It’s crazy to think that people actually survived that. Huge fireball with vertical and forward speed at play, into terrain. People die in car crashes going half that speed every day, with much less of a fireball!
Well made video of this sad accident. Impressed by the calmness of the ATC operators after the Swift has crashed. Instucting those other flights to return to gate and wait.
Yes, but they were previously grieviously at fault for allowing pilot to readback incorrect QNH setting and clearance level without correcting or challenging him. This is gross incompetence on the controller's part.
Also the Air Traffic Controller gave the pilot the WRONG FREQUENCY to contact the Tower. It is 118.205, not 118.05. This is why the pilot was silent on the approach. ATC failed repeatedly.
It's an absolute miracle 3 people survived that crash - ejected? And no one on the ground was injured. Condolences to the loved ones of the crew member who died.
@@dustyflair Just a guess, but they might have meant ejected out of the window on impact sending them away from the fireball? But uhhh yeah idk maybe they did mean like a fighter jet ejection seat, which of course airliners don't have...
I hear pilot read 2300ft 😞 Also pilot said he was not expecting to use ILS and asked for confirmation. There's a similar miscommunication about the radio channel/frequency: they seem to agree on 11805, but that is transcribed as 118.205
shouldnt matter though if they are on the ILS, since the 2500 or 2700 will have a lot of ground clearance. While its only speculations the Pilots might have just decided to fly visual rather than using the ILS and gotten too low on the approach, possibly because they started their approach too low as well. But thats just speculations since they surely would have used the ILS even if they didnt expect it.
Very sad! And very strange. From the snow hill perspective, it looks like it had an extraordinary high angle of attack, even before (obviously) stalling. No word by the crew about any malfunction either, let alone an emergency. I hope investigators can find out the (probably) small factors that led to such a tragedy. May the victim rest in peace.
Stall? That's the only thing that explains the change of vertical trajectory on final... Either that or they disconnected the AP and it was out of trim, and they didn't recover from that properly...
Interesting angle the descend starts 10s before crash, before what most clips show However you can HEAR this (with delay) in this clip: ua-cam.com/video/5MHfeqvaBP0/v-deo.html I may be wrong, but that does sound more like TOGA thrust form about 10s into the clip What was their speed? Was it not too slow? My current theory is they did not engage AT correctly, were slowing down, and reached stall speed. Pushed the stick, set TOGA, but was too little too late, and the ski lift shot suggests they did in fact stall on right wing.
Very sad…It sounds like the ILS approach they got from ATC wasn’t what they were expecting causing confusion and preoccupation. They allowed this to interfere at a critical point in the approach. Job number one, in an approach at minimums, is to land, followed by the published missed approach, if required. It also could have been some unforeseen mechanical issue that developed when they attempted to land from a way too high approach followed by a stall.
Pilot misunderstood the altitude - he clearly repeats 2300 feet, not 2700 feet as ATC control told him. If he put this altitude to autopilot, it could explain why was the plain too low. Let's wait for black boxes to confirm or deny this, but seems plausible, no way he repeats 2700
even if they descended to 2300 instead of 2700 this would not have caused the crash, they would have intercepted the glide slope from below a bit later but they would have been still safely on the ILS for an uneventful landing.
yes i heard it . . its hard to understand .. but sounds like he saying 2 thousand five hundred .. she should have picked it up and repeat .. the talk is not very clear english .. thats an issue i think in the european area ... we'll see from the investigation
No way, that altitude instruction was before the ILS establishment, from video it can be seen that aircraft was on correct ILS glide slope few seconds before crash when it suddenly dived/stalled.
shouldnt matter if they used the ILS, they would have just caught the glideslope later. They might have not have the ILS frequency or didnt set up for it since they said they dont expect it and maybe they decided to just fly visual with VS maybe? some say they might have hit something on the ground, some say stall. Hard to judge.
Second video … left wing stalls(?), plane rolls to the left, left wing strikes ground. Thankfully one pilot survived to aid investigators. R.I.P. to other.
left wing stall in a stabilized approach less than a mile from TD ... ??? It looks to me that at a some point plane starts to descend abruptly like sort of stick pusher activated
B737 instructor here. I still don’t know their pilot’s names but probably I trained them,at any point time. From the second footage,it can be clearly seen that the aircraft is maintaining its correct glide path. WE must take into account that these classic models are old airplanes and its very common that the control surfaces don’t work as brand new therefore pilots must trim accordingly (talking about ailerons and rudder). At the video we can see that the visibility is 10 km or more therefore and since it’s a ILS ,it should be CAT I ,therefore a DH of 200 ft AGL. As i said the aircraft is maintaining the glideslope (probably with AP on) til they reach DH,where it’s compulsory ti turn the AP off,and usually the AT too.What I think is the AP was compensating the sort out of trim of some flying surfaces (by the banking to the left i presume it could be the Rudder trim set some points too the left,usually maybe 2 or 3,since being so old on neutral rudder trim maybe the aircraft was slightly banking to the right). The problem is that as i said the AP was compensating for this rudder trimmed,but the minute they turn the AP off and since the trim was to the left the aircraft banked abruptly to the left (we practice this issue in the simulator because as you guys can see ,may cost your life).But the time the left wing banked maybe 15º to the left the aircraft was already maybe at 100ft off the ground ,descending at usually 750 ft/min with an airspeed of maybe 145 knots which make impossible the recovery at that height (always talking now AGL of course). This happens too when approaching on one engine with (engine failure) the rudder trimmed at a given thrust setting and at 20 feet RA you set back the throttles to idle forgetting about your rudder trim,which causes as touching down to abruptly run off the runway on the side of the dead engine (being practised in the simulator also). This is my hypothesis by watching the video. Now er must wait for the EASA report in order to know what really happened. RIP for the FO,probably one of my ex students.
That's what Lithuanian PM said, she acted similarly during pandemic. Let me translate her newspeak: we are not going to tell you anything at this point.
Freight is not worth a pilots life, those planes should be radio controlled in the future. Hopefully the rudder on a 737 did not block again, like it happend two times in the past, because the plane seemingly rolled to one side.
@@thezironsI didn't. Looks like the landing light on that side splashing light off the side of the fuselage. The light is too steady to be a fire. If it had landing lights in the wing root that would be right where they are. ETA: Older 37's have retractable landing lights in front of the pack bays so that might be what you saw over there as well. Pulling up pictures of the accident aircraft can show if it still had them or a combination of both. Some have only just the one, just depends on the operator and mods done over the lifetime of the aircraft.
Perhaps wrong altimeter settings.. The speed must have been less than 130 knots upon impact Its seem like the altitude was misjudged. Why was he pitching the nose down abruptly when the runway is yet ahead . It also appears as if there was a load shift at final
possibly about to stall and pushed down the nose in panic. They only have a split second between realizing they are about to crash and doing that, easy to make mistakes in a high stress situation like that. Or rather very hard to react perfectly within a few seconds. Of course the mistakes leading to this are the real problem, such a thing shouldnt happend. System or pilot error? we will see.
@@MrSuperGossip Except I've seen multiple Spanish speakers on other channels say he said "Oh Five", not "Two Zero Five" or "Two Oh Five". Don't forget that captions aren't 100% accurate.
ATC says “one one eight two zero five” and plane responds “one one eight zero five,” likely because ATC didn’t say “decimal two zero five” and pilots were expecting a decimal after 118, so their confirmation bias led them to say “zero five” with the “two” being the decimal they expected to hear. It’s possible they were distracted by not being able to get a reply from tower after that, leading to them not maintaining altitude. Just a hunch.
The ‘pilot not flying’ was struggling with the wrong new radio frequency which had been given to him by ATC which he had correctly read back and which the controller did not spot and correct. No fault from the poor pilot.
The sudden loss of lift is key obviously. Perhaps they deployed the spoilers instead of arming them.... something like that. It stalled and crashed on the right wing. That probably cushioned the blow to the crew. Lucky is always better than good.
@@gregzapia Actually if the spoilers were used prior to and after landing configuration it's very possible that they could have stalled. They were very fast as they got late notice of the ILS 19 approach assignment. If they deployed speed brakes to aid in slowing for configuration they could very well have forgotten to stow them fully (and then arm them if using autospoilers).
@@StevieWonder737 why would they be fast because of the late ILS? They maybe expected a different approach, but they were coming in to land either way. And you wouldnt have the spoilers deployed on landing, if you work through the approach checklist, where you would obviously have to arm the spoilers.
@@LunnarisLP Distracted by having to setup the ILS19 and being behind the curve on getting slowed down. And they might have been fast regardless of the approach assignment. But whatever the reason, they were fast and unprepared for the rapid change in approach assignment. You don't arm the spoilers until the landing check, not the approach check.
Of course it is way too early to say anything substantial on the cause of this accident as the investigation is ongoing, but by the looks of it it could've been a stall event with subsequent loss of lift as the aircraft turned to its side just before impact. My very uneducated guess would be a wrong flap setting combined with speed lowered for final approach and therefore dropping below the speed needed to sustain the approach with the flaps set. Another one could be a microburst but it doesn't look particularly favorable for such a weather phenomenon in this case.
I suspect this too. It seems to me that the aircraft was not fully configured for landing, adding a higher than normal rate of descent, as a result of a reduced IAS, which, during the Terrain Escape Maneuver, could have resulted in a stall. For what my opinion is worth, let's wait for the results of the survey.
I’m getting the impression that this controller speaks clearance, but not English. I’m also wondering if they were distracted enough by the confusion about the ILS that they didn’t notice that airspeed hold was either off, or had been adjusted down to too low of a speed.
Looks to either it was a cargo shift issue on final approach, or perhaps a flight control issue. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that there was improperly loaded cargo that shifted during decent and deceleration on final. Especially if it was a significantly heavy load that was improperly secured.
@@JoeSmith-ig3pr TRs are not prone to being engaged so easily. There are proximity sensors on the nose gear that senses the plane has landed in order for TRs to be engaged
My speculations: They catched the wrong glidslope radial, it sounds Like the readback 2100ft instead 2700ft. The approach path also looked very low. Thats why its so important to catch the G/S (glideslope) at the FAF (Final approach fix) and Check height and distance on your charts. 1. The hit a powerline or something similiar 2. stall of the left wing and rolled left side The night and bright light brings difficulty visual/illusion effect, that you didn‘t that you Are to low, also it was very early at morning. My condolences to there families!😔
doesnt matter, once you hit approach it will only be armed and then follow the glideslope as you enter it. Plane would have just stayed on 2100ft longer without decending. You dont just randomly stall because you enter the glideslop a few hundred ft lower.
