How terrible that the flight attendant died. They almost saved everybody. That must really hurt when you lose even one person. The captain did an excellent job ditching the plane. That is hard to do without losing more people. The only other person I know who was able to successfully ditch was Sully. Thankfully, he managed to save everybody.
@@scqvenger sully did a great job, made the right split second decision, but saving everyone was because he had a lot of help... an amazing story and Sully is an amazing guy....
Sully was aided by the fly by wire systems on the Airbus when he ditched in the Hudson. These guys didn’t have that capability on their plane at all and they still saved their passengers. RIP to that flight attendant.
The bit they didnt tell you about the death of the flight attendent There was severe damage to the submerged aircraft belly, especially near the tail, leading to the inference that it landed nose high with tail impacting the shallow river bed, which ripped away the cabin floor together with the two flight attendants seated there. Both were found with severe injuries in the river behind the aircraft, and one did not survive.
I wonder why he chose to exclude this information from the video. The video is only 11 minutes long. And it certainly is an interesting if salacious fact.
@@timf2279All but one person survived from a landing in a shallow river. It could have been tremendously worse. Other pilots have tried to ditch the plane in water and killed everyone on board. So yes, they did a good job. RIP to the flight attendant.
I'm still marveling at the sheer luck of the 'plabe landing in the river where it was only 1.5m deep...🤯 Great job TFC explaining and graphically describing the precipitation maps. 👏🏻
The ditch sequence was well presented. I think this could have been a Sully scenario if the river was not so shallow (2 foot in most places). Sully had 18 ft+ depth so low risk of dragging the bottom. Very sorry about the flight attendant.
I think this crew did the best they could given the circumstances, crappy old aircraft improperly serviced I can understand them trying a bit soon for the restart in high stress situations like this time plays some nasty tricks. An additional NTSB recommendation to have an audible timer associated with emergency restarts would be a thought.
@@AndrasMihalyi That's correct, but I think the pilots were mostly distracted by the weather, and the flameouts from the get go....sadly I think they were a bit panicked..
@@watershed44 that's why QRHs exist. Quick reference handbook Boeing 737 "Loss Of Thrust On Both Engines" Point 7: "Do not wait for successful engine start(s) before starting the APU." They should have read it.
RIP to the attendant. It’s interesting to note that up until 2002 some pilots would remain at engines flight idle when flying into storms, tombstone policy I guess. Also I like this intro to all of the flight channel videos the best.
If you want to cover an incident that is not at all on the scale of what is usually covered on this channel, in my city, Perth Western Australia, a student pilot in a Cessna called in a mayday because his instructor lost conciousness. I don't think he'd flown before, plenty of sim time though. The tower at Jandakot managed to talk him down to a safe landing. Not big in scale, but still kind of cool.
It's amazing only one died. This had both pilot error and mechanical failure. Low battery. But poor training in what to do when this happened. Great landing and one lost soul. RIP Thank you for another great presentation.
Something important to remember is: Whether the outcome is Tragic or Miraculous. EVERY incident results in meticulous Investigations whereby More Knowledge of Air Safety is gained.
@@timf2279 The storm might have had something to do with it. It's also kind of BS on the recommendation to increase power level into hail storms, that made no difference in the Alabama crash. Putting this on the pilots when the radar technology was itself faulty and outdated and the battery gave them no chance to restart the engines means this is more the fault of outdated or poor engineering from Boeing as usual trying to push things off onto pilots.
@@DarkFilmDirector they should have started the APU first. Then the bad battery wouldn't have mattered, and maybe they could have started the main engines too.
There is a sad story behind this plane crash incident, one of the flight attendants who died was about to get married the day before to the man she adored. I can't imagine how the man knew that the woman he adored had died in a plane crash. RIP
This could have been like the Sully-landing in 2009 where everyone survived 😢. But without the crew efforts there could been easily more fatalities, the crew saved many lifes 😇.
10:56 I wouldn't think the difference between a fully charged battery at 24 volts and the aircraft's battery charge of 22 volts would make that much of a difference. But apparently those 2 volts are essential.
It appears that the battery was most likely defective. It's not so much of two volts, but also cranking power and reserve. It could easily fail after a very short time.
They did the best they could but not 100% successful but it's better than the other option. Thank God. What I also L❤VE from this channel, is the titles. Keep it going, I still L❤VE it!
There was a lot of bad luck in the establishment of the crisis, but a lot of good luck in being able to drop below the clouds safely, and that the river was nearby. . Well done to the crew for saving their passengers. RIP to the casualties.
