Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

45 feared dead, 9 injured in Penghu plane crash
Taiwan News ^ | 23 July 2014 | Elizabeth Hsu

Posted on 07/23/2014 6:35:41 AM PDT by csvset

Taipei, July 23 (CNA) As many as 45 people are feared dead and nine people are injured after a passenger plane operated by TransAsia Airways crashed on the outlying island county of Penghu Wednesday.

The local fire department said that the 45 had no life signs after the twin-engine turboprop ATR 72 crashed just outside Magong airport around 7 p.m. The flight, coded GE 222, took off at 5 p.m. in Kaohsiung and was scheduled to land at Magong 35 minutes later.

The reason the crash happened over an hour later was not immediately clear. (By Elizabeth Hsu)


TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: aviation; crash; ge222; penghu; planecrash; taiwan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: BykrBayb

I think the “over an hour later” is in relation to the scheduled landing time: takeoff at 5pm, scheduled to land at 5:35pm, crashes at 7pm more than an hour after their scheduled landing time.

And if there was a typhoon in the area, as it seems there was, I can fully understand taking the extra time in hopes of getting a break in the weather to make the landing. That must have been a horrible flight, even without the crash. Flying in a Yahtzee dice cup for 2 damn hours. Gah.


21 posted on 07/23/2014 8:02:28 AM PDT by Little Pig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Little Pig
Flying in a Yahtzee dice cup for 2 damn hours.

Yowser!

22 posted on 07/23/2014 8:17:18 AM PDT by BykrBayb (World Lung Cancer Day {WLCD} Aug 1 https://facebook.com/events/309580722464921 ~ Þ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88

That looks like a “puddle jumper” regional commuter plane, so I don’t know what kind of instruments they were using, if any, for that ride to the island. But they sure flew into something bad. (I haven’t flown a plane since the 70s, and that was a s/e Cessna 172 Skyhawk.)


23 posted on 07/23/2014 8:27:21 AM PDT by Carriage Hill (Some days you're the windshield, and some days you're the bug.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia

I’ve done that on a motorcycle. Just following the faint red lights ahead since it was even more dangerous to pull over and wait.


24 posted on 07/23/2014 8:48:06 AM PDT by Chuckster (The longer I live the less I care about what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: expat2; TexasGator; ButThreeLeftsDo; C210
An assessment such as "2 meter visibility" would certainly make one think about going to one's alternate airport, as when one comes to the Visual Descent Point or Decision Height, 1) the visibility will need to be significantly better to be able to see the runway, or 2) it'll be a go-around or diversion at that time. One needs to prepare oneself dispassionately for the best and safest choice at that time, avoiding a terror-driven or get-home-now-we're-so-close response.

But 2 meter visibility at 2000' doesn't necessarily preclude breaking out below the clouds at 300' AGL four miles ahead. PIREPs (Pilot Reports) are oh, so welcome at such times, as well as a recent RVR (runway visual range) report.

HF

25 posted on 07/23/2014 9:32:07 AM PDT by holden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
I cannot think of anything that would be scarier than that, knowing you can’t just pull over, or stop for fear of cars hitting you.
......................................................

C’mon up to the Northeast and add blinding, accumulating, unplowed snow to the mix. I do many trips between Maine and Mass. and inevitably it happens once a winter or so.

The highways become black thanks to lights being removed many years ago and you can't slow down also due to the fear of losing traction on a low grade hill. Add to that 18 wheelers still moving like it's a summer day and it's just a blast.

26 posted on 07/23/2014 10:01:26 AM PDT by bramps (Go West America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bramps

The thing about fog is, many times it comes without warning. I know sometimes blizzards do happen unexpectedly, but usually there is some warning.


27 posted on 07/23/2014 10:04:05 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88

28 posted on 07/23/2014 11:40:29 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia
Sometimes luck trumps foolishness. Oftentimes it doesn't.
29 posted on 07/23/2014 12:03:25 PM PDT by Buffalo Head (Illigitimi non carborundum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Common problem on the 5 in the early winter in the central valley of Cal.


30 posted on 07/23/2014 12:07:26 PM PDT by Mouton (The insurrection laws perpetuate what we have for a government now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

That’s got to be a typo or a screwup. 2 meters visibility is effectively “zero/zero” weather (zero ceiling zero visibility), and the only types of aircraft allowed to land in that weather are those with highly sophisticated Category III auto-land systems—AND, the landing would only be permitted at an airport with special high-precision ILS systems that the computers onboard the airplane could use to make an automatic landing. In short, both the airplane and the particular runway have to be certified for Category III landings.

I’m not 100% sure but I don’t think a regional turboprop like an ATR-72 would be certified for Cat III autoland. I could be wrong, though, but I’d be surprised.

}:-)4


31 posted on 07/23/2014 1:01:00 PM PDT by Moose4 (Sufficiently feisty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Moose4

I had to re-listen to it 2x, but he did say meters. Maybe he meant kilometers. Now you’re getting into terminology/numbers which are way above my pitiful pay grade, but I hear what you’re saying. Heh.


32 posted on 07/23/2014 1:54:24 PM PDT by Carriage Hill (Some days you're the windshield, and some days you're the bug.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: csvset

RIP.


33 posted on 07/23/2014 5:23:18 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wetphoenix

According to wiki, TransAsia has already lost 2 aircraft of this type: 1 in 1995, and 1 in 2002. both appear to have been cargo variants and in both situations all crew were lost.

CC


34 posted on 07/23/2014 6:47:07 PM PDT by Celtic Conservative (tease not the dragon for thou art crunchy when roasted and taste good with ketchup)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Conservative

Other airlines has lost plenty of these too.


35 posted on 07/23/2014 7:27:46 PM PDT by wetphoenix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88

I was dumbfounded when I saw the report come over the tv just shortly after the crash. I am about 50 miles from Kaohsiung. We were still at the tail end of the typhoon. For the past few hours leading up to the crash and also afterwards, the weather was light rain, however, without warning you would get torrential downpours and wind gusts of about 60 mph. I couldn’t believe they let that type of plane fly during this weather.


36 posted on 07/23/2014 7:34:52 PM PDT by TheCipher (Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself- Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wetphoenix

Yeah, i also saw the list of incidents attributed to this type. It wa a fairly long list.

CC


37 posted on 07/23/2014 8:06:41 PM PDT by Celtic Conservative (tease not the dragon for thou art crunchy when roasted and taste good with ketchup)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: csvset

38 posted on 07/24/2014 3:43:17 AM PDT by csvset
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holden
I believe that the 2-meter visibility report was from ground-level observation, not at approach altitudes, and was due to heavy rain, not cloud. Even if the visibility estimate were from 2000', when it is due to heavy rain there is very little likelihood that it would be better at DH and below. It's not like breaking out through a cloud layer -- more like tryng to land with 2m visibility due to fog.

I suspect that initiation of the 35min flight was the primary fatal decision since the storm covered a wide area, and diversion to another airport with better conditions was probably not available.

39 posted on 07/24/2014 7:36:49 AM PDT by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson