youngies:
The recording, a copy of which was obtained exclusively from a top official of the Ministry of Aviation on Monday by our correspondent, showed that the flight crew did not lose hope even up till the last second before the aircraft crashed.

...

Below is the word-for-word account of the conversation between the crew of the ill-fated plane and the ATC on duty.

Co-pilot: “Lagos Tower, Dana code 0992!”

ATC: “Dana Code 0992, this is Lagos radar, go ahead!”

Co-pilot: “May Day! May Day! May Day! Dana code 0992 Five November Romeo Alpha Mike! (5N-RAM) dual engine failure!”

ATC: “Dana Code 0992, read me?”

Co-pilot: “I read you five by five! Dual engine failure! Negative response from throttle! Requesting for direct straight approach!”

ATC: “Alright, position it one mile to touch down, Runway 18R! Contact tower now on 1181!”

Co-pilot: “1181 Good day!”

Unfortunately, the crew never spoke with the control tower. The aircraft crashed into the residential building a few seconds after this discussion.

My biggest challenge with this story is that as defbond1 has already penciled out, "time elapsed" from when the co-pilot first complained to the radar control tower and when the plane crashed seems to be too short. It therefore looks to me like someone is carefully avoiding to tell us if something was done about the co-pilot complain on time or everything befell the aircraft all at the same time.

Gbyte: Though I know nothing about flying plane and landing one, but one thing I know is that, this report id probably a cover up, I'd ask some questions here, what time did the plane take off from Abuja, what time did it crash? The time frame would determine what really happened, I heard a rumor about our private jet delaying all planes for 2hrs before landing, if this is so, then the person in the jet should face trial. If a plane could make it all the way from Abuja to Iju, then it would definitely make it into the airport and land anyhow but would not have crashed the way it did.

Good point there. That fact or rumor has been denied severally by the ....
The fact remains that these issue recurs too frequently in this country. A whole airspace over the country is kept at a standstill cos someone special is airborne, about to land or is about to take off. Airborne planes cannot land and those on ground will not be cleared for take off till the VIPs land.
Tis not fair at all, Femi Falana was once airborne for over 2 hours from Lagos to Benin and had to go back to Lagos when his flight wasn't cleared to land. He was going to sue the government for endagering his life but I think the case was struck out.
If this happens in a place like Gambia whose population is a little over a Local government area in Nigeria, people will understand.

buzugee: thats how i know the pilot was not nigerian. if the pilot was nigerian his last words to air traffick control will be ' mogbeooooooooooooo egbamiiiiiiiiii ooooooooooooooo motikerannnnnnnnn yeapaaaaaaaaaaripaaaaaaa. mokuoooooooooo heleppppp me pleaseeeee ejoooooooooooo '

they are all in a better place at rest ( ecclesiastes 12 vs 7 )

dude u're crazy...
The whole thing's so unfortunate, so so unfortunate. Soooo sorry for all who lost loved ones.

texazzpete:

I worry that reasonable people would look at your drunken, brainless post and take part of it as 'facts'. How can gravity keep an aircraft moving forward at speeds sufficient to provide lift?
Pilots are trained for single and dual engine failures. With a single engine failure a pilot can continue to fly on and complete the journey without much stress. With dual engine failures, the plane is practically turned to an unpowered glider and contrary to what you say, does not have such a degree of control over the flight.

I implore you to stop airing your ignorance with such confidence!

I agree/disagree with you on this one, I went to Embry Riddle Aeronautical Univ. for a whole year for a flight program, believe me, one of my introductory courses to flying was "Aerodynamics" which like Babamike has explained, the four resulting forces; Weight opposing lift, drag opposing thrust. Therefore, well trained pilots learn beyond single/multi engine failures, they learn factors that affect the control of their airplanes during this situation. Just because the Throttle controls is out, there are other flight controls which are used to stabilize the aircraft. Contrary to your view, pilots still have some degree of control over their aircraft

@Texazzpete and Baba mike, the both of you are correct in some of your post.