Could they not have selected "Continuous Ignition" for the engine to not flameout from water ingestion ? I've seen other jets have this feature. Also those cute little "Ram Air Turbines" that pop out upon electrical failure are like a small wind generator for minimal avionics & radar & radio comms. Maybe this B737 lacked this too. Sounds like my 1972 Datsun 510 - no A/C, rubber floor mats, roll up windows !
4:57 Ignition to "FLT" is similar to Continuous. It just ignores the L/BOTH/R switch. Both igniters fire on both engines continuously. It's an early model aircraft. The later series had more bells and whistles, such as dual batteries.
@theflightchannel bro why did you delete the Qatar airways video which almost crash into the ocean it was terrifying as well please could you re upload.
Hey I fly a lot and I’m curious about something from someone who know more about flights and how often they have serious problems. I’ve had two instances that could not have been normal, but for me there’s no reference and maybe they are. 1. Barcelona to Athens, Greece. There was a decent size (similar to an explosion) but more just the plane jumped and had a bit of turbulence and pressure change for a second. Everyone starts looking around wondering if that was normal. I remember vividly the stewardess were looking at each other which is when I knew this couldn’t be normal. The lights turned on, and shortly after(very strangely calm) they were giving us directions about what to do in a water landing. All I remember was they said do not get your luggage. We made it safely to Athens and of course everyone was clapping, but I never heard any word about it again. 2. San Jose Costa Rica to Bogotá Colombia. We were coming in for a landing and the weather and visibility was extremely poor, but once we’re were maybe 1000 feet or 2000 , I’m not sure. You could see the landing. There was heavy winds and the airplane was swaying pretty good as we approached and I knew it was gonna be a rough landing. As we got closer and closer I noticed we were coming in(dropping altitude)unusually fast. Or atleast it felt that way. then finally the tires hit the ground and boom(as if you were dropped 5 feet on to your butt) it hit extremely hard and loud and immediately took off again and safely landed at another airport. I’ve flown hundreds of times but watching these videos makes me wonder how lucky I was on those two flights. Or maybe stuff like this happens often and it’s not to worry about. Can someone with any reference on this give me some context please??? Thank you so much .
Hi, I’m not a pilot. I have very basic general knowledge of how a plane works and of some of the things pilots have to deal with. In instance no. 2 it sounds like the pilots decided to ‘go around’ after the wheels contacted the runway. Only they decided not to try again but divert to anorher airport. So something happened around the moment of touchdown that made them decide they could not proceed with the landing in a safe manner. This is not ‘exceptional’ nor dangerous in itself, it’s not necessarily going to be considered an incident unless the touchdown is unusually rough or if a part of the aircraft touches the ground and is not supposed to contact the runway. One of the things that may have happened according to what you described could be the aircraft encountered wind shear right before touchdown. This is a potentially dangerous situation when winds blow in different directions at different altitudes during final approach. A pilot approaching the runway with the wind blowing in their face at 75 feet altitude could, in an extreme example, see the wind shifting 180 degrees to a tailwind when they go down to 50 feet altitude. This means their aircraft suddenly loses a bit of lift and that may mean a sudden and uncommanded drop in altitude. If this happens when the plane is at a low enough altitude, that sudden drop in altitude may be stopped only by presence of the runway under the landing gear. Maybe this happened but who knows why they then aborted the landing, maybe the aircraft bounced back up and that’s when they decided to hit the gas and abort the landing. Or maybe then pilots hovered over the runway for longer than they wanted and pushed on control column to put it down and it came down hard, and by then there was too much water on the runway to provide enough braking action. Maybe another aircraft had just crashed on the runway in front of them. There are infinite possibilities why it happened and most of them are the result of good airmanship by the pilots so it’s good on your part to inquire rather than conclude you almost crashed (not saying you did that, but too many people think a go-around is a near-crash). No idea what happened to you in situation no.1. Could be nothing, could be anything.
Engine flameout same as on the flight where another 737 landed on a strip of land plus afterwards the engines were redesigned to handle that much water and hail.
Garuda had a history of poor maintenance and substandard training; the airline did not invest in modern avionics. The Captain and First Officer did not know how to correctly interpret weather radar images on their equipment, which is unacceptable (it was the airline's fault). They also did not understand what throttle settings are required to reduce the probability of a flameout. However, they displayed outstanding airmanship in bringing the airplane to a safe river landing and saved many lives this way; they certainly deserved recognition for that. I also fault air traffic control in this incident. Why didn't ATC at the destination airport or an en-route controller warn the flight crew of the location of heavy weather and proactively offer them options through military airspace?
I was surprised that there was no mention of the pilots consulting the plane's manual for the procedures to follow in a flameout situation (was there even one on board?), or were they expected to have memorized all procedures? Though, given the battery issue, things might have gone badly anyhow.
