American Airlines Flight Crashes at Jamaica Airport

andorra-airport · Post by **andorra-airport** » 23 Dec 2009, 07:20

An American Airlines plane carrying 152 people skidded off the runway and broke in two Tuesday night after landing in Kingston, Jamaica, injuring at least 40 people, according to local news reports.

Airline spokesman Charley Wilson said in a short statement there were no reports of fatalities in the crash that occured about 10:22 p.m. local time Tuesday.

The flight from Miami was carrying 145 passengers and 7 crew members, an operations coordinator at Norman Manley International Airport said.

"The injured passengers have been taken to the Kingston Public Hospital," Information Minister Daryl Vaz told the Jamaica Observer. "There are no reports of fatalities."

Additional details were not available, but passengers at the airport told local media that the plane attempted to land in heavy rain when the crash occurred. (fox news)

Propwash · Post by **Propwash** » 23 Dec 2009, 07:51

A/C Type: Boeing 737-823
Reg: N977AN
Serial: 29550/1019

See also American Airlines Statement Regarding FLT 331 Release #1 (AA Mediaroom)

Norman Manley International Airport (Wikipedia)

Run(a)way length: 2713 meters !

WX (source: OGIMET)
METAR MKJP 230400Z 32014KT 11500 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT028 BKN090 21/18 Q1013 RERA=
SPECI MKJP 230325Z 32011KT 22000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/19 Q1014 RETSRA=
METAR MKJP 230325Z 32011KT 22000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/19 Q1014 RETSRA=
METAR MKJP 230300Z 32008KT 3000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/20 Q1014 RETSRA=

TAF MKJP 230300Z 2306/2406 33009KT 9999 BKN016 FEW018CB BKN070 TEMPO 2306/2324 5000 SHRA=
TAF MKJP 222100Z 2300/2324 34008KT 9999 FEW018 SCT032 BKN090 TEMPO 2300/2314 8000 SHRA BKN016 FEW018CB SCT032 BECMG 2314/2316 20010KT TEMPO 2318/2324 8000 SHRA SCT018 SCCT080=

Thanks for Flying with Cowboy/Girl Airlines.

Propwash · Post by **Propwash** » 23 Dec 2009, 09:07

MSNBC ..... AA331 hit the ground with a loud crash skidded along the runway, right engine broke off from the impact and the left main landing gear collapsed.

Full article H E R E (MSNBC)

Source: BBC News

UPDATE American Airlines Statement Regarding FLT 331 Release #2 (AA Mediaroom)

Anyway, nice stuff for NGC Air Crash Investigation

regi · Post by **regi** » 23 Dec 2009, 10:21

It is a disgrace for AA that they employ people to make such a statements.
First they say : "no serious enjuries"
But the airport authority speaks about broken bones, cuts , and back problems with 4 people in a serious condition. If my back would be broken, I would consider this as serious.
So AA adjusts its statement: "no critical injuries"
Wonder what they will say if one of the passengers dies within some weeks in hospital because of a infection, heart failure or whatever. " not related injuries" ?

An American judge should punish AA by shutting down its entire website immediately, including booking etcetera because it is used to mislead the population.

Accidents do happen, but these AA statements are intentionally misleading.

We have seen in the past that misleading statements ( to contain the image damage ) work in the wrong way. AA should have been very open about it, fly in extra airplanes full of journalists and relatives ( as soon as the airport is open again or use another airport ) , show their hands on approach and their name, logo, proudness and so on.
This stiff lip attitude is so old fashioned and contra productive. Even O'Learry knows this: even bad news is good ( and free) advertising.

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 23 Dec 2009, 10:56

regi wrote:It is a disgrace for AA that they employ people to make such a statements. First they say : "no serious enjuries". But the airport authority speaks about broken bones, cuts, and back problems with 4 people in a serious condition. If my back would be broken, I would consider this as serious. So AA adjusts its statement: "no critical injuries". Wonder what they will say if one of the passengers dies within some weeks in hospital because of a infection, heart failure or whatever. " not related injuries"? An American judge should punish AA by shutting down its entire website immediately, including booking etcetera because it is used to mislead the population. Accidents do happen, but these AA statements are intentionally misleading. We have seen in the past that misleading statements (to contain the image damage) work in the wrong way. AA should have been very open about it, fly in extra airplanes full of journalists and relatives (as soon as the airport is open again or use another airport), show their hands on approach and their name, logo, proudness and so on. This stiff lip attitude is so old fashioned and contra productive. Even O'Learry knows this: even bad news is good (and free) advertising.