Yes, it seems to be a stall. They had a very high AOA (2:23), possibly due to ice and reduced situational awareness, then sudden stick push by the pilot as he realized the stall, but it was too late. STALL -> wing drop -> crash. On a side note: Night flying reduces the pilots capability to a level as if they had 2 beers. Our bodies are not made for night shifts. That's why I left this job years ago.
Something important must’ve failed, how do you not look out the window with at least 15 or 20 seconds left and see the ground coming up way too soon and not correct?
I mean they are about to land, also on approach you usually are pitched upwards to allow for lower landing speeds, thus making it harder to look out and judge things + its dark lol.
@ , true, but they were below clouds a good three or 4 miles before the runway at least. I could see if you were landing in heavy fog and had literally no time to react. It almost reminds me of that flight that shorted the runway in San Francisco.
Looks to me that the pilot flying (PF) lost control when he disconnected the autopilot, which would happen at around that point. Perhaps, there was an unnoticed malfunction of the anti-ice system, the 737 had a good layer of ice all over, the autopilot was correcting and retiming, and when it got manually disconnected, the trim was so far off that the pilot was completely caught off guard (flying low and slow), and did not have time to react. 737s simply do NOT go down like that...
the tower frequency is 118.205, controller transmission was correct ,pilot read back was 118.050, also not ok was the fact that QNH was 1020 the pilot read back 1019, they where instructed to descend to 2700 (platform interception altitude for ILS19Z ) the read back from the pilot ...2500ft. Plus all the unnecessary confirmations from the pilot side, like where to start the approach from and if cleared or not for ILS etc to much non standard phraseology ... it makes me think that the pilot on the radio was the FO and not a very experienced one.
@@_Amy-Ro_ I live here in Lithuania, I listen to the tower on 118.200. 🤔 (Yaesu Ft-60) The british Sun video has a clearer sound, meaning TWO zero five from ATC. The pilot reports 118.05.
2:26 The plane just befor the crash is lifting its tail like crazy?? What is this? This doesn't look like a normal flight maneuver. If they tried to go around the NOSE should lift not the tail.
Good video. It looks like he couldn't see where he was going. It didn't look like a failure of the aircraft, he changed course into the ground after asking about ILS? Is it a case of garbage ILS giving misleading signal? and he never looked out the window. Could there be icing and he was flying blind?
Something sudden happened and they lost control.As you saw, it was very close to the ground, so almost no time to react.There could be many causes, which I cannot write here because it would be too long, and it would be just speculation at this time.The windows are heated, so the ice would melt.Unless the aircraft was dispatched with window heat inoperative,and that would be illegal, because icing conditions were expected at VNO.Could be the case that, for example, the window heat got inoperative during flight, and in the that case they would have to go elsewhere, where there were no icing conditions.Anyway, many possible causes at this time.Cheers
The subtitles do not represent the real conversation. Also the female ATC controller sounded like'' can't be bothered to talk with you'' . just an opinion
VRF conditions and runway 19 is Cat I only so no idea what went wrong. Sure, Russia and Lithuania are both playing games with jamming radio signals, but everyone knows this so it makes no sense. The controller not being able to speak English clearly isn't helpful. Every Lithuanian under 40 speaks perfect English for the most part.
That's the disadvantage of flying cargo planes. Because you only fly to certain airports very seldom, the chances of errors are higher. Unlike scheduled regular flights for passenger routes, pilots are more proficient because they fly to such airports multiple times, including flights with experienced captains and jump seat trainers.
if the spoilers were used prior to and then after landing configuration it's very possible that they could have stalled. They were very fast as they got late notice of the ILS 19 approach assignment. If they deployed speed brakes to aid in slowing for configuration they could very well have forgotten to stow them fully (and then arm them if using autospoilers).
It seems like the olane was flying normally and then pitchs down about 5 degrees or more, that increase the rate of decent, and when the pilots try to pull up, they stall and crash, maybe a windshare? But if it was a Boeing....
Isn’t there a phenomenon where if you’re on final approach at night in a dark forested area you’ll get the perception that you’re too high and naturally try to descend rapidly until you end up in the trees.
@@germanpoweractivated this makes more sense. About your other point, so much shit happens around the world it’s better to become desensitised to what doesn’t directly affect you. If every bad thing around the world caused you to be so sad then you’ll be a depressed wreck. Unless of course there was a personal connection like you here
@@rkan2 In Europe, they don't like visuals, as they charge fees for each approach. But looking out the window in perfectly VFR conditions is not illegal.... From where they changed the approach angle from being on the 3 deg glideslope to the crash site, the runway environment was in full view: Time to ask for "kill the rabbits".
The controller gave qnh 1020. Pilot reads back qnh 1019. That is a small air pressure difference. Is it enough to cause their altitude to be too low? Any REAL pilots in here who know the answer?
I heard that they published a Notam after the event saying that the ILS was being calibrated! I think they followed a faulty ILS signal into the ground
Looking at the video as far as I can tell he was in VMC at the time. You would think that they had the runway in site at that point. Looking forward to the full report one of these days.
@@cpzmelbs Was delivered to QANTAS on 31/10/1993 then stored in AUG. 2011. Was supposed to be picked up by a Cambodian airline named Wat Phnom Airlines in 2014, but did not happen so DHL got it in 2015
@@donmoore7785 Not always... could be a stall, an out of trim plane when the auto pilot gets selcted off, assynetric slats and or flaps, hydrauilc systems loss...
Всегда с запасом заправляют на случай нештатного перенаправления в другой аэропорт или ожидания на посадку - тогда самлики просто накручивают круги на аэропортом, пока очередь не дойдет. В этом случае тоже перенаправили самолёт, направлявшийся также на посадку в Вильнюсе, перенаправили в соседнюю Ригу.
Самолеты не садятся с пустыми баками. Всегда есть запас для ухода на запасной, полета в зоне ожидания и так далее. Там керосина часа на полтора полета должно было быть, это херово туча килограммов топлива которое тут и горит
Adding those lines to indicate the descent path of the aircraft was brilliant!
Was it really the descent path? Is it possible that was an optical illusion?
The plane had its very bright landing lights on and was clearly visible
@@mikero6225 yes it was, compare ADSB data for reference
Is that TacView he is using for the flight path?
It’s crazy to think that people actually survived that. Huge fireball with vertical and forward speed at play, into terrain. People die in car crashes going half that speed every day, with much less of a fireball!
500 mph vs 60/ 70 mph
@@tommas2674Huh? 150kts is like 170mph
@@rigormoritz you are blind if you didnt see a fireball
@@rigormoritz I urge you to rewatch the footage.
The nose ripped off and probably landed luckily in a way that didn't cause too much devastating damage
outstanding overlays to represent the flightpath
Shocking. Very sad to hear such a terrible plane crash.
seems that hes flyin lower than the correct altitude and the wing hits cable or smthin and roll till it crashed … RIP … :(
yes power lines maybe . i seen it
Well made video of this sad accident.
Impressed by the calmness of the ATC operators after the Swift has crashed. Instucting those other flights to return to gate and wait.
Yes, but they were previously grieviously at fault for allowing pilot to readback incorrect QNH setting and clearance level without correcting or challenging him. This is gross incompetence on the controller's part.
Also the Air Traffic Controller gave the pilot the WRONG FREQUENCY to contact the Tower. It is 118.205, not 118.05. This is why the pilot was silent on the approach. ATC failed repeatedly.
Very nice presentation, and so quick! RIP to the dead, condolences to the injured!
how anyone survived that fireball is beyond comprehension
Plane took all impact energy, Cabin broke off with pilots inside.. No fire in cabin after crash
It's an absolute miracle 3 people survived that crash - ejected? And no one on the ground was injured. Condolences to the loved ones of the crew member who died.
cockpit apparently separated from the rest of the plane where the fire was
the people climbed out of the aircraft themselves
1 dead, 4 hospitalized - 2 of them in intensive care and 1 of those in intensive is in critical condition.
ejected? wtf are talking about?
@@dustyflair Just a guess, but they might have meant ejected out of the window on impact sending them away from the fireball? But uhhh yeah idk maybe they did mean like a fighter jet ejection seat, which of course airliners don't have...
She also said 2700ft and read back was 2500ft from 18D
I hear pilot read 2300ft 😞
Also pilot said he was not expecting to use ILS and asked for confirmation.
There's a similar miscommunication about the radio channel/frequency: they seem to agree on 11805, but that is transcribed as 118.205
shouldnt matter though if they are on the ILS, since the 2500 or 2700 will have a lot of ground clearance.
While its only speculations the Pilots might have just decided to fly visual rather than using the ILS and gotten too low on the approach, possibly because they started their approach too low as well. But thats just speculations since they surely would have used the ILS even if they didnt expect it.
@@mm1979dk These are transcription errors, 2500 is given by the pilot, frequency is given as 118.05.
Very sad! And very strange. From the snow hill perspective, it looks like it had an extraordinary high angle of attack, even before (obviously) stalling. No word by the crew about any malfunction either, let alone an emergency. I hope investigators can find out the (probably) small factors that led to such a tragedy. May the victim rest in peace.
You know those symptoms, on climb-out. But does something fall away as well? 2:25. Possibly an engine?
@@JelMain The light you see on the bottom is a lense flare from the landing gear light. Nothing fell off of the aircraft prior to the crash
@@deekamikaze Thanks, it does roll. though.
you can not estimate their AoA from that video footage. If you're using the deck angle that's irrespective to AoA.
@@JelMain possible an engine? What are you talking about.
Big question… on an ILS established (we think) approach, why is the aircraft not stable to the Rwy?
they never reported established
The plane seemed to roll before plunging into the ground.
Yeah I saw it too.
Probable cause might be stalling.
Wing over stall?
I am from Vilnius. How on earth they survived this???? Have You ever seen a crash like this with at least one survivor?
Stall? That's the only thing that explains the change of vertical trajectory on final... Either that or they disconnected the AP and it was out of trim, and they didn't recover from that properly...
Stupid.
I think they stalled on final
Maybe cuz of too much workload of switching frequencies and other things.
possible they had to enter the ils last second, but thats what you got 2 pilots for. It shouldnt be hard to do.
Interesting angle
the descend starts 10s before crash, before what most clips show
However you can HEAR this (with delay) in this clip: ua-cam.com/video/5MHfeqvaBP0/v-deo.html
I may be wrong, but that does sound more like TOGA thrust form about 10s into the clip
What was their speed? Was it not too slow?
My current theory is they did not engage AT correctly, were slowing down, and reached stall speed. Pushed the stick, set TOGA, but was too little too late, and the ski lift shot suggests they did in fact stall on right wing.
speed was above usuall.
seems left wing lost lift
I can’t believe anyone survived this.
Very sad…It sounds like the ILS approach they got from ATC wasn’t what they were expecting causing confusion and preoccupation. They allowed this to interfere at a critical point in the approach. Job number one, in an approach at minimums, is to land, followed by the published missed approach, if required. It also could have been some unforeseen mechanical issue that developed when they attempted to land from a way too high approach followed by a stall.
THIS IS VFR CONDITIONS! Never reported established.... Wrong tower frequency communicated..... Why not come back to approach if nobody on "tower"?
Pilot misunderstood the altitude - he clearly repeats 2300 feet, not 2700 feet as ATC control told him. If he put this altitude to autopilot, it could explain why was the plain too low. Let's wait for black boxes to confirm or deny this, but seems plausible, no way he repeats 2700
even if they descended to 2300 instead of 2700 this would not have caused the crash, they would have intercepted the glide slope from below a bit later but they would have been still safely on the ILS for an uneventful landing.
1:04 I heard "two thousand twenty hundred feet". But same opinion, with ILS it shouldn't be much of a problem right?
yes i heard it . . its hard to understand .. but sounds like he saying 2 thousand five hundred .. she should have picked it up and repeat .. the talk is not very clear english .. thats an issue i think in the european area ... we'll see from the investigation
No way, that altitude instruction was before the ILS establishment, from video it can be seen that aircraft was on correct ILS glide slope few seconds before crash when it suddenly dived/stalled.
shouldnt matter if they used the ILS, they would have just caught the glideslope later. They might have not have the ILS frequency or didnt set up for it since they said they dont expect it and maybe they decided to just fly visual with VS maybe? some say they might have hit something on the ground, some say stall. Hard to judge.
when its stall, the recorders will pick up and several message ( signals ) in cockpit too
bud she is rolling when going down... tragic!!
What the hell? Was it wind sheer? In that one angle it looks like the tail of the airplane was thrown straight up into the sky.
Second video … left wing stalls(?), plane rolls to the left, left wing strikes ground. Thankfully one pilot survived to aid investigators. R.I.P. to other.
3 of 4 survived.
left wing stall in a stabilized approach less than a mile from TD ... ??? It looks to me that at a some point plane starts to descend abruptly like sort of stick pusher activated
I think last moment he was trying to avoid the house on the right
@@davereaville4927 ..I know, I said "sort of"
B737 instructor here. I still don’t know their pilot’s names but probably I trained them,at any point time. From the second footage,it can be clearly seen that the aircraft is maintaining its correct glide path. WE must take into account that these classic models are old airplanes and its very common that the control surfaces don’t work as brand new therefore pilots must trim accordingly (talking about ailerons and rudder). At the video we can see that the visibility is 10 km or more therefore and since it’s a ILS ,it should be CAT I ,therefore a DH of 200 ft AGL. As i said the aircraft is maintaining the glideslope (probably with AP on) til they reach DH,where it’s compulsory ti turn the AP off,and usually the AT too.What I think is the AP was compensating the sort out of trim of some flying surfaces (by the banking to the left i presume it could be the Rudder trim set some points too the left,usually maybe 2 or 3,since being so old on neutral rudder trim maybe the aircraft was slightly banking to the right). The problem is that as i said the AP was compensating for this rudder trimmed,but the minute they turn the AP off and since the trim was to the left the aircraft banked abruptly to the left (we practice this issue in the simulator because as you guys can see ,may cost your life).But the time the left wing banked maybe 15º to the left the aircraft was already maybe at 100ft off the ground ,descending at usually 750 ft/min with an airspeed of maybe 145 knots which make impossible the recovery at that height (always talking now AGL of course). This happens too when approaching on one engine with (engine failure) the rudder trimmed at a given thrust setting and at 20 feet RA you set back the throttles to idle forgetting about your rudder trim,which causes as touching down to abruptly run off the runway on the side of the dead engine (being practised in the simulator also). This is my hypothesis by watching the video. Now er must wait for the EASA report in order to know what really happened. RIP for the FO,probably one of my ex students.
Frequency is on 118.205 not 118.05
Частота башни 118.20
I love the comments saying : " let s not make assumptions it s too early to know what went wrong but the probable cause of the accident is …"
*GRAVITY*
That's what Lithuanian PM said, she acted similarly during pandemic.
Let me translate her newspeak: we are not going to tell you anything at this point.
@mm1979dk What are you on? We get the black box plus recordings and we will know the cause. Thats the only sane thing to do.
@@OrbitalCookie yes yes, blackbox, see you next year.
Perfect on slope but suddenly a lot more pitch. Does someone push the steering suddenly fast to ground?? FDR will tell us the truth. RIP Pilot.
Freight is not worth a pilots life, those planes should be radio controlled in the future.
Hopefully the rudder on a 737 did not block again, like it happend two times in the past, because the plane seemingly rolled to one side.
"RaDiO cOnToLLeD" yeah ooookay buddy.
I saw a wing stall.
it really pitched in towards the end of flight... 😮 02:25
Yep, Saw Left wing Stall..
It looks like the left wing/fuselage area is on fire?
Me also.
@@thezironsI didn't. Looks like the landing light on that side splashing light off the side of the fuselage. The light is too steady to be a fire. If it had landing lights in the wing root that would be right where they are.
ETA: Older 37's have retractable landing lights in front of the pack bays so that might be what you saw over there as well. Pulling up pictures of the accident aircraft can show if it still had them or a combination of both. Some have only just the one, just depends on the operator and mods done over the lifetime of the aircraft.
