A Marathon Airlines Embraer E195 aircraft operating on behalf of Air Serbia (registered OY-GDC, pictured) sustained substantial damage to its fuselage and wing box yesterday evening upon take-off from Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport when the plane is alleged to have made contact with the runway approach lights. The jet, bound for Dusseldorf, immediately diverted back to Belgrade, however, it took almost an hour for the plane to touch down as it burned off fuel and performed a low pass over the runway so ground staff could determine the condition of the plane. As the events unfolded, other aircraft were grounded at Belgrade Airport, while an incoming Austrian Airlines flight from Vienna and a Wizz Air flight from Dortmund were forced to divert to Timisoara. The Embraer in question eventually landed safely in Belgrade and was greeted by emergency services.
 |
| OY-GDC flight path |
The exact details as to how and why the aircraft made contact with the lights are unknown although based on accounts and air traffic control recordings, the pilot had too little runway after deciding not to use the full length of the strip despite warnings from air traffic control. An investigation by the Serbian Civil Aviation Directorate and other relevant authorities will now take place. The incident is being treated as serious. The aircraft, which is under a wet-lease agreement, was staffed by Greece’s Marathon Airlines, including both the flight deck and cabin crew. Both the outbound and inbound Dusseldorf service were cancelled and will take place today instead. Due to the extent of the damage to the aircraft, it is unlikely to return to service anytime soon and it may be written off. Air Serbia’s five-member Embraer fleet is operated by Marathon Airlines and the carrier has one inactive E195 parked in Belgrade, which is likely to be deployed now in leu of the damaged aircraft.
— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) February 18, 2024
There were no injuries among the 106 passengers. In a short statement, Air Serbia said, “The aircraft landed safely at Belgrade Airport. Air Serbia regrets for the inconvenience caused and is doing everything in its power for the flight to continue as soon as possible. The safety of passengers was not compromised at any time”. Passengers who were on board the aircraft said they heard a loud bang upon take off. They disembarked the aircraft at the gate upon landing. Operations at Belgrade Airport resumed shortly upon the aircraft’s arrival. The airport has been forced to downgrade its Instrument Landing System (ILS) from a category three to a category one as a result of the incident, however, this is expected to be amended once the damaged lights are replaced. Due to good weather conditions in Belgrade so far, the ILS downgrade has not had an impact on flight operations.
Due to a large volume of comments, in order to view all please click on the "Load More" button at the very bottom of the page, underneath the comment box
This could have ended very badly. Passengers are lucky.
ReplyDeleteSimilar incident happened last year when flydubai was taking off in Belgrade. If anything it shows that Belgrade tower has a lot of problems to clear the takeoff with 1/3 of the tarmac left is just calling for bad things to happen
ReplyDeleteThe same incident happened exactly 2 years ago,
DeleteI still don't get how that happens and who is responsible
Deletehttps://avherald.com/h?article=4f4e09cc
DeleteEmbraers are economical machines but they have mosquito-like performance, often on a razor's edge.
DeleteThis leaves quite a few questions:
- How was the plane allowed to take off far bellow the required distance needed for take-off?
- Why didn't the pilots abort take off?
- We heard of high-speed exits being built, were they operable?
- How safe was it to dump fuel for an hour without knowing the extent of damage to the wings/hydraulics/fuselage that could have left them without controls at any moment? Does the Embraers have back-up in case of hydraulics loss?
- How come a leaking, damaged airplane was allowed to be parked at gate via air-bridge? To contain PR damage?
So many questions, pointing equally if not more towards Vinci rather than Marathon.
@IR720
DeleteRegarding the high speed exits, this is being built for the old runway which will be the main runway. They are unrelated to this inserted runway.
That plane will be written off for sure
ReplyDeleteNo way, it is reparable.
DeleteIt is reparable, but it's going to be extremely expensive. They will need to pay an AOG team to do temporary repair so aircraft is allowed to fly to some MRO facility that has Embraer type (LOT in Warsaw, KLM in Norwich or Exter Aerospace). Or they will cash out even more money to bring in big team to do repairs in one of JAT Tehnika hangars.
DeleteThe safety of passengers was not compromised at any time - I will not laugh to that (:sarcastic:). Luckilly, there are no victims.
ReplyDelete+1000
DeleteThat was a shameful statement by the airline - only a brainless PR manager could have written that. Would fire him/her if I was in charge immediately.
DeleteWhy? How was the safety compromised? Everyone survived with no injuries
DeleteWhat? A jetbridge connected to an aircraft leaking fuel after an emergency landing? BEG must be a crazy place...
