Latest news with #Flight592
Indian Express
6 hours ago
- General
- Indian Express
Air India Ahmedabad crash: Veteran NTSB investigator on what the video footage reveals, focus of the probe
Few people in the world know what to look for in the chaotic seconds after a plane lifts off and something goes terribly wrong. Greg Feith (67) is among them. A former senior air safety investigator with the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Feith has spent decades examining complex air crashes — including those that, like the Air India Express tragedy near Ahmedabad on Thursday, unfolded in the brief but critical moments after takeoff. From the fiery plunge of ValuJet Flight 592 into the Florida Everglades in 1996, which killed all 110 people on board, to the mysterious crash of SilkAir Flight 185 over Sumatra in 1997 that claimed 104 lives, and the midair fire that brought down Swissair Flight 111 near Halifax in 1998, he has investigated some of the most devastating air accidents. In an interview to The Indian Express, he draws on early video footage of the Thursday crash and his decades of experience to explain what may have gone wrong with AI 717, what questions investigators will now be asking, and why patience — not speculation — is essential in the hours and days after a crash. From your expert perspective, what is your initial impression of the air crash given that it occurred shortly after takeoff and below 1,000 feet? One of the first questions, when looking at the video, is whether the airplane was properly configured for takeoff. During takeoff —when the aircraft is heavy, low, and slow—it needs extra lift, which is achieved by deploying the trailing-edge flaps (flaps are adjustable, hinge-like surfaces on the trailing edge of the wing that can be lowered to change wing shape in order to increase wing area and curvature, allowing the aircraft to operate efficiently at lower speeds during takeoff and landing). If the correct flap setting wasn't used, the wings may not have produced enough lift to support the aircraft's weight at low speed. This can lead to what we call getting on the 'backside of the power curve' (an aviation expression for when an aircraft is flying so slowly that more power is required to maintain altitude than to maintain speed). So even with fully functioning engines, the aircraft can 'mush' or settle into the ground if the wings aren't properly shaped to generate sufficient lift. The thing that's curious about the video is that the flaps appear to be up or at a minimal setting that wouldn't be typical of a normal takeoff. Also, at 600 feet, the landing gear (the system of wheels, struts, and other components that allow the aircraft to safely land and take off) should have been up (or retracted). So the question is: why wasn't it? Was it a hydraulic issue or an electrical problem? Landing gear is hydraulically held in place and retracted, while flaps are electrically operated. So why were these systems in an improper position at that low altitude? When you watch the video, the aircraft's pitch attitude — the nose-up angle — appears normal for a climb, yet the airplane is settling into the ground. That could indicate inadequate thrust from both engines. There have been similar cases — such as a Northwest Airlines crash in the U.S. in August 1987 — where improper flap settings during takeoff led the aircraft to lift off briefly, settle into the ground, crash on a highway and it killed the majority of the people. Aircraft performance is going to be a critical aspect of this investigation. Another key question for investigators will be whether the engines were producing proper thrust. This is a highly computerised and technically advanced aircraft. The crew has to account for the aircraft's weight. It was also very hot that day which significantly affects both engine and overall aircraft performance. If the crew didn't factor in the high temperature or didn't set the correct thrust, the engines might not have generated enough power to keep the plane airborne after liftoff. Investigators will examine the crew's procedures: how the aircraft was set up for takeoff, especially considering they were likely operating at a heavy weight with 242 people on board and possibly a substantial fuel load. In addition to pilot actions, they'll be looking closely at mechanical aspects —specifically, whether the engines were generating adequate thrust. So many different aspects in this investigation based on early information from the video, but there are a lot of things that won't be known until we get better data. You mentioned the importance of the appropriate flap setting for takeoff. When is that typically done — before takeoff or during the takeoff roll? The trailing-edge flaps are typically set by the flight crew before initiating takeoff. These flaps change the shape of the wing to produce more lift at low speeds when deployed. As the aircraft climbs and gains altitude, the