Flight simulations have proven than an airplane can glide through the air, so gliding isn't the issue at hand.

However, they will ONLY glide FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME enough for them to land safely if the airport is within close proximity because there's no engines to provide (power)thrust , although air still flows over the wings for sustainable period of time, however, since there's no power to generate lift, weight cannot be compensated, the rest becomes story.

Let it not be mistaken, while it's gliding, it's descending (descent), although can be S/L, the Rate of Descent depends on other facts such as weight and speed, most reasons why pilots dump their jet fuel on board. However, if the weight is greater on any part of the aircraft, the airplane tilts towards that direction.

In this case, the MD family airplanes have tail mounted engines on the aircraft. Since there was no power (Thrust) to either of the engines, the tail portion (aft)of the fuselage became more heavier than the rear. What this probably could have resulted to was a stall and very high rate of descent with low altitude (less than 5,000ft) to recover, but how can you recover from stall without power?

manny4life:

but how can you recover from stall without power?

Same as you would with power: Get the nose down QUICK and dive to build airspeed, only pulling slightly back on the flight yoke to reduce rate of descent after that stall warning alarm falls silent, stabilizing the bird into a controlled glide that is hopefully on course to the nearest avialable runway.

Jakumo:

Same as you would with power: Get the nose down QUICK and dive to build airspeed, only pulling slightly back on the flight yoke to reduce rate of descent after that stall warning alarm falls silent, stabilizing the bird into a controlled glide that is hopefully on course to the nearest avialable runway.

Thanks!

Makes sense though since the flight controls are independent without power, though I've always known to correct stall with power so to gain airspeed and reduce rate of descent.

Thanks though, I never knew, perhaps, it's about time to leave my job and go into pilot career.

na waaaoh
OYIBO

HE still kept the conversation formal till death.

He suppose to have gone GAGA on the phone, they for answer am.


I pity the porr oyibo man, he no no NIGA


EWOOOO

Rest in peace

At least people knowledgable enough are talking. Thanks to that guy that talked about lift, thrust etc. very correct too.
Now that brings me to the point. This plane plunged nose down and never recovered. If planes can nose dive to build speed you will expect that with 5000 ft to ground he could manage to reduce a thousand feet or so and then glide past a building or possibly make it to airport. This went down. Didn't glide. We all saw the American plane glide for that low before landing on water and if you check your facts it took them about 10 mins or more between engine failure and landing on water.If there was no building around the crash site this Dana plane would have still crashed seeing that it plunged nose down. So that's my argument.
By the way from the so called pilot conversation with the tower you would expect the plane would make it to the airport. At least they were told to line up for emergency landing. What Happened in between? If they didn't believe they could make it to airport I suppose the conversation would have been more alarming than that.
So are we saying a professional pilot of over 22 years didn't know common physics or is incompetent? Isnt it just easy for the authorities to place fault on the dead as they can't defend themselves than take the responsibility of their incompetence and corruption? And wickedness if I may add.

Jakumo:

Same as you would with power: Get the nose down QUICK and dive to build airspeed, only pulling slightly back on the flight yoke to reduce rate of descent after that stall warning alarm falls silent, stabilizing the bird into a controlled glide that is hopefully on course to the nearest avialable runway.

II

The "Miracle on the Hudson" is the name that America chose for that historic incident in which both engines of an Airbus A320 ingested flying geese shortly after takeoff from La Guardia Airport, New York. Captain "Sully" Sullenberger entered the history books on that day on account of his amazing feat of gliding that crippled airliner down to a smooth landing on the Hudson River, just off Lower Manhattan. The term "miracle" was used because that sudden loss of ALL engine power occurred at a very low altitude, which left mere seconds for all the right pilot decisions and actions to take place in order to avoid all-out disaster. ALL passengers and crew survived the Miracle on the Hudson, and were ferried to the Manhattan shoreline on boats that converged on the sinking jet.