GPS?
Very bad stall on final? What was that.
lack of airflow below wings I think
@@rodleon4341Bro that's what an aircraft stall is
Sum Ting Wong - Wi Tu Lo - Ho Lee Fuk
Call sign is “Postman” not “Swift”.
Swift was doing DHL cargo runs. Swift owns the aircraft.
But callsign is Postman.
@ yes. DHL was wet leasing the aircraft. The captioning in this video was confusing as “Postman” appears to be cutoff several times.
Indeed, it was Postman. The text titles here are not correct. Anyway, that does not change anything with the tragedy.
Do they know the reason why it came down?
Neither the pilot nor ATC sounded confident of anything they were doing on the radio.
The text showing what should've been said instead of what was being said is a bit meh.
Perhaps wrong altimeter settings.. The speed must have been less than 130 knots upon impact Its seem like the altitude was misjudged. Why was he pitching the nose down abruptly when the runway is yet ahead . It also appears as if there was a load shift at final
possibly about to stall and pushed down the nose in panic. They only have a split second between realizing they are about to crash and doing that, easy to make mistakes in a high stress situation like that. Or rather very hard to react perfectly within a few seconds. Of course the mistakes leading to this are the real problem, such a thing shouldnt happend. System or pilot error? we will see.
He doesn't say 118.205, he says 118.05...
As does the ATC.
does not make difference, despite he says .205 with spanish accent. it is radio frequency.
@@MrSuperGossip Except I've seen multiple Spanish speakers on other channels say he said "Oh Five", not "Two Zero Five" or "Two Oh Five". Don't forget that captions aren't 100% accurate.
ATC says “one one eight two zero five” and plane responds “one one eight zero five,” likely because ATC didn’t say “decimal two zero five” and pilots were expecting a decimal after 118, so their confirmation bias led them to say “zero five” with the “two” being the decimal they expected to hear. It’s possible they were distracted by not being able to get a reply from tower after that, leading to them not maintaining altitude. Just a hunch.
The ‘pilot not flying’ was struggling with the wrong new radio frequency which had been given to him by ATC which he had correctly read back and which the controller did not spot and correct. No fault from the poor pilot.
The sudden loss of lift is key obviously. Perhaps they deployed the spoilers instead of arming them.... something like that. It stalled and crashed on the right wing. That probably cushioned the blow to the crew. Lucky is always better than good.
why not, but unlinkely on the boeing, you can't mix arm with deploy, the lever goes in opposite way.
@@gregzapia Actually if the spoilers were used prior to and after landing configuration it's very possible that they could have stalled. They were very fast as they got late notice of the ILS 19 approach assignment. If they deployed speed brakes to aid in slowing for configuration they could very well have forgotten to stow them fully (and then arm them if using autospoilers).
@@gregzapia You answered your own question.
@@StevieWonder737 why would they be fast because of the late ILS? They maybe expected a different approach, but they were coming in to land either way. And you wouldnt have the spoilers deployed on landing, if you work through the approach checklist, where you would obviously have to arm the spoilers.
@@LunnarisLP Distracted by having to setup the ILS19 and being behind the curve on getting slowed down. And they might have been fast regardless of the approach assignment. But whatever the reason, they were fast and unprepared for the rapid change in approach assignment.
You don't arm the spoilers until the landing check, not the approach check.
Of course it is way too early to say anything substantial on the cause of this accident as the investigation is ongoing, but by the looks of it it could've been a stall event with subsequent loss of lift as the aircraft turned to its side just before impact. My very uneducated guess would be a wrong flap setting combined with speed lowered for final approach and therefore dropping below the speed needed to sustain the approach with the flaps set. Another one could be a microburst but it doesn't look particularly favorable for such a weather phenomenon in this case.
way too uneducated guess...
I suspect this too. It seems to me that the aircraft was not fully configured for landing, adding a higher than normal rate of descent, as a result of a reduced IAS, which, during the Terrain Escape Maneuver, could have resulted in a stall. For what my opinion is worth, let's wait for the results of the survey.
I’m getting the impression that this controller speaks clearance, but not English. I’m also wondering if they were distracted enough by the confusion about the ILS that they didn’t notice that airspeed hold was either off, or had been adjusted down to too low of a speed.
Did someone have the wrong runway elevation set?
Looks to either it was a cargo shift issue on final approach, or perhaps a flight control issue. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that there was improperly loaded cargo that shifted during decent and deceleration on final. Especially if it was a significantly heavy load that was improperly secured.
Thrust reverser?
Great guess. I was curious why the plane suddenly experienced such a steep nose down attitude.
@@JoeSmith-ig3pr TRs are not prone to being engaged so easily. There are proximity sensors on the nose gear that senses the plane has landed in order for TRs to be engaged
@@lagonzalez81 I'm a jet mechanic for jumbo jets and well versed in potential dangers of cargo loading. It is an educated guess :D
@@JoeSmith-ig3pr TR cant deploy in air.
My speculations:
They catched the wrong glidslope radial, it sounds Like the readback 2100ft instead 2700ft.
The approach path also looked very low.
Thats why its so important to catch the G/S (glideslope) at the FAF (Final approach fix) and Check height and distance on your charts.
1. The hit a powerline or something similiar 2. stall of the left wing and rolled left side
The night and bright light brings difficulty visual/illusion effect, that you didn‘t that you Are to low, also it was very early at morning.