DeletePlane parked at C2. i don't know why they didn't send it to a remote stand away from people inside the terminal.
Delete@09:19
DeleteWhich is a complete and utter scandal and shows the airport is run by people of compromised intellectual capabilities.
I think BEG has some serious questions to answer if it is true that a leaky plane was put on a stand.
DeleteYou literally have videos of fuel leaking into a plastic bucket at the gate.
DeleteNot only was it connected to a jet bridge but right next to it on the stand was a Turkish Airlines jet with pax that just finished refueling and was ready for push back.
DeleteTrue, TK B738 to ESB was on C1.
DeleteUnbelievable!
DeleteVinci is really a disaster.
DeleteThey make one mistake after another.
THe pilot did a good job landing and recovering from the incident, but was he also responsible for hitting the lights in the first place
Delete@anon 9.15. If for instance a plane were to take off without clearance and no accident would happen, it would still be rated a serious incident.
DeleteThe assessment of an incident is not based om the number of victims.
Similar to being fined in traffic :)
It looks quite serious, glad it ended without injuries!
ReplyDeleteAnother thing to consider now is that basically they've ended up without an aircraft - so they'll have to either wet lease another one or simply not expand as much. A shame really
ReplyDeleteOY-GDA was sitting on BEG tarmac.
Delete@ 9.03 you could have bothered reading the article. Especially about the replacement for this plane.
DeleteOy-gda is not a replacement it's an addition to the fleet, JU will thus be one Ejet short
DeleteThe plane was inactive and sitting on the tarmac because there was nothing for it to fly.
Delete0% chance this plane will ever fly again.
ReplyDeleteThe tail also suffered damage.
Exactly, I remember some decades ago when that JAL plane crashed killing like 500 people, it happened because a plane had a tailstrike that was not noticed.
DeleteIt was noticed.
DeleteAnon 9:10: it was of course noticed but improperly repaired.
DeleteWere the pilots from JU?
ReplyDeleteNo. They were pilots from Marathon.
DeleteNo, they were from Marathon.
DeletePilot commanding the E95 was Italian.
DeleteYou should bother to read the article.
DeleteCould passengers sue Marathon Airlines in Greece?
ReplyDeletePassengers can only put claims against Air Serbia as it was the carrier where they purchased their tickets from. What will ASL do later is up to their Legal department.
DeleteIn my opinion they should consider suing JU and ATC so that both learn from their mistakes.
DeleteYour opinion is extraordinarily important
DeleteFlight was operated by Marathon. Passengers could have bought tickets from a tourist agency, that does not matter.
DeleteYes it does matter. Air Serbia runs the flight, the metal is irrelevant.
DeleteMarathon needs to follow JU procedures.
DeleteMarathon can only follow Greek and EASA procedures. JU can ask to modify certain procedures but it is up to Marathon and Greek CAA to approve them.
DeleteIt's a wet lease. If it was pilot to blame then what can JU can be blamed for? they didn't employ him and didn't train him.
DeleteProbably safe to assume it was thr insurance of marathon that covers the staff and the plane of the flight since its registered to them and they operate it.
@Slav: of course it’s also JU‘s responsibility. They should know who to make deals with. Not to mention that they said that the passengers safety wasn’t compromised at any time? Laughable and shameful - as if they were trying to brush something under the rug.
DeleteFrom passengers perspective it’s responsibility of JU. Ticket is a contract between passenger and the ticketing airline.
DeleteThat's what the pre-threshold lights mean, right?
ReplyDeleteThis is why we need the death penalty back. Both the ATC and Marathon pilots need to be held accountable.
ReplyDeleteATC guys from the tower are busy taking pictures of sunsets and posting it online when they should be monitoring what is going on below. What are they doing in their fancy tower? Who was in charge and why didn't anyone notice that the plane was using the wrong taxiway to the runway.
On top of that ATC allowed a severely damaged plane to fly over a densely populated area (Mladenovac, Smederevska Palanka, Smederevo) instead of sending it to burn fuel over the fields of Banat.
Then the blame is also on Air Serbia management which is forced to outsource all sort of random equipment. Why? Because work conditions are horrible and people are leaving them. If they had normal work conditions then these pilots, the plane and crew would be JU's.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Saddest part of this all is that JU management will not learn anything from this almost tragic event.
"Then the blame is also on Air Serbia management which is forced to outsource all sort of random equipment. Why? Because work conditions are horrible and people are leaving them. If they had normal work conditions then these pilots, the plane and crew would be JU's."
