Talk:Philippine Airlines Flight 137

Some Help?
Could someone help me with the external link. JJ 04:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Picture
I think we need a picture for the info box.

Numbers don't make sense

 * 1) "There were no fatalities among the aircraft's crew and passengers but 3 died"
 * 2) In the infobox: 121 passengers + 6 crew = 127 people total. If there's 121 survivors there must have been 6 fatalities, which doesn't match the sentence above either.

Hirudo 20:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The three fatalities were on the ground, according to ASN. I've rewritten the article to clarify this, improve language and add references.  I haven't found any references for the stated number of injuries, though - no idea how many were onboard and how many were on the ground. DES 15:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Aviation Safety Network gives 124 passengers plus 6 crew members for a total of 130 people onboard.Aldo L 02:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Cause of the accident
The cause of the accident is somewhat different according to Aviation Safety Network. Check: http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19980322-0 Aldo L 23:28, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The cause of this accident may be due for some revision as greater understanding of the throttle/thrust reverser relationship is revealed. The listed causes appear to be related to that of the [TAM Flight 3054 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAM_Linhas_A%C3%A9reas_Flight_3054] as mentioned in this [CNN article http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/08/01/brazil.crash.cause.ap/index.html].  Is there a problem with the aircraft's computer programming?  Have all the operating parameters of the computer been revelaed to pilots in training? i.e. if the throttles are not on idle the thrust reverser won't deploy.  Maccess 07:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I haven't seen any proper report that could corroborate the version that the onboard computers were to blame. I think that aviation safety network's has more than enough credibility, and it's report contents should be transcribed here. --Nelievsky 23:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Official Report
Can be found here: http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/compendium/incidents_and_accidents/BacolodReport.pdf Its a scan. 2.7mb. 14pages. --Anonymous 13 November 2007
 * I've read the report and it shows clearly that the crash was due to pilot error and not due to computer error as stated in the wikipedia article. Nelievsky 16:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've edited the article; I'll take down the tag too, hope that's ok, --John (talk) 05:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Similar Accidents
While reading the crash report more thoroughly, I've reckoned that the causes of this crash were quite similar to the TAM's a320 crash in congonhas. Both had one engine's reverse inoperable and both crews were unexperienced in airbus aircraft. Also there's America West Flight 794, (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20020828-1), wich seems to have the same cause. Anyone knows of similar incidents involving the A320? Nelievsky (talk) 13:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Found another incident involving the same scenario. This time with TransAsia Flight 536 while landing at Taipei-Sung Shan Airport: http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20041018-0. Nelievsky (talk) 15:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)