anything...
 

Chittagong

Gold Member
Jun 8, 2004
18,654
2,962
2,075
Yeah unfortunately this is bound to happen in the next year a lot as planes will have been out of service for an unusual amount of time. Just by the sheer number of grounded planes there will be a couple that slip through not properly maintained.

I made the decision to fly private until the end of 2021. 27 flight hours in total.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: jts

Despera

Member
May 22, 2010
11,581
290
895
RIP

Just a few days ago I was in a call with a friend talking about the inevitable surge in the number of plane crashes and accidents once we're able to fly again.
 

jts

...hate me...
Apr 29, 2007
17,371
825
1,450
36
PT
The risks of getting planes back on the air after flight bans get lifted also occurred to me as soon as air travel came to a halt, but honestly, can the flight industry really afford a scare after this already massive crisis? I think if the industry is smart it will double down on check-up and maintenance procedures or it risks not seeing the bottom of this crisis.

This happened in Pakistan, and it’s no less of a tragedy for it, but it is a way more predictable place where safety procedures wouldn’t be as tightly followed due to budget / staff / corruption issues etc. Same for small south american airlines and other cheap companies around the world, in which I wouldn’t risk fly now, and not sure I’d risk fly ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zombrex

Chittagong

Gold Member
Jun 8, 2004
18,654
2,962
2,075
Do you have a private jet?
Nah just a pleb share card, you can prebuy hours. It’s of course much more expensive than business travel but considering how little we travel the overall costs will about even out over the next 18 months
 
  • Like
Reactions: plushyp

Thaedolus

Member
Jun 9, 2004
9,442
2,065
1,700
As an ex flight attendant what pisses me off about this news is how the media (local media mostly) are reporting this. They keep mentioning the number 99 or 100. Yes thats PAX but why are you not mentioning extra 10 crew who were on that flight and died as well. They should say 108 or 110 people have died in the crash but for some reason they keep the crew out of the equation which is insulting.

Thaedolus Thaedolus

Actually nush nush pointed out a good question. Most planes today are dual engined. An engine failure can slow down the flight time of the aircraft but can still fly with only one engine to its destination. Having both engines catch fire and failing is unheard off in modern aviation. Unless it was man made mistake as an engineer fucked up big time or malitiously, only other thing I can think off is they ran into a flock of birds but that is so damn rare that birds would be caught in both engines. And even when they are, its not like in the movies where the bird always brings a plane down. Depending on size and entry point, mostly the bird would be turned into slush in 1 second as if nothing happened. But both engines? Something is not right here.
Right, I know all large Airbus planes have at least two engines...that's why I'm speculating about what could cause both engines to fail plus have landing gear issues. To me that sounds like a different root cause than multiple engine failures. Something other than engine failure happened which then led to landing gear issues, engines catching fire, etc. IMO. It makes me think there must've been some sort of explosion, malicious or not, which could cause multiple systems to fail, or cause a cascade of failures.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: nush

Nankatsu

Formerly 'Kamehameha'
Mar 2, 2020
388
917
430
Damn, my condolences to the families.

I'm definetely not going on a plane any time soon, even after they open the air traffic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: donfonzie
May 4, 2007
4,108
29
1,235
Yeah it's an odd situation to scrap both engines like that, lots of important components on the underside of those CFM56 engines, not surprised it didn't last long in the air after the go around.
 

Jezbollah

Formerly 'DV27'
Jun 14, 2010
11,406
731
940
AV Herald reporting the gear up touchdown.


How the fuck they didnt notice this on pre landing checklist is beyond me. Utterly negligent.