DeleteWhat a nonsense!
JU does not have a single pilot that can fly E195 as this plane is totally new in their fleet. I just wonder how the non-existing JU E195 pilot can leave the company? It must be some miracle.
JU can train E95 pilots the same way they trained them for the A319/320 or for the A330.
DeleteI agree that jailing the pilots, let alone executing them is stupid but this part is correct:
Delete"ATC guys from the tower are busy taking pictures of sunsets and posting it online when they should be monitoring what is going on below. What are they doing in their fancy tower? Who was in charge and why didn't anyone notice that the plane was using the wrong taxiway to the runway.
On top of that ATC allowed a severely damaged plane to fly over a densely populated area (Mladenovac, Smederevska Palanka, Smederevo) instead of sending it to burn fuel over the fields of Banat"
Did the ATC give the green light for take off once the E95 was positioned on the runway or while it was taxiting to active position? If the E95 was ready on the runway waiting for take off clearance then it means someone in the ATC messed up. They had to see the plane waiting at the wrong position.
DeleteIt wasn't at the wrong position at all. Please stop making things up for the sake of saying something. Many aircraft depart from that very same position.
DeleteNo, they do not and stop saying nonsense. The E95 entered the runway too soon, it went out an exit too early. No one takes off from there as there isn't enough runway for a fully loaded plane to take off.
DeleteE95 had 106/118 passengers and was going on a 2 hours flight. It means it was heavy on take off for its standards. They are lucky they even managed to take off and that they didn't crash onto the highway or the industrial zone behind it.
@anon 09:16
DeleteDo you really, really think that training a pilot for new type of plane is so simple? Few flights over BEG and you get the licence?
Some people here...
You are the one talking nonsense. Have you even listened to the ATC recording? No.
DeleteSo according to the genius above. The pilot who is trained and experienced. Just listened to the controller when and how to take off. He never used his brain and his experience to think when it is safe for him and all the lives on board so they don't all die?
DeleteWhat the pilot just a mindless drone?
If your claim about the controller mistake is correct. (Which you just started guessing) then the pilot is also equally responsible.
I hope rational thought helps everyone 👍🏻
Anon 09.29
DeleteNo one said that which is why introducing a new model type is not done overnight. Look at how long it took Kondic to introduce A319/320/332.
Marek on the other hand introduced the E75/90/95 overnight and here we are.
It took JU something like 8 months to introduce the A332.
Kondic introduced A319 right after Air Serbia operations started. He was not waisting a time.
Deletehttps://www.gettyimages.ie/detail/news-photo/aleksandar-vucic-serbias-deputy-prime-minister-left-dane-news-photo/185845207?adppopup=true
At this moment JU did not have recources and money to train E195 pilots, but the market for that plane is there.
Why to lose a chance and not to grab it? Do you actually suggest to implement OU "it is still too early" strategy?
I do not see here any JU mistake.
He introduced ONE A319 (YU-APC) and then slowly more were coming over the next 3 to 5 years. I think that one came in October 2013 and the second I think YU-APE came in December. Pilots were trained over time and put to fly and obey JU guidelines.
DeleteMarek not missing a chance brought us to this chaos where wetleases make up the bulk of their operations. I guess he learned all this fine management in AZ, OK, MA etc.
Air Serbia never had a fleet of only one A319 plane as they had leased A319 planes from UAE with their registration.
DeleteMarek brought Air Serbia close to the result big JAT had and it is surely not called chaos. He found EU wet leasing companies that are under EU regulations got permission to fly together with their pilots.
I suppose Marek should have taken the commands of OY-GDC in order to show to the pilot what is the safe distance for take off.
Jailing the pilots? Executing them?
DeleteThe fabuluous Balkans in all its wonderful glory.
Marek is doing it only because the market is strong. It's so string that even with all those fabulous results they manage to hold 50% of the market. If he's so smart je can develop INI.
DeleteAlso, it's great how everybody is now aviation expert and people jump to conclusions which fault is what and are not even waiting for everything to be cleared up & investigated. Good for you all!
DeleteThis has been a severe incidence that could have ended fatally. Those 2 idiots (pilot + co-pilot) must be jailed. The guys sitting at the tower must be investigated as well. Air Serbia should terminate the lease agreement with Marathon Airlines with immediate effect. From today on, I am not flying Air Serbia anymore.
ReplyDeleteHave you listened to the ATC recording and that's how you came to this conclusion?