In other words, it takes consummate airmanship, and absolute calm under enormous pressure, for any pilot to pull off a safe landing with ALL engines inoperable. Besides Captain Sully's masterful water landing, the only other incidents of "dead stick" landings in recorded aviation history can literally be counted on the fingers of one hand - the Air Canada 767 that lost all engine power and crash landed at Gimley airstrip in Canada after a long, un-powered glide from cruise altitude, and of course the Air Transat jet that ran out of fuel and then set the record for un-powered flight by staying aloft for a full ten minutes with zero engine power, before executing a textbook landing that recorded no injuries or airframe damage.

In short, the odds were heavily stacked against the MD80 which crashed in Lagos, from the very instant that power fell to zero in both engines, REGARDLESS of what was said by the co-pilot over the radio to Air traffic Control or to Lagos Control Tower. That was the instant at which a miracle was needed, but unlike the situation that Captain Sully handled with dexterity and astonishing skill, the Dana Airlies MD80 simply ran out of altitude before any safe landing site fell within range.

defbond1: At least people knowledgable enough are talking. Thanks to that guy that talked about lift, thrust etc. very correct too.
Now that brings me to the point. This plane plunged nose down and never recovered. If planes can nose dive to build speed you will expect that with 5000 ft to ground he could manage to reduce a thousand feet or so and then glide past a building or possibly make it to airport. This went down. Didn't glide. We all saw the American plane glide for that low before landing on water and if you check your facts it took them about 10 mins or more between engine failure and landing on water.If there was no building around the crash site this Dana plane would have still crashed seeing that it plunged nose down. So that's my argument.
By the way from the so called pilot conversation with the tower you would expect the plane would make it to the airport. At least they were told to line up for emergency landing. What Happened in between? If they didn't believe they could make it to airport I suppose the conversation would have been more alarming than that.
So are we saying a professional pilot of over 22 years didn't know common physics or is incompetent? Isnt it just easy for the authorities to place fault on the dead as they can't defend themselves than take the responsibility of their incompetence and corruption? And wickedness if I may add.
II

Let me state this, I WILL NOT speculate on events nevertheless, here's my opinion.

To clear up confusion, airplane slightly nosedive to correct the negative angle of attack (stall) on the wings. When an airplane stalls, it's has a low speed airspeed(stall speed) reading. Pushing the nose down corrects the stall "JUST ENOUGH" to smoothly apply throttle to accelerate your climb out, and reduce rate of descent.

There's no evidence of proof it was a stall, even if if it was, whether it was properly corrected or not, and what other factors contributed to it is what we're yet to know.

Let's not speculate. It's not accurate and unfair to assume if the pilot could maintain a thousand feet because you have to consider the odds working against the plane and the pilot such as weight/balance of the aircraft, what systems/controls where deployed, was autopilot at work, powered out engines, etc.

Experienced pilots correct stalls at high altitudes, but at low altitudes without power, it's takes REALLY GOOD Pilots and God to do so. In addition, some pilots are under intense pressure that they correct stall incorrectly(see Colgan 3407).

In addition, like I previously stated, when there's no power (THRUST) to generate "LIFT", the weight and drag effect becomes greater. Things to consider: The airplane was on "final approach" to the airport, pilot deployed flaps (halfway)say about 15degrees or even full flaps, spoilers (armed), brakes(set), landing gears(extend/set), and the endless list.

The gears, spoilers, flaps cause drag to slow the aircraft upon it's slope descent. Perhaps, there was enough weight and drag to increase the rate of descent of the aircraft. Like I previously stated, I don't want to assume, only the FDR can explain what happened that Sunday afternoon.

Again, I cannot speculate events - if the airplane glided or not, idk, we don't know the time interval when the first/second/third engines went out. We don't know of ANY hard facts, so I will not assume on this.

The American plane you talk of US Airways "Cactus 1549", look at what @Jakumo has explained (thanks to him). In response to you, Cactus 1549 total flight time from KLGA Runway 4 to Hudson was 6mins. I don't know where you got 10mins interval.