@@thrustasymcomp9145 In 2005 I was on a Garuda flight out of Bali. As we took off we were all looking to the left and thinking the same thing: "That engine doesn't sound right.'
So this was a Pre-Sully river landing that went fairly well except for the loss of a Flight Attendant.....if the vid reflects the river accurately it looks like the ideal emergency landing area for them.....I would be curious to know how the poor flight attendant died.....did they drown?
It's not shown or mentioned but the tail section suffered a lot of damage from striking the shallow river bottom. The two flight attendants basically fell out when the aft floor section collapsed and were found in the water behind the plane severely injured. One of them passed away from those injuries.
@@mako88sb Ok, sorry to hear this, and I guess thats the advantage of landing in the Hudson versus a smaller shallow river....Flight attendants are probably most at risk on these things since they may or may not be strapped in while trying to manage passengers......RIP to her or him.
@@trevorregay9283 You are guilty of using unnecessary abbreviations. Are you too hip and cool to use proper English? What did you do with the time you saved not typing eo?
@@ImperrfectStranger Then they were totally screwed.😵💫. Batteries should be replaced on a schedule in my opinion. You can’t really test them without discharging them which they clearly didn’t.
Everyones a critic.. couldve been so much worse. Well done to these pilots who made a mistake but still saved 99% of souls on board and no ground fatalities.
Lucky day for them. Can you also cover pre-jet age incidents too? i recently read about the mid air collision between a DC-7 and a Constellation over the Grand Canyon in the 1950's, that was interesting.
I'd like _somebody_ to do United Flight 23, the first known airline bombing. There's a lot of info on the incident, and an excellent B-247 sim is available. But it happened in 1933, too early for most to care.
Wasn't the attenuation effect a well known radar phenomenon by 2002? I don't understand why no one on the very experienced flight deck expressed any sort of knowledge of this. Heroic landing for certain but they should have not been in this kind of situation to begin with.
Realistically not something a pilot would regularly encounter, even in that climate. As usual Boeing makes excuses for not updating their equipment and pushing more tasks and responsibilities onto the pilots for something they could have just fixed. The battery too.
The video mentioned that this area having an older weather radar, preventing them from seeing the intense downpour, and hail, due to the intensity/ denseness of the precipitation inside the clouds ahead of them. Certainly correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking that the old radar must have been able to transmit and receive on a single frequency. Whereas a newer radar, Doppler radar, can transmit and receive on multiple frequencies and could have picked up many, if not all, of the different intensities of precipitation within the clouds/ weather system. I remember that, back in the ‘70s, ATC could unknowingly vector aircraft into embedded thunderstorms, something that I don’t believe happens today. Because of the quality of the radar.
From outside maybe it’s just green layer, but when going through it, the rest can be up to magenta. The magenta inside is not not seen because covered by green one.
Of course even the single death is tragic, but this could have been so much worse. The technology back then was nowhere near as advanced as it is today, but how many times do you hear in the official report into the accident, that the pilots should have been better trained. That's not taking anything away from the pilots, they did their very best in the circumstances presented to them and really deserved a 100% survival rate but sadly, it was not meant to be.
If there was narration on your videos instead of reading it would get me in completely. Great channel and extremely interesting (thank you). I hate having to read a video. I like your vids. Subscription comes with narration.
Do we know how the flight attendant ended up in the river dead? I was not expecting that with a successful ditch were there were hardly any serious injuries.
It seems a bad choice turning the engines down during a hailstorm. But I guess one might restart them later if the engines have not been flooded with hail pellets.
This happened 20 years ago. I hope all such aircraft have been updated to have AUTOMATIC start-up of the APU when the engines fail. This would be so simple to implement. I am running this computer on a battery back-up system. Carrying a large enough battery to run the avionics of that aircraft for an hour would be totally doable. E.g. a Tesla battery would reduce payload 6% when the 737 is fully loaded with fuel (the worst case).
It is unfortunate that one of the flight attendants died. Nevertheless, the captain did a great job in saving almost everyone after going through such an terrible situation...
Still, Captain Abdul Rozaq and First Officer Gunawan received an Award for their Heroic Action to save their Plane. Rest in Peace for the Female Flight Attendant 😔
@denniswilson8013 You sound like a "jackass", but I bet you are one fine old school pilot anyway. I'd rather be called a pigeon and have a skilled pilot save my life in dangerous conditions than a slick young guy who gets us killed in the same dangerous conditions.
Question please: I noticed in the scene just prior to the plane taking off several long vertical "tags" (banners?) hanging from the front area of the aircraft. Can anyone shed some light on what these "tags" are for and when they are removed? Thanks!