My condolences to there families!😔
doesnt matter, once you hit approach it will only be armed and then follow the glideslope as you enter it. Plane would have just stayed on 2100ft longer without decending.
You dont just randomly stall because you enter the glideslop a few hundred ft lower.
@@LunnarisLP that’s not 100% correct, in 98-99%, but in some cases it didn’t. I‘m flying. I can send you a proof. Its not the first time this happend.
Yes, it seems to be a stall. They had a very high AOA (2:23), possibly due to ice and reduced situational awareness, then sudden stick push by the pilot as he realized the stall, but it was too late. STALL -> wing drop -> crash. On a side note: Night flying reduces the pilots capability to a level as if they had 2 beers. Our bodies are not made for night shifts. That's why I left this job years ago.
Moronic.
Something important must’ve failed, how do you not look out the window with at least 15 or 20 seconds left and see the ground coming up way too soon and not correct?
He was flying ILS. Not really much time to look away from the instrument panel when landing ILS
@ , looked like he was below any weather , you have to glance outside at some point if you can see the ground.
I mean they are about to land, also on approach you usually are pitched upwards to allow for lower landing speeds, thus making it harder to look out and judge things + its dark lol.
@ , true, but they were below clouds a good three or 4 miles before the runway at least. I could see if you were landing in heavy fog and had literally no time to react. It almost reminds me of that flight that shorted the runway in San Francisco.
Not all countries require 1500 hrs to fly a 737… some places go from flying a Cessna… to 737
The Russians did it
Looks to me that the pilot flying (PF) lost control when he disconnected the autopilot, which would happen at around that point. Perhaps, there was an unnoticed malfunction of the anti-ice system, the 737 had a good layer of ice all over, the autopilot was correcting and retiming, and when it got manually disconnected, the trim was so far off that the pilot was completely caught off guard (flying low and slow), and did not have time to react. 737s simply do NOT go down like that...
Finally there’s the clip that dad showed me 2:23
1:20 118.05, but the tower is on 118.200?! 🤔
the tower frequency is 118.205, controller transmission was correct ,pilot read back was 118.050, also not ok was the fact that QNH was 1020 the pilot read back 1019, they where instructed to descend to 2700 (platform interception altitude for ILS19Z ) the read back from the pilot ...2500ft. Plus all the unnecessary confirmations from the pilot side, like where to start the approach from and if cleared or not for ILS etc to much non standard phraseology ... it makes me think that the pilot on the radio was the FO and not a very experienced one.
@@_Amy-Ro_ I live here in Lithuania, I listen to the tower on 118.200. 🤔 (Yaesu Ft-60) The british Sun video has a clearer sound, meaning TWO zero five from ATC. The pilot reports 118.05.
2:26 The plane just befor the crash is lifting its tail like crazy?? What is this? This doesn't look like a normal flight maneuver. If they tried to go around the NOSE should lift not the tail.
His read back was 2500 not 2700 wow how was that not picked shocking failure on both ends
Prayers for the families
Good video. It looks like he couldn't see where he was going. It didn't look like a failure of the aircraft, he changed course into the ground after asking about ILS?
Is it a case of garbage ILS giving misleading signal? and he never looked out the window. Could there be icing and he was flying blind?
Something sudden happened and they lost control.As you saw, it was very close to the ground, so almost no time to react.There could be many causes, which I cannot write here because it would be too long, and it would be just speculation at this time.The windows are heated, so the ice would melt.Unless the aircraft was dispatched with window heat inoperative,and that would be illegal, because icing conditions were expected at VNO.Could be the case that, for example, the window heat got inoperative during flight, and in the that case they would have to go elsewhere, where there were no icing conditions.Anyway, many possible causes at this time.Cheers
ILS says 2700ft, but at 1:04 pilot confirms with 2300ft ?!
at 1:22 they say 11805, but transcript shows 118.205 ?
Looks like a sudden bank to left, may have been rudder stuck or wind
Readback at 1:04 seems to be 2300 instead of 2700.
clearly 2700. wash your ears.
I hear 2500
It has been pretty much confirmed to be 2700 even though it sounds like 2300-2500
It is irrevelant to this accident as it was on very final approach
He would have been flying ILS at that point?
I dont really understand how most of the crew survived. RIP to the one person who lost their life.
That was my thought... That he dropped below the glideslope.
unfortunately there was a loss of lift, we see that the left wing suddenly leans directly downwards. yet we see that the plane arrives at a high speed
The subtitles do not represent the real conversation. Also the female ATC controller sounded like'' can't be bothered to talk with you'' . just an opinion
Very sad for all those who died, may they Rest in Peace.
VRF conditions and runway 19 is Cat I only so no idea what went wrong. Sure, Russia and Lithuania are both playing games with jamming radio signals, but everyone knows this so it makes no sense. The controller not being able to speak English clearly isn't helpful. Every Lithuanian under 40 speaks perfect English for the most part.
That's the disadvantage of flying cargo planes. Because you only fly to certain airports very seldom, the chances of errors are higher. Unlike scheduled regular flights for passenger routes, pilots are more proficient because they fly to such airports multiple times, including flights with experienced captains and jump seat trainers.
if the spoilers were used prior to and then after landing configuration it's very possible that they could have stalled. They were very fast as they got late notice of the ILS 19 approach assignment. If they deployed speed brakes to aid in slowing for configuration they could very well have forgotten to stow them fully (and then arm them if using autospoilers).
It seems like the olane was flying normally and then pitchs down about 5 degrees or more, that increase the rate of decent, and when the pilots try to pull up, they stall and crash, maybe a windshare? But if it was a Boeing....
Isn’t there a phenomenon where if you’re on final approach at night in a dark forested area you’ll get the perception that you’re too high and naturally try to descend rapidly until you end up in the trees.
I'm so fucking sad
Why
@jamie123b people died.. and your question is. Why am I sad? WTF dude
@@jamie123b also I had to work with them a couple of years ago. So I know them and I know the aircraft. So
@@germanpoweractivated how are they doing right now?
@@germanpoweractivated this makes more sense. About your other point, so much shit happens around the world it’s better to become desensitised to what doesn’t directly affect you. If every bad thing around the world caused you to be so sad then you’ll be a depressed wreck. Unless of course there was a personal connection like you here
Could it be such that the pilots simply misinterpreted the motorway as their runway?
Highly unlikely
visibilty seems to have been good. were they flying with their eyes closed?
Easy to say without knowing the real reason, why this happened.
@@MalconMarlin its easy to say because the videos shows visibility to be good.
@@Chris_L034 bro, you are retarded or troll ?
1:05 - espanjalainen mieslentäjä vastaa "oukei tuutausentthriihändnröd" eli numeroina 2300.
The pilot read back QNH wrong at the first communication and ATC didn’t correct him
ATC 1020
Pilot 1019
Transcription of communications in the video is TOTALLY wrong. If you have to share video like this be respectful, smart.. or don’t do nothing!!
i’m hearing pilot saying “2 thousand twenty” even if it’s the 50th time Im listening to this
2:16
huge pitch forward
Looked like a wing over stall to me, maybe didnt maintain enough airspeed
Sorry, I will never understand how anyone survived that. Not sure I even believe it.
Swift 😱 They can't even drive trucks, who gave them planes?
At last minute right wing drops fast, then cartwheels into ground .. :(((
Very good images. VFR weather, hand fly a visual.... Over-reliance on automation.....
VFR weather? 😂 So why not on a visual approach then?? Lol
@@rkan2 In Europe, they don't like visuals, as they charge fees for each approach. But looking out the window in perfectly VFR conditions is not illegal.... From where they changed the approach angle from being on the 3 deg glideslope to the crash site, the runway environment was in full view: Time to ask for "kill the rabbits".
The controller gave qnh 1020. Pilot reads back qnh 1019. That is a small air pressure difference. Is it enough to cause their altitude to be too low? Any REAL pilots in here who know the answer?
Také jsem to sledoval na Flightradar 24😢😢😢
Maybe he forgot to calibrate the altimeter.
Russia has been interfering with the ILS frequencies in the Baltic States for a long time.
😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
😂
Troll go back to sleep
jesus christ the second cctv footage was horrifying
Jesus is Lord not a swear
My God cheeses at least without screams... 🙈it is not terrible it is SCARY too much🙈 rip this Pilots❤
Maybe a stall low speed
what the...??
I heard that they published a Notam after the event saying that the ILS was being calibrated! I think they followed a faulty ILS signal into the ground
Sounds very likely, although unless on full auto-land, I would think the pilot would be hand-flying at that stage.
Looking at the video as far as I can tell he was in VMC at the time. You would think that they had the runway in site at that point. Looking forward to the full report one of these days.
and he could not see the approach indicators at .8NM from
the threshold???
@@selftrue670 not possible to do an autoland in r19, is cat I only.
@@DubFreakuencies I was pretty sure that is the case.
bizarre!!!
Unrealiable glide slope at the worst time.
Descent below glideslope and hit an obstacle, IMHO
pilot says 2300???
🙏
That used to be Qantas plane
Interesting little fact neighbour
Do you know what date it left Qantas?
@@cpzmelbs Was delivered to QANTAS on 31/10/1993 then stored in AUG. 2011.
Was supposed to be picked up by a Cambodian airline named Wat Phnom Airlines in 2014, but did not happen so DHL got it in 2015
Possibly a windshear, but who knows for sure.
seems alot like a stall
For some reason, someone flew it directly, abruptly, into the ground.
It stalled. Very clear in the video.
It is too soon to make such a judgment.
Please don't comment on something you fail to understand. An abrupt drop and roll like that is a wing stall.
@@donmoore7785 Not always... could be a stall, an out of trim plane when the auto pilot gets selcted off, assynetric slats and or flaps, hydrauilc systems loss...
@@saito125 it did not stall
R.I.P
Что взорвалось при ударе ? Он что ,не планировал заправку в Вильнюсе ? Или это груз взорвался ?😮
the fuel. what else?
Всегда с запасом заправляют на случай нештатного перенаправления в другой аэропорт или ожидания на посадку - тогда самлики просто накручивают круги на аэропортом, пока очередь не дойдет. В этом случае тоже перенаправили самолёт, направлявшийся также на посадку в Вильнюсе, перенаправили в соседнюю Ригу.
Самолеты не садятся с пустыми баками. Всегда есть запас для ухода на запасной, полета в зоне ожидания и так далее. Там керосина часа на полтора полета должно было быть, это херово туча килограммов топлива которое тут и горит
On vet ne na asfalt aeroporta sel. A na doma upal.
Terrible 😢
If you watch really carefully and closely, you can see Putin with his remote control.
😮😢