crew gradually retracts the flaps so that, by the time the plane reaches cruise altitude, the wings are in their optimal shape for high-speed flight. You mentioned that the nose of the aircraft appeared to be in a climb attitude even as it was descending. Could that suggest the engines were not producing enough thrust? Based on the pitch attitude and the fact that the flaps don't appear to be in the down position, it's possible the pilots were maintaining a climb attitude but didn't have enough thrust for the aircraft to actually gain altitude. Given how low they were, they may have been trying to keep the airplane flying by holding that attitude — essentially gliding it forward as far as possible. If there was insufficient thrust, it could have been due to engine rollback or even flameout (read: completely shut down) caused by a fuel issue. What does the altitude of 600 feet tell you about the phase of flight and the pilot's workload at that moment? Typically, in that particular phase of flight, the airplane would have been on the takeoff roll, then rotated, and started its initial climb. Once you establish a positive rate of climb — or rate of ascent — the callout is 'positive rate, gear up.' The pilot monitoring calls 'positive rate, gear up,' and the flying pilot gives the command and executes it. That's why it's curious that at 600 feet, the gear was still down. So is that because of an engine problem — or problems with both engines? Is it a hydraulic problem? Or did the pilot become consumed with handling another issue and simply didn't get the gear up? There are a number of possible scenarios based on what the pilots may have been dealing with. Takeoff and climb, under normal conditions, aren't considered a high-workload phase, but they are a phase where both pilots are actively monitoring instruments, engine performance, and aircraft behaviour. If a problem developed that prevented them from retracting the landing gear — or if there was a hydraulic issue and the flaps retracted on their own — that would cause performance problems. Now the pilot flying has to expend significant mental effort to understand what's happening and figure out the appropriate corrective action. How much room does a pilot typically have to recover from an emergency at such a low altitude — just seconds after takeoff? That's a hard question to answer because it really depends on the nature of the problem. For example, if during takeoff and the initial climb only one engine failed, the airplane is certified to fly on a single engine. So the pilots would just continue what they were doing—climbing and monitoring the aircraft's performance to reach a safe altitude. You can have an engine failure and still keep flying. Now, if they had a total electrical failure, the airplane would still fly, but it would require a different kind of corrective action. So being at 600 feet is just an altitude—what the pilots should do depends entirely on the specific situation they're facing. With more than 8,000 hours of flying time, the captain was highly experienced. Does that make this crash surprising to you? At this point, there's no reason to be surprised — because we don't yet know what the crew was dealing with. Was it an issue with the aircraft that couldn't be corrected at such a low altitude? Take the example of Jeju Air and the 737: that crew flew through a flock of birds, and both engines rolled back. The pilots, relying on their experience, managed to get the plane back to the airport. But they didn't complete all the necessary procedures — like lowering the landing gear or properly slowing the aircraft—so it went off the end of the runway. In this case, we simply don't know what these pilots were facing. Until we have a better understanding, it's hard to be critical or supportive of the crew's actions because we don't know what they were dealing with. How common are air crashes during the takeoff phase? For a major air carrier worldwide operating as an airline, takeoff accidents are rare. They do happen and have happened because I've investigated them over my career. But they are rare events. Could you explain why crashes during takeoff are less common than, say, those during landing? Typically during takeoff, the crew has had time to prepare the airplane while they're sitting at the gate. They're configuring it, making sure the flight management computer has all the relevant information necessary to determine the proper engine thrust for takeoff. As they're heading to the runway, they're setting the airplane up — putting the flaps at the appropriate setting for the conditions they're taking off in. Then, on the takeoff roll, one pilot is flying the airplane, and the other is monitoring what's going on — airspeed, engine thrust, and everything else. Unless the aircraft encounters something like a flock of birds — like what happened with the 'Miracle on the Hudson,' where Sully Sullenberger flew through a flock of geese