Ram air turbines should be made mandatory in all aircrafts. Then the power in this situation would've likely been recoverable, giving it a high chance for a different outcome
It's seems that no matter what country, there is a long history of bamboozling pilots with outdated maps and weather detection systems. It makes me concerned that the constant push for new technology backburners newer advances in safety.
*As soon as I found myself in those terrible conditions flying into the storm back up I would have gone... I would have diverted to another airport or flew a holding pattern until the weather cleared* Yes arm chair QB again*
I've got my phone in me ringer up loudly in at the store but I'll answer it reply and no messing around with my systems apps please thank you very much. I hope you're having a good day
So, this type of landing on water successfuly has been done before!? just never really talked about much; people only hear about the USAirways flight in New York a few years ago, where both engines flamed out due to bird strike, and they landed on the Hudson river. The pilot in this Indonisian flight did a FANTASTIC JOB, so sad that someone lost their life, but all others walked away unharmed, a few with just minor injuries. GREAT JOB by the pilots!
How terrible that the flight attendant died. They almost saved everybody. That must really hurt when you lose even one person. The captain did an excellent job ditching the plane. That is hard to do without losing more people. The only other person I know who was able to successfully ditch was Sully. Thankfully, he managed to save everybody.
This for me shows how amazing sully was. To ditch that jet into the freezing Hudson with more than 100 passengers and no one dies is truly phenomenal
Talk about seeing a spoiler in the first comment!
@@scqvenger sully did a great job, made the right split second decision, but saving everyone was because he had a lot of help... an amazing story and Sully is an amazing guy....
There was a pilot that ditched a plant into a Levi and everyone survived. Sully jus got the movie
This was before Sully did it I think
Sully was aided by the fly by wire systems on the Airbus when he ditched in the Hudson. These guys didn’t have that capability on their plane at all and they still saved their passengers. RIP to that flight attendant.
They did save passengers but the mistake they made will affect them for the rest of the life
@@luuduonghy659Not entirely, that faulty battery would’ve made a difference had it been fully charged.
@@Powerranger-le4up Still pilot should had start APU rather than use battery
@Powerranger-le4up could you qualify why/how fbw is an advantage in this situation
@@hachimaru295So confusing to call it "fly by wire" when the point is Boeing has "wires" / cables connected to the controls and Airbus DOESN'T
The bit they didnt tell you about the death of the flight attendent There was severe damage to the submerged aircraft belly, especially near the tail, leading to the inference that it landed nose high with tail impacting the shallow river bed, which ripped away the cabin floor together with the two flight attendants seated there. Both were found with severe injuries in the river behind the aircraft, and one did not survive.
I just read this from the wikipedia.
I wonder why he chose to exclude this information from the video. The video is only 11 minutes long. And it certainly is an interesting if salacious fact.
This was my one question! Thank you for adding the info.
Thank you, you're the real MVP.
I was certainly questioning how this happened, but that answers it. Thanks, and great job too TFC also.
Looks to me like the Captain and Co-pilot did an extraordinarily good job especially considering the outdated equipment they were working with.
I didn't get that they did a good job from what I saw in the video.
@@timf2279All but one person survived from a landing in a shallow river. It could have been tremendously worse. Other pilots have tried to ditch the plane in water and killed everyone on board. So yes, they did a good job. RIP to the flight attendant.
spiderman home< nice to see Mclaren back!
I'm still marveling at the sheer luck of the 'plabe landing in the river where it was only 1.5m deep...🤯 Great job TFC explaining and graphically describing the precipitation maps. 👏🏻
Yes! The explanation of the radar and the use of the maps were first rate!
The ditch sequence was well presented. I think this could have been a Sully scenario if the river was not so shallow (2 foot in most places). Sully had 18 ft+ depth so low risk of dragging the bottom. Very sorry about the flight attendant.
Miracle on the Bengawan!
I think this crew did the best they could given the circumstances, crappy old aircraft improperly serviced I can understand them trying a bit soon for the restart in high stress situations like this time plays some nasty tricks. An additional NTSB recommendation to have an audible timer associated with emergency restarts would be a thought.
they should have started the APU first...
@@AndrasMihalyi That's correct, but I think the pilots were mostly distracted by the weather, and the flameouts from the get go....sadly I think they were a bit panicked..
@@watershed44 that's why QRHs exist.
Quick reference handbook Boeing 737 "Loss Of Thrust On Both Engines"
Point 7: "Do not wait for successful engine start(s) before starting the APU."
They should have read it.
RIP to the attendant. It’s interesting to note that up until 2002 some pilots would remain at engines flight idle when flying into storms, tombstone policy I guess. Also I like this intro to all of the flight channel videos the best.