DeleteATC has the visual of the runway, they can supervise what's going on. If a plane missed an exist and almost crashed then the ATC is at fault. They gave the green light for the take off.
DeleteHow do you know the plane missed an exit? Don't make things up.
DeletePlane did not have enough runway to take off properly. That is the fault of both pilots and ATC staff in the tower.
DeleteAnd they did. Per AH's reader: just listened to ATC recording and ATC did very well.
DeleteThey asked Marathon crew twice about intention to depart from D5. They reminded them on distance available and asked them to respond.
The plane was in a position from which numerous aircraft take off from Belgrade. Please stop making things up for the sake of submitting a comment.
DeleteYou are writing nonsense and you have your reply above.
DeleteNo-one needs jailing. It was an accident. Some of your comments are ridiculous and ugly to read. No-one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes sometimes.
DeleteATC gave them permission to take off from D5.
DeleteBoth are to blame.
So endangering 106 passengers and 4 crew does not require jailing? Are you serious? At least 110 people could have perished yesterday because JU and ATC might not have followed safety procedures? This happens second time in two years after a security breach a few weeks ago. Obviously at BEG there is a problem and no one is addressing it.
DeleteJU didn't follow safety procedures? What are you even talking about. Take a deep breath first.
DeleteMy friend this was a JU flight so they have to take at least partial responsibility
DeleteATC did not give permission for departure out of D5. Aircraft was cleared to line up via D6. Pilots entered the runway at D5. ATC asked are you aware you lined up at D5, advise do you need to return to D6. Pilots confirmed D5 OK hence ATC cleared them. It is not up to ATC to define if they are able performance wise to depart out of certain interesction - it is up to the flight crew. ATC did nothing wrong here, stop making false assumptions.
DeleteIs there any link for ATC conversation with AC?
DeleteSo ATC is ok with airlines ignoring their instructions as long they say they are ok with that?!
DeleteAnon 11:04 ATC can not be held responsible, nor is the one to decide if flight crew advises they can depart out of a certain intersection. It is the duty of the flight crew to do preflight calculations with margin for stop, V1/VR/V2 speeds and to determine necessary runway length. ATC did ask 3 times are they sure they can depart from D5, they confirmed. Nothing else they could have done.
DeleteAnon 10:59 unfortunately no, it would be illegal according to Serbian Law to have that shared over the internet.
anon @11:14, I have to respectfully disagree with you. As ATCO I can assure you we are also responsible for recognizing dangerous situations and to prevent them. One is taking off from 2/3 of the runway, but giving clearance for take off from half or even last third of the runway (taking into account type of aircraft and wind) is surely not purely crew discretion. As if you would see somebody trying to do something extremely dangerous and obviously wrong within the system you have control of, and you just don't do anything. That is beyond non-punitive policy for aviation sector. Again, as I said, this is gross negligence.
Delete"The safety of passengers was not compromised at any time"
ReplyDeleteSeriously now JU? LOL!
I am SMFH off too with that.
DeleteThe safety of passengers was not compromised at any time? If Air Serbia does not correct this statement, Marek would have to go.
ReplyDeleteDon't worry, they will not change the statement and he won't go, no matter what. In reality he should resign after this. It was probably him that signed the agreement with Marathon.
DeleteWOW that's massive damage!!
ReplyDeleteThis is why you don't overexpand with wet-leasing whatever you can (and even paint it to your own colors taking all the blame) but grow organically. This is not how aviation works (that's why no other airline do this) and it's high time for Air Serbia to learn that. They are lucky no one got hurt.
ReplyDeleteDoes JU even have head of operations right now? I know they are looking for someone to hire. Air Serbia is really struggling with staffing their operations. I think top management needs to be replaced.
DeleteI think that after anon comment at 09:20 all wet lease companies should be closed.
DeleteYou can lease extra capacity but you do not base your entire growth on it like JU did. I think these wet leases started when Marek took over.
DeleteAnon 09:30 Please tell me another serious company which is wet-leasing 20-30% of its capacity.
Deletehttps://simpleflying.com/june-largest-airline-wet-lease-contracts/#sas-again
DeletePerpetually loss making SK should not be used as an example of a well run business
DeleteLoss making or not, they are serious company and that's what you asked for.
DeleteAlso Swiss and Qantas are there.
Ex-YU Aviation can you ask the ATC or ask the Directorate what their stance is on where the plane was burning fuel? Does the Directorate believe that it was a risk to have it fly over so many people instead of Banat which is not densely populated?
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteSo you suggest a plane in such a state should be flying around Serbia instead
DeleteThere are areas that are not densely populated. That is how it is normally done.
DeleteThe part of Belgrade the plane was in a hold over is not densely populated at all.
DeleteBanat which is just across the river is not densely populated with huge wheat and corn fields.
DeleteAnon 09.36
Smederevo and Smed. Palanka are not Belgrade so I don't know what you are going on about.
Anon 09.42
DeleteIt literally is densely populated as it covers area such as Mladenovac, Sopot, Smederevska Palanka, Pozarevac, Smederevo....
Guys, Embraer or any other medium jet has no option for fuel jetisson. It is not 777! They can only hold and burn fuel in holding.
Delete@Anonymous 10:41
DeleteI didn't knew that. Thanks for the info.
Does the A220 has the ability to jettison fuel or it also can only burn it?
Anon 11:02
DeleteNope. Only heavy jets have fuel jettison. Every other aircraft burns corresponding amount of fuel in order not to be overweight for landing.
this is another question - you had an airplane damaged during take-off, and just few kilometers away there is an air base with people trained to intercept and inspect. This is one of the tasks of air policing. Why was not fighter scrambled to inspect the damage?
DeleteDo I see it right in the FR24 recording, that they had a missed approach as well upon returning?
ReplyDeletePerhaps try reading the article. It would have taken you 2 minutes tops.
Delete"It took almost an hour for the plane to touch down as it burned off fuel and performed a low pass over the runway so ground staff could determine the condition of the plane. "
DeleteSeriously people, at least read the article before jumping to post a comment with some conspiracy.
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that they were doing a flyover to inspect for any damage to the landing gear, etc. But take this with a grain of salt
DeleteREAD THE ARTICLE!! Both of you.
DeleteAnon 9:42 you are shocking. You just proved you didn't even read the article. Same as @9.36. That's the problem with most people commenting here. They don't even read anything they just come here to release venom in the comments.
DeleteYes, literally explained in the second sentence of the article.
DeleteSve je dobro sto se dobro zavrsi. Bar sto se putnika tice.
ReplyDeleteOpravka aviona ce zavisiti od stepena ostecenja, cene opravke, ukupne vrednosti trupa i resursa motora... Itd.
Posmatrajuci sliku, stice se utisak da ce imati spasa za ovaj iznajmljeni avion. Procena kolega iz Uprave Civilnog Vazduhoplovstva ce prezentovati nalaze.
Nadaj mo se i za ovaj avion i njegovo osoblje, da ce prebroditi ovaj veci eksident.
Aerodromu Beograd mnogo stece i mirniju luku.
Rodney. 😀☦♥️✈🌐🛬🇷🇸✈
Aviation should not be run on the principle that "all is well that ends well". The jet was leaking fuel and it was still put on a stand, it circled densely populated areas with severe fuselage damage before landing, and there is still lots of confusion about what actually happened and who is to blame.
DeleteJust because no one died it does not mean that it all ended "well".
Is it true that they had only 1300m for take off?
ReplyDeleteas former TWR controller and instructor I can say only this - whoever gave take-off clearance from the MIDDLE of the runway for passenger jet, should be criminally persecuted, as this should be regarded as gross negligence. I have never ever in my career allowed any jet to take off from the any other position than from the threshold and for a good reason. It is always better to taxi a bit longer and take off in the middle of the runway, as to taxi a bit less and take off at the end of it. And here you have the results. Cpt. of this plane should also be criminally charged as his decision to take off from the middle of the runway (see flight radar 24 for evidence) should also be regarded as gross negligence. There was no operational and no other sound reason for this decision other than saving some taxiing time. They decided to do so and were given clearance accordingly.
ReplyDeleteand on top of that - the damage on the fuselage indicates, that they were even not on the runway any more, that in the moment they hit the lights were still rolling on the shoulder (hardened part of the field in front of the runway). This could have ended in disaster very quickly.
DeleteThank you for this fantastic comment!
DeletenotLufthansa
Delete+1
some people may think, it was the decision of the crew to depart from where they elected and that ATC has nothing to do with it. It has. It is duty of ATC to prevent unsafe operations when they recognize them as such. I will give just a simple example - you may remember the crash of Montenegro Airlines F-100 in Podgorica 2005 - they slid from the snowy runway after mistaking the edge lights for centerline ones? One whole part of the RWY edge lights was not in operation, yet ATC didn't prevent anybody from landing there and the weather was far from favorable. I know I would. Taking shortcuts in aviation can and often has serious repercussions. In that case, Fokker 100 slid from the runway (as they were touching down on the left side of the runway) and ended up in snow. Passengers had to walk (!) to the apron and airport building, and it is interesting to draw a parallel with what the CEO at the time had to say: "a šta, malo su se prošetali...". What happened yesterday in LYBE, should sound all alarms on all decision levels - from ATM, CAA, Airport management and further on.
DeletenotLufthansa great info and perspective.
DeleteYour posts should be pinned at the top so that we get some facts in before reading rants from the ignorant.
@not Lufthansa: thank you for your statement. I was sitting in another plane yesterday at BEG watching the flyover of 324 and the landing a few minutes later. After landing BEG went back into operation quickly. I didn’t see anyone checking the runway for potential debris before doing that.
Deletewhaat? That is standard procedure in cases like that. Dammit, if bird strike is reported they should do runway inspection...This is getting more and more disturbing.
Delete^ and you believe anything someone writes as anoanymous.
DeleteTotally agree with you. Even if they were in limits by calculation for taking off, you should always allow for extra room just in case something unpredictable happens. Cutting the corners is unacceptable in aviation.
DeleteIt's not even the middle of the runway, it's 1/3 of the runway.
Deletethere must be room to perform emergency stop after aborted take off (all the way until V1). They probably reached V1 at the end of the runway....
DeleteI was on this flight, could anyone provide me with a link to the ATC recording?
ReplyDeleteWas there a loud bang on take off?
DeleteYes, there was a loud bang. During the flight the cabin crew shut off all the lights and started investigating the wings & engine from the windows with flashlights.
DeleteDuring our taxi to the runway I looked at the map and thought it was really strange we didn't taxi further as all flights from BEG (that I have been on) usually do
strange the recordings are not available at the moment https://www.liveatc.net/search/?icao=LYBE+
DeleteIt's not strange. LiveATC has never had any coverage in BEG.
DeleteNow I'm glad I stopped flying with JU. I value my life too much for others to play with it.
ReplyDeleteDid you stop flying with Croatia Airlines after their scary landing gear accident?
DeleteGood question.
DeleteI do not fly with OU as they don't fly from BEG
DeletePilots are fully trained to land an Aircraft safely with no landing gear.
Delete^ Oh yes that was nothing. Only the plane was out of service for almost a year and passengers were screaming as the plane landed without its front nose gear. It was really fun actually. Some people here...
DeleteShameful that someone still to spin this serious incident about OU.
DeleteOh, oh, oh, look how many JU haters crawled out the holes this morning! Glad to hear from you after so long time. Wash your mouths next few days and then go back underground crying, because JU will continue growing and setting standards. This is only small relief for you, although JU has absolutely nothing with this bizarre incident
ReplyDeleteYou do know that these kind of incidents can damage the reputation of an airline irreversibly? Especially if it is small and just developing.
Delete@09:59 You sound unhinged. A serious aviation incident happened and you get all defensive straight away.
DeleteNeither the controller nor the cockpit crew should see another day in the aviation sector. To risk your own life and a life of 100pax for 2 minutes of taxiing is ridiculous and to clear pax airliner for takeoff in the middle of the runway and let the aircraft that's on fire burn fuel over residential area instead of the fields is plain and stupid.
ReplyDeleteAnd the worst part is - none of this is AirSerbias fault, and Marathon seems to be a great little company, it's just a shame that the combo of rouge controller and crew happened
And what if... they were encouraged to cut taxiing short whenever possible, to reduce fuel burn? What if the pilots receive bonuses if they consume less?
DeleteLast flight to DUS was operated with the full runway on the takeoff, so that's not the case
DeleteNo it wasnt, check on Flight radar. The plane literally took of from the middle of the runway and thats not enough runway for safe take off which is confirmed now witht this incident. I havent seen even ATR72s taking off from there. Plus the emrbaer was fully packed.
DeleteThis just goes to show how sturdy these planes are. It sustained such damage and still was able to fly and land safely. Investigation will show, but probably the pilots were guilty here - still, I think they kept it together and were able to professionally land the injured bird. To all wishing them the death penalty, what is wrong with you? Also, if ATC wasn’t sure that was the best position and enough runway for takeoff, shouldn’t they have played it safe and ordered them to taxi to a suitable position? In incidents like these there are always multiple mistakes that come together. I do hope Air Serbia, Marathon and ATC will take this very seriously and not just brush it off.
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteIt was late afternoon, ATC was maybe busy with the nice sunset so they could post on their Instagram
DeleteI was reading comments on other posts and apparently the pilots made a mistake by taking off from point B5 instead of B6 ( maybe i missunderstood the codes ) but the point from which they started the take off role was mistaken and there wasnt enough runway for them to pull up and thats why they caught the lights. Still they managed to land safe and thats the most important. It could have been worse. The investigation will show what really happend. Also JU is lucky it happend on this plane as it has insurance now and not on their own fleet.
DeleteThis should absoloutely be the last straw for Vinci in Belgrade. Letting an airplane that is leaking fuel to park at the gate, no less C2 which is right on the main terminal building, and parked next to another loaded aircraft, is clear criminal negligence on the part of the emergency services and who runs them.
ReplyDeleteVinci should be reported to relevant authorities such as ICAO for non compliance of basic safety standards, and be sued for compensation and termination of the concession agreement
You do know that where exactly this aircraft would go to get the passengers off was the decision of the tower and not the airport operator, right?
DeleteI bet you do but you are trying to deflect blame from them.
+1, government should give them a penalty in the size of the 10 year concession
DeleteNot gonna happen. We don’t want to anger our EU “friends and partners”
Delete@Anon10;57
DeleteIm not deflecting blame for anyone, idk how you could make up such a nonsense comment. Everyone is at least partly at fault here - Marathon, Air Serbia, SMATSA, and BEG (multiple services combined).
Tower can only suggest, pilots can always overrule and decide for safety reasons to not accept parking at a gate, and go to a remote stand, maybe even a managed evacuation on the runway or taxiway. IF it ends up that tower did tell them to park at C2 then SMATSA should be held responsible as well, as that is also a criminal level of negligence and disregard for safety of passengers, ground crew and other aircraft and people present in the surRoundings
How on earth is VINCI to blame? Do you understand anything about how airport operations work?
DeleteHow is it not to blame? Local ATC needs very close cooperation with the airport for coordination, its incredible how not a single person thought maybe they shouldnt park a jet leaking fuel next to the terminal building and other planes... Its basic logic and common sense. When has this ever happened at other airports? They always stop the plane on the runway and deplane on the spot
DeleteFrom what I know, after an aircraft in emergency lands it is inspected by the ground staff on the runway which is solely in communication with the pilots. Based on that information the pilots decide whether they are able to continue taxiing to the apron or not. I think that a lot of blame is being deflected from these extremely irresponsible pilots.
DeleteInteresting how there is basically no coverage of the incident in the local press - absolutely crazy but not unexpected.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely not true.
Delete"A Marathon Embraer ERJ-195 on behalf of Air Serbia, registration OY-GDC performing flight JU-324 from Belgrade (Serbia) to Dusseldorf (Germany), had lined up runway 30L at taxiway D5 (TORA/TODA/ASDA 1273 meters/4175 feet) and departed at 17:38L (16:38Z), but overran the end of the runway before becoming airborne. Following a collision with the high precision approach lights of runway 12R past the end of the runway the aircraft became airborne about 500 meters/1650 feet past the runway end, climbed through 50 feet AGL about 2050 meters/6700 feet past the runway end, stopped the climb at 4000 feet, burned off fuel and returned to Belgrade for a landing on runway 30L without further incident about 55 minutes after departure. There were no injuries, the aircraft sustained substantial damage."
ReplyDelete500 METERS, FIVE HUNDRED, How in the world crew didn't stop the takeoff!?!?!?!?
There are many people who tried to calculate take off time by using Google maps and they were wrong.
DeleteThis is what I found
"I was on this flight, we took off at the end of the runway and struck the lights during takeoff. So not 1100 meters after the end of the runway as stated in the article.
AirSerbia and airport staff made sure everyone was okay even though organisation was pretty chaotic.""
the above text is quoted directly from The Aviation Herald which is the most reliable aviation incident reporting website
DeleteHow on earth did air Serbia make sure everyone was "ok"? The aircraft sustained severe damage b
DeleteBecause no one was injured, there was no emergency landing, they left the plane in a normal fashion and will be flying today to their destination.
Delete@anon 11:12 I posted the quote that you found.
DeleteI'm not sure if there's grass in between the asphalt and the lights/antennas. But it felt quite bumpy right before we took off. And then all of a sudden there was the bang which i'm assuming were the lights/antennas.