and lost thrust — that's a very rare event. Or, if the airplane is taking off in bad weather that causes wind shear or some other issue, that can also affect the aircraft's ability to fly. But again, those are rare events. Pilots typically don't take off in dangerous weather. They're very aware of conditions during takeoff. Now, we tend to see more accidents during landing, because the aircraft is committed to its destination. Weather might have more of an adverse effect on landing performance than on takeoff. Unless something happens that severely impacts the airplane in a way that prevents the pilot from taking corrective action, accidents during takeoff—like this one—are very rare. We've had them before, like Northwest 255 in Detroit, years ago. The pilots didn't put the flaps down into the proper configuration, so when they tried to take off, the wing didn't produce enough lift. The airplane, similar to what we see in this video, lifted off briefly and then settled back into the ground—crashing on a highway and, unfortunately, killing everyone onboard except for one person. That happened in 1987 and killed 154 people. But again, that kind of accident with a major commercial airline is extremely rare today. If you were leading this investigation, what would your top priorities be? If I were running this investigation, there would be multiple priorities. First, of course, would be recovering the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder. That will give the investigative team the most reliable information to determine the direction the investigation should take — whether it's pointing to an aircraft issue, a pilot issue, or a combination of both. So that would be a top priority. Another priority would be collecting as much video evidence as possible — including what's already circulating online, but also checking for any additional footage from airport security systems. Can we see the airplane at the gate? Can we observe whether it was properly configured while taxiing or during the takeoff roll? That kind of information could be captured by security cameras and would help investigators assess whether they need to focus more on mechanical systems or on flight crew actions and procedures. And then, of course, there's the physical wreckage. Examining the accident site for any visible signs of damage or failure can help determine whether there was a mechanical malfunction or or failure of the aircraft. Given that much of the physical wreckage appears to be completely destroyed, what kind of clues can the accident site still hold to indicate a mechanical failure? Correct — but that's the forensic part of the investigative process. You're looking for components or parts of the airplane that are not in a normal state. For example, if investigators find the trailing-edge wing flaps, they'll examine the mechanical devices that move them — like the jack screws — to measure how much the flaps were deployed. If one flap is at a five-degree position and the other is at fifteen degrees, that's an anomaly. The next question is: why did that happen? In the cockpit, investigators will look at the physical positions of the thrust levers, the flap handle, and the landing gear handle. Then they'll compare those positions to the data from the flight data recorder. If the recorder shows the landing gear or flaps were in the 'up' position, but physically we know the gear was still down, that's another anomaly. That's why the forensic, on-scene work is so important. Even in a crash like this, where the aircraft appears completely destroyed, there's still a lot to learn. It's like working a crime scene — sometimes it's the smallest pieces of evidence that matter most. As the saying goes, the devil is in the details. It's not always the big things — it's often the little things that provide the biggest clues. How long does it typically take for an investigation like this to conclude — or at least to arrive at some conclusive findings? In this case, the investigative process is really twofold. The first part involves gathering as much information as possible to determine whether there was some kind of deficiency, inadequacy, or failure within the broader system. And when we say 'system,' we're talking not just about the aircraft, but also about policies, procedures, regulations — anything tied to the airline, including training and operational practices. We also need to identify whether there were any mechanical failures or malfunctions with the aircraft itself. All of these factors can have an adverse impact on flight safety. The goal is to find out what went wrong as early as possible — so if there's something that needs to be fixed, it can be addressed immediately, while other aircraft are still flying. That's why investigators push to get actionable information quickly. But the full investigation typically takes between 18 and 24 months. How quickly do you think investigators can gather actionable information — so that corrective measures can be identified and implemented? I think if the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and the flight data recorder (FDR) provide useful information because these boxes, while they are built to be somewhat indestructible, they have failed in the past. I've had to deal with that in the past. Assuming we get good data from both the CVR and FDR, that's a good start. In addition, aircraft constantly transmit data to the ground, so we have access to other repositories as well. I would expect that if there is any kind of issue that has an adverse effect on flight safety, I would expect the investigators to identify it within a week. Any final thoughts you'd like to share? I think right now, with all the media coverage and the chatter on the internet by so-called experts — and all the hypotheticals and theories floating around — it can mislead people, especially passengers who are about to get on an airplane or are making decisions based on what they've read online. That kind of information has to be taken with a high level of caution, because a lot of people are speculating without having any real facts — aside from a video that's circulating. I've read a bunch of stuff online that I know is completely wrong. But to someone who's untrained or not familiar with aviation, it may sound like fact when it's actually fiction. So, people really need to take a step back and allow the investigative process to begin. There's a team coming from the AAIB in the UK and the NTSB from the US as well. As more information comes out over the next 48 to 72 hours, we'll hopefully get a better understanding of what took place — whether it was an issue with the airplane, the pilot, or a combination of both. Ritika Chopra, an award-winning journalist with over 17 years of experience, serves as the Chief of the National Bureau (Govt) and National Education Editor at The Indian Express in New Delhi. In her current role, she oversees the newspaper's coverage of government policies and education. Ritika closely tracks the Union Government, focusing on the politically sensitive Election Commission of India and the Education Ministry, and has authored investigative stories that have prompted government responses. Ritika joined The Indian Express in 2015. Previously, she was part of the political bureau at The Economic Times, India's largest financial daily. Her journalism career began in Kolkata, her birthplace, with the Hindustan Times in 2006 as an intern, before moving to Delhi in 2007. Since then, she has been reporting from the capital on politics, education, social sectors, and the Election Commission of India. ... Read More
Miami Herald
09-05-2025
- General
- Miami Herald
A jetliner crashed into the Everglades in May 1996. Here's how you got the news
The news stopped waiting on May 11, 1996. That's when HeraldLink, the Miami Herald's first website, went live. It happened earlier than planned. ValueJet Flight 592, with 110 people aboard, had just crashed into the Everglades shortly after taking off from Miami Internationa Airport. So the decision was made to press the button and send to computers everywhere. Of course, at that time, live didn't mean instant. With no social media and a system that didn't exactly cough up instant gratification, it took more than five hours to post that breaking story. Maybe you saw it on your Mac Performa or Compaq. But the point is, the news was out before the next day's newspaper. HeraldLink was born. The ValuJet DC-9 had traveled less than 100 miles west of the airport when the crew reported smoke in the cockpit. The pilot turned around and tried to make it back. Atlanta-bound Flight 592 slammed nose-first into the muck and disappeared. Investigators later determined that 144 oxygen-generating canisters were improperly secured, labeled and packaged in the cargo hold of the plane. Here is a look at the tragedy in photos and words through the Miami Herald archives: MORE: See the original Miami Herald website crash coverage from 1996 THE CRASH Published May 12, 1996 By airboat and helicopter, rescuers searched the muck and shallow water of the Everglades, but they quickly stared at the grim reality: None of the 109 people on board a ValuJet DC-9 survived when their plane slammed into the earth west of Miami International Airport on Saturday. 'Oh, no. Not the day before Mother's Day, ' said one frustrated Metro firefighter, pulling off his sweaty flame retardant gear. The feeling of hopelessness struck even harder at families of the passengers: 'There doesn't seem to be any hope, ' said Stewart P. Thomas of Coral Gables, whose daughter, son-in-law and granddaughter were on the plane. 'The screens on TV have gotten pretty close. I can't see any metal larger than a dishpan.' Firefighters, paramedics and police officers — who have trained for just such a tragedy — could do little Saturday afternoon but slosh through the mud. At times, it seemed only the dragon flies and mosquitoes easily visited the wreckage. Bodies were sighted, but fuel that could have been easily ignited and the natural terrain hampered rescue efforts to the point where even airboats were eventually prohibited from skimming the river of grass to help. 'It is just all swamp and sawgrass. It will probably take three or four days to clean up. It will all have to be all done by airboat, ' said J.C. Esslinger, a state wildlife officer. 'It is going to be ugly out there. It's not going to be pleasant, that is for sure.' ValuJet Flight 592 took off from Miami International at 2:05 p.m. — one hour late — with 104 passengers and a crew of five, said Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Christy Williams. It was scheduled to land one hour and 55 minutes later in Atlanta. Instead, after about 20 minutes, it bored into the ground like a power drill. 'What we have is a high-impact crash, ' said a somber Luis Fernandez, spokesman for the Metro-Dade Fire Department. The FAA's Williams gave this account of Flight 592's last minutes: The DC-9 took off and had traveled less than 100 miles west of Miami, when the crew radioed Miami traffic controllers to report smoke billowing into the cockpit. The plane had been airborne eight minutes. Headed back to airport The jet, then at an altitude of 10,500 feet, turned around and tried to make it back to Miami International. At about 2:25 p.m., Miami air traffic control lost Flight 592 from its radar screens. The jet went down, apparently nose first, about 14 miles northwest of Miami International. It disintegrated on impact in a desolate area of wet earth, grass patches and trees. A private pilot from Miami Beach who was flying west at the time told Cable News Network he saw the plane go down. Daniel Muelhaupt said he was about two miles from the plane, flying toward Naples, when he saw what he at first thought was a small plane doing maneuvers. The craft was pointing down at an angle of about 75 degrees. 'When it hit the ground, the water and dirt flew up, ' Muelhaupt said. 'The wreckage was like if you take your garbage and just throw it on the ground, it looked like that.' Muelhaupt said he radioed authorities and circled until they reached the scene, which took a long time because there were no visible flames or large chunks of aircraft to focus on. 'Access was a major, major problem. The plane was broken up into many pieces and submerged in 4 to 5 feet of water.' said Metro-Dade's Fernandez. Helicopters from the U.S. Coast Guard, Metro Police and the Dade fire department finally located the crash site and reported no signs of survivors, just minuscule pieces of shredded metal, baggage, bodies and a taut crater shaped like a candle flame. The crash sight is very close to where an Eastern Airlines L1011 crashed in 1972, the worst local air disaster before Saturday. While rescuers searched in vain, distraught relatives of passengers rushed to the ValuJet counter at Miami International. Company officials quickly moved them to an auditorium, where counselors were available to help them deal with their loss. Saturday afternoon, ValuJet's president spoke from Atlanta. 'It's impossible to put into words how devastating something like this is, ' said Lewis Jordan, president and chief operating officer. Atlanta-based ValuJet, which began operations in October 1993 and serves 26 cities in 17 states, has had a checkered past. The airline has been one of the most successful startups in aviation history, but its rapid growth has been tainted by several accidents and questions about the reliability of its aged fleet. The FAA has ValuJet under a special emphasis inspection because of repeated safety problems. Last summer, the FAA issued a special inspection notice for aircraft engines that ValuJet purchased from a Turkish airline. That investigation stemmed from a June 8, 1995, fire that destroyed a ValuJet DC-9 on a runway at Atlanta. One flight attendant was burned and minor injuries were reported as the 57 passengers and five crew were evacuated. In January, a ValuJet DC-9 got stuck in the mud at Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport. The 101 passengers were bused to a terminal. Also in January, another ValuJet DC-9 with 30 people aboard slid into a snowbank after landing at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, closing the airport for nearly three hours. No one was hurt. A ValuJet DC-9 also skidded off an icy runway at Dulles in January 1994, closing the airport for almost two hours. Flight 592 was a McDonnell Douglas DC-9-32 configured with 113 passenger seats. It is powered by Pratt & Whitney JT8D-9A engines. At the crash site, Metro fire and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commision officers gathered about a half mile from the crash on the levy of the L-67 Canal. Helicopters landed on the ridge dropping off firefighters. About 5:30 p.m., police and rescue were waiting for hazardous material specialists to check out the area before going in. There was concern about possible fuel leakage and explosion. 