If you want to cover an incident that is not at all on the scale of what is usually covered on this channel, in my city, Perth Western Australia, a student pilot in a Cessna called in a mayday because his instructor lost conciousness. I don't think he'd flown before, plenty of sim time though. The tower at Jandakot managed to talk him down to a safe landing. Not big in scale, but still kind of cool.
This was covered on a different channel. I agree that young man did an excellent job landing the Cessna.
ok
It's amazing only one died. This had both pilot error and mechanical failure. Low battery. But poor training in what to do when this happened. Great landing and one lost soul. RIP Thank you for another great presentation.
Something important to remember is: Whether the outcome is Tragic or Miraculous. EVERY incident results in meticulous
Investigations whereby More Knowledge of Air Safety is gained.
I think the Pilot should have received a special commendation for saving virtually every life aboard.
Seems that he caused the problem in the first place.
@@timf2279 The storm might have had something to do with it. It's also kind of BS on the recommendation to increase power level into hail storms, that made no difference in the Alabama crash. Putting this on the pilots when the radar technology was itself faulty and outdated and the battery gave them no chance to restart the engines means this is more the fault of outdated or poor engineering from Boeing as usual trying to push things off onto pilots.
@@DarkFilmDirector they should have started the APU first. Then the bad battery wouldn't have mattered, and maybe they could have started the main engines too.
@DarkFilmDirector Google search this accident there are more facts than presented in the video.
@@AndrasMihalyi Unlikely.
Impressive with the water landing.
Yes! The quality of these videos keep getting better and better!
There is a sad story behind this plane crash incident, one of the flight attendants who died was about to get married the day before to the man she adored.
I can't imagine how the man knew that the woman he adored had died in a plane crash.
RIP
Fantastic explanation of the radar anomaly! Thank you!
this could've been so much worse. This is a success in my book, even though we lost an innocent life. RIP to that FA.
I know, it's such a shame, because chances are she was smokin' hot
@@ElementsMMA You're sick
This could have been like the Sully-landing in 2009 where everyone survived 😢. But without the crew efforts there could been easily more fatalities, the crew saved many lifes 😇.
10:56 I wouldn't think the difference between a fully charged battery at 24 volts and the aircraft's battery charge of 22 volts would make that much of a difference. But apparently those 2 volts are essential.
It appears that the battery was most likely defective. It's not so much of two volts, but also cranking power and reserve. It could easily fail after a very short time.
22 volts should have been enough to start the APU first...
It should last about 1 hour instead of 22 minutes.
They did the best they could but not 100% successful but it's better than the other option. Thank God. What I also L❤VE from this channel, is the titles. Keep it going, I still L❤VE it!
The Ditching simulation was realistic, woahh
sully was never the first or second but due to the power of holly wood
Come now. He had seconds to decide what to do and not a single person was injured.
There was a lot of bad luck in the establishment of the crisis, but a lot of good luck in being able to drop below the clouds safely, and that the river was nearby. . Well done to the crew for saving their passengers. RIP to the casualties.
This was on the wonder channel the other day.
FLT stand for Full Load Torque. Just in case there's anyone in the world who did not know that.
Of course everyone including children know that, you are so smart.
Definition: The torque necessary to produce the rated horsepower at full load speed.
Yes 🎉 the one video I’ve been waiting for from this channel, thank you bro
This Is A Really Good Ass Channel l Give You 👍👍 Keep These Videos Coming
Ah finally garuda flight 421. This is what i have been waiting for! Thank you
Tye pilots are heroes, no question.
What amazing piloting by Captain Chesleyputra Sukarnoberger!
great work by the pilots it couldve been much much worse for i think theres no error on their side and they did a pretty damn good job
Seems you didn't watch the video. Multiple errors were made.
They tried to restart in wrong sequence, then didn't wait long enough between restarts. That might be down to poor training, though.
@margeebechyne8642 I have to agree that the pilots did a good job landing. However, didn't problem solve in the first place.
8:04 "With no airport beyond reach"
So did the pilots just say: "Nah, we're all going for a swim."?
I caught that. Had to be a typo
there are a few points that aren't correct english, and it's moreso than usual. i think he meant "with no airport within reach".
@@renferal5290 You're right but imagine
01:51
The steps move off by themselves and all the red pitot sleeves are still on the aircraft. Animation slip up?😅
Please also make a video on Charkhi Dadri Mid Air collision that happened in 1996.
Nice video 👍
May the one flight attendant RIP.
They tried their best. Our family had many small aircraft growing up. RIP
Could they not have selected "Continuous Ignition" for the engine to not flameout from water ingestion ?
I've seen other jets have this feature.
Also those cute little "Ram Air Turbines" that pop out upon electrical failure are like a small wind generator for minimal avionics & radar & radio comms.
Maybe this B737 lacked this too.
Sounds like my 1972 Datsun 510 - no
A/C, rubber floor mats, roll up windows !
4:57 Ignition to "FLT" is similar to Continuous. It just ignores the L/BOTH/R switch. Both igniters fire on both engines continuously. It's an early model aircraft. The later series had more bells and whistles, such as dual batteries.
Great enactment as always @The flight Channel. So sad that one person died and others were injured, but hopefully they all recovered.
Always great content. Thanks
@theflightchannel bro why did you delete the Qatar airways video which almost crash into the ocean it was terrifying as well please could you re upload.
Hey I fly a lot and I’m curious about something from someone who know more about flights and how often they have serious problems. I’ve had two instances that could not have been normal, but for me there’s no reference and maybe they are.
1. Barcelona to Athens, Greece. There was a decent size (similar to an explosion) but more just the plane jumped and had a bit of turbulence and pressure change for a second. Everyone starts looking around wondering if that was normal. I remember vividly the stewardess were looking at each other which is when I knew this couldn’t be normal. The lights turned on, and shortly after(very strangely calm) they were giving us directions about what to do in a water landing. All I remember was they said do not get your luggage. We made it safely to Athens and of course everyone was clapping, but I never heard any word about it again.
2. San Jose Costa Rica to Bogotá Colombia. We were coming in for a landing and the weather and visibility was extremely poor, but once we’re were maybe 1000 feet or 2000 , I’m not sure. You could see the landing. There was heavy winds and the airplane was swaying pretty good as we approached and I knew it was gonna be a rough landing. As we got closer and closer I noticed we were coming in(dropping altitude)unusually fast. Or atleast it felt that way. then finally the tires hit the ground and boom(as if you were dropped 5 feet on to your butt) it hit extremely hard and loud and immediately took off again and safely landed at another airport.
I’ve flown hundreds of times but watching these videos makes me wonder how lucky I was on those two flights. Or maybe stuff like this happens often and it’s not to worry about.
Can someone with any reference on this give me some context please??? Thank you so much .
Hi, I’m not a pilot. I have very basic general knowledge of how a plane works and of some of the things pilots have to deal with. In instance no. 2 it sounds like the pilots decided to ‘go around’ after the wheels contacted the runway. Only they decided not to try again but divert to anorher airport. So something happened around the moment of touchdown that made them decide they could not proceed with the landing in a safe manner. This is not ‘exceptional’ nor dangerous in itself, it’s not necessarily going to be considered an incident unless the touchdown is unusually rough or if a part of the aircraft touches the ground and is not supposed to contact the runway. One of the things that may have happened according to what you described could be the aircraft encountered wind shear right before touchdown. This is a potentially dangerous situation when winds blow in different directions at different altitudes during final approach. A pilot approaching the runway with the wind blowing in their face at 75 feet altitude could, in an extreme example, see the wind shifting 180 degrees to a tailwind when they go down to 50 feet altitude. This means their aircraft suddenly loses a bit of lift and that may mean a sudden and uncommanded drop in altitude. If this happens when the plane is at a low enough altitude, that sudden drop in altitude may be stopped only by presence of the runway under the landing gear. Maybe this happened but who knows why they then aborted the landing, maybe the aircraft bounced back up and that’s when they decided to hit the gas and abort the landing. Or maybe then pilots hovered over the runway for longer than they wanted and pushed on control column to put it down and it came down hard, and by then there was too much water on the runway to provide enough braking action. Maybe another aircraft had just crashed on the runway in front of them. There are infinite possibilities why it happened and most of them are the result of good airmanship by the pilots so it’s good on your part to inquire rather than conclude you almost crashed (not saying you did that, but too many people think a go-around is a near-crash).
No idea what happened to you in situation no.1. Could be nothing, could be anything.
@@etiennedauphin wow that was an extremely thoughtful and coherent response. Thank you for that.
Engine flameout same as on the flight where another 737 landed on a strip of land plus afterwards the engines were redesigned to handle that much water and hail.
Tout a été très très vite, incroyable…en tout les cas superbe amerrissage malgré la perte d’un membre de l’équipage
Garuda had a history of poor maintenance and substandard training; the airline did not invest in modern avionics. The Captain and First Officer did not know how to correctly interpret weather radar images on their equipment, which is unacceptable (it was the airline's fault). They also did not understand what throttle settings are required to reduce the probability of a flameout. However, they displayed outstanding airmanship in bringing the airplane to a safe river landing and saved many lives this way; they certainly deserved recognition for that. I also fault air traffic control in this incident. Why didn't ATC at the destination airport or an en-route controller warn the flight crew of the location of heavy weather and proactively offer them options through military airspace?
I was surprised that there was no mention of the pilots consulting the plane's manual for the procedures to follow in a flameout situation (was there even one on board?), or were they expected to have memorized all procedures? Though, given the battery issue, things might have gone badly anyhow.
Perhaps ATC’s radar was no better. Perhaps it was better, but ATC was just lazy, or busy.
Just guesses, obviously. But, that is a good question.
Nope, garuda always has the best maintenance and training at least in the country.
@@thrustasymcomp9145 In 2005 I was on a Garuda flight out of Bali. As we took off we were all looking to the left and thinking the same thing: "That engine doesn't sound right.'
So this was a Pre-Sully river landing that went fairly well except for the loss of a Flight Attendant.....if the vid reflects the river accurately it looks like the ideal emergency landing area for them.....I would be curious to know how the poor flight attendant died.....did they drown?
It's not shown or mentioned but the tail section suffered a lot of damage from striking the shallow river bottom. The two flight attendants basically fell out when the aft floor section collapsed and were found in the water behind the plane severely injured. One of them passed away from those injuries.
@@mako88sb Ok, sorry to hear this, and I guess thats the advantage of landing in the Hudson versus a smaller shallow river....Flight attendants are probably most at risk on these things since they may or may not be strapped in while trying to manage passengers......RIP to her or him.
WTF is a vid?
@@Capecodham vid-eo.......hope that helps??
@@trevorregay9283 You are guilty of using unnecessary abbreviations. Are you too hip and cool to use proper English? What did you do with the time you saved not typing eo?
You are among the very best at your craft. Thank you for another nail biter.
Isn’t there a “rat” to provide emergency power? Should have been adequate to start the APU I would think
RATs aren't used to start the APU. The don't provide enough current. Only batteries can.
@@ImperrfectStranger Then they were totally screwed.😵💫. Batteries should be replaced on a schedule in my opinion. You can’t really test them without discharging them which they clearly didn’t.
Everyones a critic.. couldve been so much worse. Well done to these pilots who made a mistake but still saved 99% of souls on board and no ground fatalities.
That was pretty amazing.
This intro music is my favorite.
Lucky day for them. Can you also cover pre-jet age incidents too? i recently read about the mid air collision between a DC-7 and a Constellation over the Grand Canyon in the 1950's, that was interesting.
He already did. There're two videos covering this accident in his channel, if I'm not mistaken.
@@masamuneidkyriou I'll check it out, thanks.
@@StalinTheMan0fSteel Enjoy it.
@@masamuneidkyriou Ha Ha! I'm watching it right now!
I'd like _somebody_ to do United Flight 23, the first known airline bombing. There's a lot of info on the incident, and an excellent B-247 sim is available. But it happened in 1933, too early for most to care.
Wasn't the attenuation effect a well known radar phenomenon by 2002? I don't understand why no one on the very experienced flight deck expressed any sort of knowledge of this. Heroic landing for certain but they should have not been in this kind of situation to begin with.
Realistically not something a pilot would regularly encounter, even in that climate. As usual Boeing makes excuses for not updating their equipment and pushing more tasks and responsibilities onto the pilots for something they could have just fixed. The battery too.
The video mentioned that this area having an older weather radar, preventing them from seeing the intense downpour, and hail, due to the intensity/ denseness of the precipitation inside the clouds ahead of them.
Certainly correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking that the old radar must have been able to transmit and receive on a single frequency.
Whereas a newer radar, Doppler radar, can transmit and receive on multiple frequencies and could have picked up many, if not all, of the different intensities of precipitation within the clouds/ weather system.
I remember that, back in the ‘70s, ATC could unknowingly vector aircraft into embedded thunderstorms, something that I don’t believe happens today. Because of the quality of the radar.
From outside maybe it’s just green layer, but when going through it, the rest can be up to magenta. The magenta inside is not not seen because covered by green one.
Even planes of this immense size are not immune from the weather...
Of course even the single death is tragic, but this could have been so much worse. The technology back then was nowhere near as advanced as it is today, but how many times do you hear in the official report into the accident, that the pilots should have been better trained. That's not taking anything away from the pilots, they did their very best in the circumstances presented to them and really deserved a 100% survival rate but sadly, it was not meant to be.
0:01 Intro
0:35 Pre - flight Preparation
1:02 Passangers and Crew
2:02 Takeoff
2:30 Approaching Thunderstorms
3:54 Finding a Weak Spot
5:03 Plane Radar
6:16 Engines Flameout
7:55 Ditching
9:19 Investigation
Oh good. Because no one here wants to watch the vid 🙄🙄
spiderman home< nice to see Mclaren back!
you the real mpv
Seemed like a good landing. How did one flight attendant have serious injuries and on died?
Not to confuse folks, even though the conditions are VFR, commercial planes still fly IFR and ATC are responsible for aircraft separation.