Listen to TRACON radio, cactus couldn't make it to either of the airport, Capt Sullenberger requested for Teterboro in NJ which was closest to him, but because airspeed on descent was increasing, after all, he was at about 2,700ft, when TRACON granted him clearance inbound to Runway 1 at Teterboro, he replied "unable", the AT controller asked him what runway do you want? He replied "Hudson". This was experience at work, coupled with different things.

Few thing to consider in both aftermath: Cactus used a 1999 Airbus (A320) Aircraft, which by standard is averagely used, abt 10years prior to the accident. Unlike DANA that used an airplane that was 20+ years. Cactus wasn't tail heavy, it had one of the best fly-by-wire systems, that could correct itself in emergencies, something I doubt DANA air did have. I mean there were so many odds against DANA, the NTSB report will shed more light on this.

If the scenarios where same, had DANA landed on water, there would have been survivors and had Cactus landed on bldgs, there would have been severe casualties.

Unfortunately, that's for the FDR to determine what the communication was between Radar Approach and DANA Air. Let's not mix up roles of both; Radar approach gives you briefing on initial and final approach based upon updated traffic pattern around the designated airport, crews execute the approach, descent and landing. Whatever happened in-between, you and I don't know.

I'm definitely NOT blaming the pilot nor his First Officer nor anyone, however, IMO, Radar Approach had done when they think best. If at all we're to blame them, it's for not directly clearing them to the closest runway available, instead they told them to contact the local tower. There's nothing ATC could have done irrespective of whoever talked on the radio. Nigeria is not like U.S. where they have about 4,000 airports of different sizes and capacity, so proximity was an issue.

Believe it, under intense pressure, most pilots make fatal decisions, most act unknowingly out of emergency and pressure. If you go to ERAU, there's a class called Flight Psychology, even experienced pilot can't handle pressure when a multiple of things go wrong in the cockpit. The FDR will explain what went wrong, but my best bet is that multiple things went wrong in the faulty plane through no fault of the pilots but the equipment they flew.

I didn't blame the pilot at all. things can go wrong even on new engines.
If you ask me (1) I suspect a sabotage (2) I blame the authorities for giving license to the wrongest sef of people. Jimoh Ibrahim included.

manny4life:

Let me state this, I WILL NOT speculate on events nevertheless, here's my opinion.

To clear up confusion, airplane slightly nosedive to correct the negative angle of attack (stall) on the wings. When an airplane stalls, it's has a low speed airspeed(stall speed) reading. Pushing the nose down corrects the stall "JUST ENOUGH" to smoothly apply throttle to accelerate your climb out, and reduce rate of descent.

There's no evidence of proof it was a stall, even if if it was, whether it was properly corrected or not, and what other factors contributed to it is what we're yet to know.

Let's not speculate. It's not accurate and unfair to assume if the pilot could maintain a thousand feet because you have to consider the odds working against the plane and the pilot such as weight/balance of the aircraft, what systems/controls where deployed, was autopilot at work, powered out engines, etc.

Experienced pilots correct stalls at high altitudes, but at low altitudes without power, it's takes REALLY GOOD Pilots and God to do so. In addition, some pilots are under intense pressure that they correct stall incorrectly(see Colgan 3407).

In addition, like I previously stated, when there's no power (THRUST) to generate "LIFT", the weight and drag effect becomes greater. Things to consider: The airplane was on "final approach" to the airport, pilot deployed flaps (halfway)say about 15degrees or even full flaps, spoilers (armed), brakes(set), landing gears(extend/set), and the endless list.

The gears, spoilers, flaps cause drag to slow the aircraft upon it's slope descent. Perhaps, there was enough weight and drag to increase the rate of descent of the aircraft. Like I previously stated, I don't want to assume, only the FDR can explain what happened that Sunday afternoon.

Again, I cannot speculate events - if the airplane glided or not, idk, we don't know the time interval when the first/second/third engines went out. We don't know of ANY hard facts, so I will not assume on this.