Oh boy. So AA must go out of business because they've "mislead the public"? Perhaps you can start yourself with not misleading the luchtzak.be audience, because you are not quoting AA correctly:

You said: First they say : "no serious enjuries".

AA didn't said that. AA said: "... Preliminary reports indicate there are no serious injuries". ... "At this point, no additional details can be confirmed..."

Looks very clear to me that AA wrote they were not sure yet. But what are you suggesting? That AA was trying to hide that passengers were killed, hoping that the media will never find out? If people hear about a crash in the US (or Jamaica), aa.com is not their main source to find out what happened. They watch CNN or they go to CNN.com or foxnews.com

I totally disagree with your vision about AA's incident reporting policy.

But ... then ... even - if - one passenger was killed, it would have been better to ignore this in the first press release untill his/her relatives have been informed and other passengers were able to contact their relatives. Imagine the stress, the fear with the relatives from the 154 on board (148+6) if AA would report "one passenger has been killed, but he/she hasn't been identified yet". Except for you, nobody would blame AA if their first preliminary report has to be corrected one or two hours later.

- - -

FORT WORTH, Texas, Dec. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- On Tuesday, December 22, 2009, American Airlines Flight 331, a Boeing 737-800 aircraft, overran the runway on landing at Kingston, Jamaica's Norman Manley International Airport. The flight originated out of Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, operated into Miami International Airport, and then operated into Kingston's Norman Manley International Airport.

Preliminary reports indicate there are no serious injuries. The aircraft was carrying 148 passengers and a crew of six.

American Airlines is in direct contact with officials from the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration and is cooperating fully with appropriate authorities. American Airlines will not speculate as to possible causes of the incident. At this point, no additional details can be confirmed.

SOURCE: American Airlines

Propwash · Post by **Propwash** » 23 Dec 2009, 11:13

LX-LGX wrote:American Airlines is in direct contact with officials from the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration and is cooperating fully with appropriate authorities

Stupid statement, If they don't 'Cowboy/Girl Airlines" will lose their AOC.

BTW I'm ..... how many sorties (Crew fatigue) the flightcrew had before going to KIN.

regi · Post by **regi** » 23 Dec 2009, 11:29

I did not mislead the members, I just used exactly the same words of the AA statement. You repeat it even yourself.
I did not ask that AA goes out of business. I just say that if they use their website to spread misleading information , that this website should be temporarely banned. If this would mean that AA goes out of business, it is not my fault that their business plan is completely based on a website.

AA itself talks about preliminary reports. Was it so difficult to phone one of their staff and ask what the condition was of the passengers ? I am sure they did. But they could not mention that many passengers were wounded , with bloody faces, in great pain and so on. That was the truth. But they couldn't put that on their website , is it ?

NCB · Post by **NCB** » 23 Dec 2009, 11:32

I hope that the heavily injured will get out of this.

The picture of the day:

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/960/Buitenland ... aica.dhtml

cnc · Post by **cnc** » 23 Dec 2009, 11:38

depends on how you define "serious enjuries"
a broken rib, leg or arm is never marked as serious enjuries in an accident and neither are most flesh wounds.
if you have a small cut above your eye your whole face will be in blood but it doesn't mean you are seriously injured.

regi · Post by **regi** » 23 Dec 2009, 14:17

depends on the case:
A friend her arm was broken. Not serious for you. During the operation her vains are cut. Her arm is immobilised and she is now lifelong disabled. Not serious ?
And the people with neck and back injuries. From familiy members who were victims in car crashes, I can tell you that not 1 completely healed. Some became disabled - just because of a whip lash. Permant pain, unable to work. Not serious or not enough blood?
And the people who have post traumatic stress disorder ? If this means that you can not work anymore, are in constant fear , impacts your personnal life. Is that not serious? Is that not as serious as somebody who's leg has to be amputated to evacuate him out of a burning wreck?

cnc · Post by **cnc** » 23 Dec 2009, 14:44

some people die from a simple flu. does it mean the flu is a deadly virus? some people bleed to dead from a single scratch (too few white blood cells)
you have to put things in perspective

Post by **sdbelgium** » 23 Dec 2009, 15:04

AP video footage on Youtube

regi · Post by **regi** » 23 Dec 2009, 15:16

completely right CNC: it depends on the case. So I come back on the website report of AA where they stated that there were no serious injuries.
They should have shut up and waited untill the real reports came in.
But I agree that I am straying a bit off track .

Now with that second B737-800 getting of the runway at Prestwick, the safety record of this airplane looses some points in the statistics ( despite we may presume that both accidents are not airplane related )

Propwash · Post by **Propwash** » 23 Dec 2009, 16:20

regi wrote:Now with that second B737-800 getting of the runway at Prestwick, the safety record of this airplane looses some points in the statistics ( despite we may presume that both accidents are not airplane related )

Number one (PIK) is a incident

Number two (KIN) is a 'massive and classic' Flight Crew f*ck *p
Night
Tailwind
Wet run(a)way
+SHRA around
Crew fatigue?
etc. etc.

Contributing factor: Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL) .... inoperative (INOP).

RMK / If you can't/don't touchdown shortly after the pianobars (Touch Down Zone) and/or stop before the run(a)way (2713 meters !!) end, it doesn't look good for the 'Cowboy/Girl Airlines' JJ's (Jet Jockeys).

Post by **sdbelgium** » 23 Dec 2009, 18:35

A lot of photos here: http://www.flightlevel.be/434/american-kingston.html

NCB · Post by **NCB** » 23 Dec 2009, 19:04

Number two (KIN) is a 'massive and classic' Flight Crew f*ck *p
Night
Tailwind
Wet run(a)way
+SHRA around
Crew fatigue?
etc. etc.

You could be right and you could be wrong.

Other potential factors could be anti-skid failure, or brakes failure, or the aircraft could have unexpectedly waterplanned over a significant distance of the runway or the aircraft could have veered off the runway before the runway end, etc...
More complicated but a software problem could have fooled the aircraft causing it to fail to switch to ground mode and blocked/delayed the deployment of T/R, ground spoilers and braking.

Propwash · Post by **Propwash** » 23 Dec 2009, 20:04

@sdbelgium

If I look at the first two pics, it looks like the Captain had a head-up display (HUD).

andorra-airport · Post by **andorra-airport** » 24 Dec 2009, 07:05

The pax claimed that the aircraft landed ok, with no damage after touchdown. So I guess the damage happened after the aircraft went off the runway. Would a buffer zone, or how you call it, arrestor bed, not be useful? (Like the ones you see for trucks around Verviers)

Propwash · Post by **Propwash** » 24 Dec 2009, 07:50

andorra-airport wrote:The pax claimed that the aircraft landed ok, with no damage after touchdown

Another passenger (MIA - KIN frequent Flyer with window seat) ....:
"The aircraft appeared to crossed the threshold higher than normal and did NOT appear to have contacted the runway until about HALF WAY DOWN the runway length"

andorra-airport wrote:Would a buffer zone, or how you call it

It's called Runway Safety Area (RSA) or Runway End Safety Area (RESA), see Wikipedia

Source (Caribbean Net News)

Anyway, the 738 doesn't have 4x4 capability.

stefanel · Post by **stefanel** » 24 Dec 2009, 13:32

Propwash wrote:A/C Type: Boeing 737-823
Reg: N977AN
Serial: 29550/1019

See also American Airlines Statement Regarding FLT 331 Release #1 (AA Mediaroom)

Norman Manley International Airport (Wikipedia)

Run(a)way length: 2713 meters !

WX (source: OGIMET)
METAR MKJP 230400Z 32014KT 11500 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT028 BKN090 21/18 Q1013 RERA=
SPECI MKJP 230325Z 32011KT 22000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/19 Q1014 RETSRA=
METAR MKJP 230325Z 32011KT 22000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/19 Q1014 RETSRA=
METAR MKJP 230300Z 32008KT 3000 +SHRA BKN014 FEW016CB SCT030 BKN100 21/20 Q1014 RETSRA=

TAF MKJP 230300Z 2306/2406 33009KT 9999 BKN016 FEW018CB BKN070 TEMPO 2306/2324 5000 SHRA=
TAF MKJP 222100Z 2300/2324 34008KT 9999 FEW018 SCT032 BKN090 TEMPO 2300/2314 8000 SHRA BKN016 FEW018CB SCT032 BECMG 2314/2316 20010KT TEMPO 2318/2324 8000 SHRA SCT018 SCCT080=

Thanks for Flying with Cowboy/Girl Airlines.

If the wind was 320 why did the plane land on runway 12? You can clearly see on sat. maps that the beach it winded up at is at the end of runway 30, so I'm quite puzzled...

Aviation24.be