'We have to wait until Haz Mat cleans it up, ' said E.M. Davis, a fresh water and game commission officer. But as night came on, the search was called off. Rescue officials said the fuel atop the water posed too much of a risk for the airboats. 'Night is falling, we're going to secure things here and make sure no one molests the area. We won't be going out there tonight, ' said Metro-Dade Police Capt. Rita Oramas. MORE: An Eastern plane crashed into the Everglades in 1972. See the coverage as it happened THE SEARCH Published May 12, 1996 They used airboats and helicopters. They dodged snakes and alligators. But the rescuers who desperately searched the Everglades muck for survivors of South Florida's worst plane crash soon came upon the grim reality: None of the 109 people on board a ValuJet DC-9 survived Saturday when their plane slammed into the earth west of Miami International Airport. Today, the grimmest of tasks continues — confirming the crash toll by combing the Everglades debris. Chris Aguirre, a Metro-Dade hazardous material technician, was one of the first on the scene Saturday. 'I saw a family album floating on the water. It depicted a mother with small children. My first thought was about my family and then I thought about the last seconds before the plane crashed,' Aguirre said. The feeling of hopelessness struck even harder at families of the passengers: 'There doesn't seem to be any hope,' said Stewart P. Thomas of Coral Gables, whose daughter, son-in-law and granddaughter were on the jet. 'The screens on TV have gotten pretty close. I can't see any metal larger than a dishpan.' Firefighters, paramedics and police officers — who have trained for just such a tragedy — could do little but sweat and slosh through mud. At times, it seemed only the dragonflies and mosquitoes easily visited the wreckage. Bodies were sighted, but fuel that could have been easily ignited and the natural terrain hampered rescue efforts to the point where even airboats were eventually prohibited from skimming the river of grass to help. 'It is just all swamp and sawgrass. It will probably take three or four days to clean up. It will all have to be all done by airboat,' said John Esslinger, a state wildlife officer. 'It is going to be ugly out there. It's not going to be pleasant, that is for sure.' Television news helicopters circled the site all afternoon, showing South Florida and the world the same bleak view: bits of debris dotting the shallow water and hammocks. ValuJet Flight 592 took off from Miami International at 2:05 p.m. — one hour late — with 104 passengers and a crew of five, said Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Christy Williams. The DC-9, one of aviation's great workhorses, was scheduled to land one hour and 55 minutes later in Atlanta. Instead, after about 20 minutes, the white blue and yellow aircraft bored into the ground like a power drill. 'What we have is a high-impact crash,' said a somber Luis Fernandez, spokesman for the Metro-Dade Fire Department. The FAA's Williams gave this account of Flight 592's last minutes: The DC-9 took off to the east and then turned northwest. It had traveled less than 100 miles from Miami when the crew radioed Miami traffic controllers to report smoke billowing into the cockpit. The plane had been airborne eight minutes. The jet, then at an altitude of 10,500 feet, turned around and tried to make it back to Miami International. At about 2:25 p.m., Miami air traffic control lost Flight 592 from its radar screens. The plane went down, apparently nose first, about 14 miles northwest of Miami International. It crashed in a desolate area of wet earth, grass patches and trees. A private pilot from Miami Beach who was flying west at the time said he saw the plane go down. Daniel Muelhaupt said he was about two miles from the jetliner, flying toward Naples, when he saw what he at first thought was a small plane doing maneuvers. The plane was pointing down at an angle of about 75 degrees. 'When it hit the ground, the water and dirt flew up,' Muelhaupt said. 'The wreckage was like if you take your garbage and just throw it on the ground, it looked like that.' On the ground, Sam Nelson and Chris Osceola said they were on a bass boat fishing on the L-67 Canal about a half-mile from the crash when they saw the plane begin to falter. 'The plane was going when all of a sudden it just made a right turn. I don't know what it was doing. It looked like it was trying to go back up. It was pretty low,' said Nelson, 52, of Hollywood. 'It kinda turned sideways, then it just nose dived, right down straight into the swamp.' The two men brought the boat to land and ran up on the levee to look, thinking they could help. 'The last thing we saw was the tail end going down,' Nelson said. 'Then it hit and there was a big, big explosion. You could hear the motor, like it was under full power. That thing hit so hard you couldn't even see it. After the explosion went away, there was no smoke. It was like nothing ever happened.' Muelhaupt, the small-plane pilot, said he radioed authorities and circled the crash site until rescuers reached the scene, which took about a half hour because there were no visible flames or large chunks of aircraft to focus on. Helicopters from the U.S. Coast Guard, Metro Police and the Dade fire department circled the crash site and reported no signs of survivors, just minuscule pieces of shredded metal, baggage, bodies and a taut crater shaped like a jagged candle flame. 'Access was a major, major problem. The plane was broken up into many pieces and submerged in 4 to 5 feet of water.' said Metro-Dade's Fernandez. The site is very close to where an Eastern Airlines L1011 crashed in 1972, the worst local air disaster before Saturday. While rescuers searched in vain, distraught relatives of passengers rushed to the ValuJet counter at Miami International. Company officials quickly moved them to an auditorium, where counselors were available to help them deal with their loss. At Gate G-2, a sign announcing the departure of Flight 592 still was listing it as 'On Time.' Saturday afternoon, ValuJet's president spoke from Atlanta. 'It's impossible to put into words how devastating something like this is,' said Lewis Jordan, president and chief operating officer. Atlanta-based ValuJet, which began operations in October 1993 and serves 31 cities in 19 states, has had a checkered past. The airline has been one of the most successful startups in aviation history, but its rapid growth has been tainted by several accidents and questions about the reliability of its aged fleet. The FAA has ValuJet under a special emphasis inspection because of repeated safety problems. Last summer, the FAA issued a special inspection notice for aircraft engines that ValuJet purchased from a Turkish airline. That investigation stemmed from a June 8, 1995, fire that destroyed a ValuJet DC-9 on a runway at Atlanta. One flight attendant was burned and minor injuries were reported as the 57 passengers and five crew members were evacuated. Flight 592 was a McDonnell Douglas DC-9-32 configured with 113 passenger seats. It was powered by Pratt & Whitney JT8D-9A engines. At the crash site, Metro fire and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission officers gathered about a half mile from the wreckage on the levee of the L-67 Canal. Helicopters landed on the ridge dropping off firefighters. About 5:30 p.m., police and rescue workers were waiting for hazardous material specialists to check out the area before going in. There was concern about possible fuel leakage and fire. 'We have to wait until Haz Mat cleans it up,' said Ernest Davis, a wildlife officer. But as night came on, the search continued with a handful of airboats equipped with floodlights and generators. More workers were expected to join the effort at daybreak today. Nelson, the bass fisherman who saw the plane go down, said that hours later his heart was still racing. 'It was something I will never ever forget,' he said. THE SCENE Published May 12, 1996 Late Saturday, rescue crews were trying to determine whether the ValuJet aircraft disintegrated on impact or partially lodged itself in the soft, marshy terrain of the Everglades. The area where Flight 592 crashed Saturday is thick with razor-tooth sawgrass and a variety of wildlife, including alligators. Popular with airboaters, froggers and fishermen, the swampy muck beneath the water may have acted as a pincushion, essentially swallowing the disabled DC-9 aircraft. 'That's why you don't see big parts of it,' theorized Harold Johnson, vice president of the Everglades Coordinating Council and an airboater familiar with the area. 'It may have just swallowed it up. It's like quicksand. It doesn't have a bottom.' Maj. Jim Ries of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission said that's a likely scenario, depending on the trajectory of the aircraft on impact. 'It looks like a large part of the airplane must be below the muck and mud. That stuff can be very deep before you hit shell rock,' or limestone, Ries said. May is generally the dry season in the Everglades, with water only one to three feet deep. During the rainy season, it can reach five feet in places. Alligators in the area can grow to 12 feet or more in length. But Steve Coughlin, a biologist with the game and fish commission, said they probably pose no threat to searchers. 'Usually something like that scares wildlife away,' he said. 'And if there's fuel or oil or anything like that in the water, alligators won't get anywhere near there.' Coughlin said the crash isn't likely to pose a hazard to wildlife or water quality in the area. But salvaging what's left of the aircraft may be difficult since it's nearly impossible to get heavy equipment into the area.