Communication on Air Serbia's part has een really bad though, yesterday at the airport they said the new flight would be at 18:00, however I found out through people that devided to stay in a hotel (I opted for my own acommodation) the flight is actually at 17:00.
anon 11:18
DeleteThis is what author wrote afterwards. Try to read everything
"There are 1350 meters from taxiway D5 to the very end of the paved surface (including runway end safety area, hence 1273 meters ASDA available from D5 only, see AIP), the aircraft became airborne only at the field past the aerodrome fence and before the motorway turnoff towards the airport, and overflew the main motorway by about 50 feet.
I now corrected the distances in the article as last night, when I was already extremely tired and ready for bed when I received the information about this occurrence, I measured the distances from the displaced threshold runway 12R instead of the runway end."
Oh the Greeks from Marathon are gonna be mad
ReplyDeleteWhat are you on about? It is their pilot that made the error. The aircraft was staffed by their employees. As this is an ACMI and Marathon is responsible for insurance, they will also have to cover all costs incurred by Air Serbia as a result of this incident.
DeleteYou didn't understand the comment at all.
DeleteDa li vidmo da li će Vesić sada da bljuje vatru na propust aviokompanije, kao što to radi kada kritikuje Vinci za sve živo.
ReplyDeleteKako je tacno propust aviokompanije s obzirom da nisu bili njeni piloti ni posada kao ni avion.
DeleteLjudi su kupili kartu Air Serbie a ne Maratona, naravno da i oni snose odgovornost i tu se svaka priča završava.
DeleteNaravno da se ne zavrsava.
DeleteTako je, kao i inače srpsko prebacivanje odgovornosti dok se sledeći put zaista ne desi tragedija.
DeleteAir Serbia is ultimately responsible. Passengers on board this horrid flight do not care if they were on Marathon or Air Serbia. JU is ultimately responsible because it hired this company.
DeleteBy following that logic we can say that EU is actually here responsible the most because they issued flying permit to Marathon.
DeleteWhen people were saying that it's not normal to wet lease so many aircraft from all sorts of random airlines, JU fanboys were attacking them in full swing. I'm glad everyone made it safe.
ReplyDeleteSo an EU airline is random?
DeleteYes it is. Why would it not be random just because it has an EU AOC?
DeleteBecause it has to meet certain safety standards in order to gain an EU AOC. They didn't lease aircraft from Africa.
DeleteExactly my point.
Deletehttps://tangosix.rs/2024/19/02/analiza-kako-je-doslo-do-ozbiljne-nezgode-embraera-195-na-er-srbijinom-letu-ju324-kontrola-letenja-tri-puta-pokusala-da-upozori-posadu/
ReplyDeleteIt was the Marathon crew fault 100%..Translate text
Just wanted to post it myself too! This was a blatant fault by the crew, actually crazy especially as minimum takeoff distance is longer than D05 lenght, and yet I still have a bad feeling regarding fuel burn over inhabited area - why didn't they made them hold over the fields?
DeleteDid they turn to D5 by mistake? I wouldn't expect that from BEG based pilots. And the decision to still take-off from that intersection instead of back tracking for a few more minutes. Beyond baffling.
DeleteThey were asked MULTIPLE times by the tower if they are sure they want to take off from this position. They were even reiterated the runway length they have and they confirmed they're good.
Deleteit's same as if they would ask them: do you want to kill yourselves? And doing nothing to prevent it.
DeleteWhat needs to happen to tower forbid the take off? Is it possible and usual?
DeleteThe ATC does not know the weight and configuration of the plane - they will of course stop something that's clearly nuts (taking off from the very last intersection or pilot in command sounding drunk), but there is nothing that unusual in taking off from the middle.
Deleteyes it is. Cessna 172 taking off from last third in LYBE is safe, but not E-195. They can send him to proper entrance. Do they want to do that, is another question....
DeletenotLufthansa Since you were a controller, my question is are controllers expected to know the take off performance of every single aircraft that flies from BEG? How would they know that the plane could possibly be very light due to small amount of pax and cargo and would fit the requirements for that intersection? Especially if the pilots are confirming not once but several times that they want to depart there.
Deletethe entire incident is funny cause PR-wise JU is gonna catch all the blame because of the livery, while the real culprit is italian guy from marathon airlines
ReplyDelete"it's me mario, f*c*ing up air sErbiiia"
And rightfully so. What a ridiculous line of thinking.
DeleteBut it wasn't Marathon airlines which launched Dusseldorf from Belgrade, right? It's Air Serbia's responsibility to run their operations, they choose the way how to do it and they are to blame for it, or to get the applause. I never heard anyone praising Marathon for having record pax numbers in the past months in Belgrade...
Delete