# Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 Accident Animation



## observor 69 (7 Sep 2010)

Excellent animation of the accident, very informative.
Computers versus man?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR6YPFIeemE


----------



## aesop081 (7 Sep 2010)

I'm asking myself :

- What was the cause of the RADALT problem;
- Why were they vectored to the localizer closr to the airport than normal;
- Why the crew did not compare RADALT and BARALT readings ( and deselected automated aproach);
- Why were company procedures not followed in preparation for landing


Yes i know....20/20


----------



## observor 69 (8 Sep 2010)

Interesting report from Dutch Safety Board. I find it different from American accident reports in it's lack of spelling out who was at fault. Rather it describes what the various parties responsibilities are. 
So we get a "Who" but as C A says not the "Why."  

http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/docs/rapporten/Rapport_TA_ENG_web.pdf


----------



## Zoomie (8 Sep 2010)

Sounds like classic complacency associated with automation.  We try and drill it into our ab-initio pilots about the pitfalls associated with flying fully coupled.  I insist that they maintain their scan and actually fly with their hands on the controls.  It is way too easy to sit back and watch George fly - right into the ground in this case.

Short gate ILS' are not uncommon - it is ultimately up to the pilot to tell ATC to give them a better vector if they feel they are too tight.  5.5miles is not too bad - intercepting from above the GP sucks but can be fixed.  Personally, I would not be letting the AP/FD fly a short gate ILS like that - they are just not fast enough IMO.


----------