The American plane you talk of US Airways "Cactus 1549", look at what @Jakumo has explained (thanks to him). In response to you, Cactus 1549 total flight time from KLGA Runway 4 to Hudson was 6mins. I don't know where you got 10mins interval.

Listen to TRACON radio, cactus couldn't make it to either of the airport, Capt Sullenberger requested for Teterboro in NJ which was closest to him, but because airspeed on descent was increasing, after all, he was at about 2,700ft, when TRACON granted him clearance inbound to Runway 1 at Teterboro, he replied "unable", the AT controller asked him what runway do you want? He replied "Hudson". This was experience at work, coupled with different things.

Few thing to consider in both aftermath: Cactus used a 1999 Airbus (A320) Aircraft, which by standard is averagely used, abt 10years prior to the accident. Unlike DANA that used an airplane that was 20+ years. Cactus wasn't tail heavy, it had one of the best fly-by-wire systems, that could correct itself in emergencies, something I doubt DANA air did have. I mean there were so many odds against DANA, the NTSB report will shed more light on this.

If the scenarios where same, had DANA landed on water, there would have been survivors and had Cactus landed on bldgs, there would have been severe casualties.

Unfortunately, that's for the FDR to determine what the communication was between Radar Approach and DANA Air. Let's not mix up roles of both; Radar approach gives you briefing on initial and final approach based upon updated traffic pattern around the designated airport, crews execute the approach, descent and landing. Whatever happened in-between, you and I don't know.

I'm definitely NOT blaming the pilot nor his First Officer nor anyone, however, IMO, Radar Approach had done when they think best. If at all we're to blame them, it's for not directly clearing them to the closest runway available, instead they told them to contact the local tower. There's nothing ATC could have done irrespective of whoever talked on the radio. Nigeria is not like U.S. where they have about 4,000 airports of different sizes and capacity, so proximity was an issue.

Believe it, under intense pressure, most pilots make fatal decisions, most act unknowingly out of emergency and pressure. If you go to ERAU, there's a class called Flight Psychology, even experienced pilot can't handle pressure when a multiple of things go wrong in the cockpit. The FDR will explain what went wrong, but my best bet is that multiple things went wrong in the faulty plane through no fault of the pilots but the equipment they flew.

i hard that there is bomb explosion around wuse. how true is it. pls let any one their 2 tell. GOD save our country amen

Vanity upon vanity.....D days of man.

Jakumo: Dual engine failure does indeed mean BOTH engines "flamed out", or stopped running, as the aircraft descended through 5 thousand feet, about a mile above ground. Aircraft of the MD80 family are notorious for being overly sensitive to excessive throttle inputs, such as "fire-walling" the levers to full 95% N1 throttle power so much as a moment too early during takeoff, which could EASILY trigger dual compressor stall and engine failure at dangerously low altitudes. Compounding that flaw, the tail-heavy nature of all jets with tail-mounted engines greatly reduces their un-powered glide capabilities, and they will drop like a brick from the sky at airspeeds still capable of keeping aloft jets with wing-mounted engines.

In the catastrophic instance of simultaneous left and right engine failures , the jet becomes an un-powered glider, that can ONLY then make a safe landing IF the airport runway lies within range of the very steep descent path that will be taken by the pilot, so as to maintain airspeed and prevent a stall. If the destination airport lies BEYOND the distance that the un-powered jet can glide, there will be a crash at some point before the runway threshold, the severity of which will vary with the terrain encountered, the speed at impact, and the attitude of the aircraft at impact.

Thank u sir for this highly analytical and educative piece, I have little knowledge of aviation but have never liked tail-mounted planes, infact raised the matter in my office after the first and only time I used dana, been a student of physics I have always suspected that the tail wud be the wrong point to mount engines given the length of a commercial jet, its like trying to pick a very long pole from just one end-just kind of wrong to me. Also my only flight on dana, the noisse from the engine was too loud and obviously over-labored. Thank u