They made some misstakes but a fantastic landing!
Terima kasih thank you
If there was narration on your videos instead of reading it would get me in completely. Great channel and extremely interesting (thank you).
I hate having to read a video. I like your vids. Subscription comes with narration.
Whatever happened to the aircraft? Was it scrapped? Or, could it have been recovered as transportable pieces over land?
A perfect example of the swiss cheese model.
Do we know how the flight attendant ended up in the river dead? I was not expecting that with a successful ditch were there were hardly any serious injuries.
parts of the bottom of the aircraft where ripped out
@@leosleo8829 Appreciate that. That makes sense.
some could say it was a perfect storm of events
Theflightchannel please make a video of what happened to Philippines Airlines 113 please i said this multiple times
It's a compressor stall. These kinds of incidents happen all the time
@@Blank00 I want this owner of this channel to listen to my comment he has not make a video about what happened to Philippine airlines 113 in LAX
Don't the pilots get a weather report at the destination airport before taking off?
Yes, they did.. however it was sadly blown away due to high winds.
Earliest i ever been in TheFlightChannel vid 👍
WTF is a vid?
It seems a bad choice turning the engines down during a hailstorm. But I guess one might restart them later if the engines have not been flooded with hail pellets.
Just like the Miracle on the Hudson. Well done!!
This happened 20 years ago. I hope all such aircraft have been updated to have AUTOMATIC start-up of the APU when the engines fail. This would be so simple to implement. I am running this computer on a battery back-up system. Carrying a large enough battery to run the avionics of that aircraft for an hour would be totally doable. E.g. a Tesla battery would reduce payload 6% when the 737 is fully loaded with fuel (the worst case).
It is unfortunate that one of the flight attendants died. Nevertheless, the captain did a great job in saving almost everyone after going through such an terrible situation...
My grandfather's house was very close to the bridge and the position where the aircraft actually stopped after an emergency landing
So close to being fatality free! 😞
My best series of garuda 421
It is possible for you to make a video about LinjeFlyg Flight 618? Plane is a Vickers 838 Viscount
Still, Captain Abdul Rozaq and First Officer Gunawan received an Award for their Heroic Action to save their Plane. Rest in Peace for the Female Flight Attendant 😔
Thank you
Despite the Equipment is Outdated and the rain and hail the Pilot and the first officer did a great job in alteast landing it on river
Wait for me this realese today
“The flight crew and two flight attendants are uninjured.”
Flight attendants are part of the flight crew.
No they are not what are you smoking flight attendants are cabin crew
No, cabin crew are not flight crew. Flight crew fly the plane.
@@gort8203 See my response above.
@denniswilson8013 You sound like a "jackass", but I bet you are one fine old school pilot anyway. I'd rather be called a pigeon and have a skilled pilot save my life in dangerous conditions than a slick young guy who gets us killed in the same dangerous conditions.
Why is cutting the screen from top and bottom a thing? Hard watch
Question please: I noticed in the scene just prior to the plane taking off several long vertical "tags" (banners?) hanging from the front area of the aircraft. Can anyone shed some light on what these "tags" are for and when they are removed? Thanks!
Bro plz uploaded Qatarairways B787 rapid descent video 😢😢
the word you are looking for is attenuation
I love the font, what font do you use?
The NTSB, like like Mum, Dad, big Brother allrolled into one, as your big Brother.
17 sec ago is crazy
Even more impressive landing then Sully's given the 1.5m deep water and lesser technologies aboard.
Ram air turbines should be made mandatory in all aircrafts. Then the power in this situation would've likely been recoverable, giving it a high chance for a different outcome
It's seems that no matter what country, there is a long history of bamboozling pilots with outdated maps and weather detection systems. It makes me concerned that the constant push for new technology backburners newer advances in safety.
Looks like experience didn't pay off this time.
*As soon as I found myself in those terrible conditions flying into the storm back up I would have gone...
I would have diverted to another airport or flew a holding pattern until the weather cleared* Yes arm chair QB again*
Hats off to the pilot and crew. I enjoyed this one
Does anyone know the song playing at the beginning of the video?
I've got my phone in me ringer up loudly in at the store but I'll answer it reply and no messing around with my systems apps please thank you very much. I hope you're having a good day
Sully😮
So, this type of landing on water successfuly has been done before!? just never really talked about much; people only hear about the USAirways flight in New York a few years ago, where both engines flamed out due to bird strike, and they landed on the Hudson river.
The pilot in this Indonisian flight did a FANTASTIC JOB, so sad that someone lost their life, but all others walked away unharmed, a few with just minor injuries. GREAT JOB by the pilots!
The original Sully!
APU should have a second battery