Dana Air Jet Crashes in Lagos, Nigeria, At Least 193 Dead [PHOTOS/VIDEO]-UPDATE 6
Dana Air Jet Crash MD-83
UPDATE 6 – June 6, 2012 – 11:00 AM EDT:
The death toll has now risen to 193 as Nigerian authorities say 40 people have perished on the ground.
UPDATE 5 – June 4, 2012 – 11:20 AM EDT:
The latest reports from Lagos, Nigeria are saying at least 10 people on the ground have died as a result of the crash.
UPDATE 4 – June 3, 2012 – 6:03 PM EDT:
There have been conflicting reports as to where the plane was flying from originally. Nigeria’s Civil Aviation Authority has now said the MD-83 was flying from Abuja to Lagos.
UPDATE 3 – June 3, 2012 – 2:27 PM EDT:
Below are new pictures and video…
UPDATE 2 – June 3, 2012 – 2:02 PM EDT:
The Latest: The plane was flying from Lagos to Abuja, which is the capital of Nigeria, when the pilot said he needed to return to Lagos shortly after takeoff.
The MD-83 aircraft went down at approximately 3:30 PM local time…10:30 AM EDT.
Reports also say the plane was full of fuel so on impact there was an enormous explosion and fireball.
We are not certain if the plane struck an apartment building but it did strike a structure and split in two. All the passengers on board were likely killed instantly.
UPDATE – June 3, 2012 – 1:51 PM EDT:
Nigeria’s aviation ministry said Sunday that 147 people were aboard a Dana Airlines passenger jet that crashed into a two-story building in Lagos, the country’s largest city. “I don’t believe there are any survivors,” said Harold Denuren, Nigeria’s director of aviation.
Initial reports said there were 153 passengers on board the aircraft.
A Dana Air passenger jet on approach to Lagos, Nigeria hit power lines and crashed in to nearby structures with 153 passengers on board.
The Dana Air flight has reported to have slammed in to an apartment building.
There are no reported survivors from the McDonnell Douglas MD-83 aircraft.
‘At the crash site, an Associated Press reporter saw parts of the plane’s seat signs scattered around. The rest of the plane was cratered into the apartment building. Firefighters tried to put out the smoldering flames of a jet engine and carried at least one corpse from the building that continued to crumble. Thousands of people looked on.’
This is a developing story…stay tuned…
VIDEO:
Images from the Scene:
Dana Air Disaster in Nigeria (Photo: Nigerianeye.com)
Dana Air Nigerian Disaster (Photo: Nigerianeye.com)
Dana Air Nigerian Disaster (Photo: Nigerianeye.com)
Category: Airnation
Comments (30)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Sites That Link to this Post
- Dana Air Crash Eyewitnesses Recount What They Saw | June 4, 2012
- Dana Air Claims Bird Strike Cause for MD-83 Crash, Others Disagree | June 10, 2012
- Air Nigeria Shut Down by Regulators | June 16, 2012
- Dana Air Crash Preliminary Report: Engine Failure Likely Cause | July 15, 2012
Dear God, I’m gonna start crying. What’s going on? Terrible!! These countries have to do something to better protect their citizens. :(
Was just reading Airnation.net and then I come back to the home page and see this story. Damn! This sucks!
wait. not the same crash as yesterday, right??
No Ted. This just happened…today.
CNN said there were survivors from the crash but that could have been an early report. Bad news.
Oh no!!! I wonder what the heck happened…
This plane (5N-RAM) wasn’t that old either, being built in 1990.
http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/McDonnell-Douglas/MD-80/53019,5N-RAM-Dana-Air.php
Old enough that if maintenance wasn’t kept up anything could have gone wrong. The weather is said to have been clear.
And also that MD83 was an ex- Alaska’s Airlines jet… I hope they greased that jackscrew!
What i can’t determine is whether the plane hit the power lines “because” of another issue, or whether hitting the power lines caused it to crash. I know there was an engine problem, but was that under control?
I know a few years ago, an MD80 didn’t have the right flap setting, limiting it’s climb after takeoff, which caused it to hit power lines which made it crash. I wonder if this plane was trying to land, got to low, and hit the lines?
From the reports so far Chris it looks like one or possibly BOTH engines failed.
Hmm… that would explain it!
exactly. The two engines failed.
Sad. Another ‘hunk of junk’ goes down. Not surprised.
This plane was no “hunk of junk”…
Read a ways down the article….
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2009-03-13-aa-maintenance-questions_N.htm
What in that article indicates that the MD80 is a hunk of junk? Uncontained engine failure or wing cracks? I think they were actually talking about another plane ;)
Ruler, In think you’re losing just a bit…
EVERY plane suffers from age-related metal fatigue and other issues. What does that article prove?
So what…you’re gonna tell us that Airbus planes don’t have similar issues? I’m sure we could bust out some articles in a few minutes doing a Google search too!!
James, it’s probably not worth us educating him… Anyone who tries to argue that the ill-fated A380 “rules” anything outside of the hangar where they’re being stripped and re-built because of poor engineering isn’t worth listening to…
The MD80 is one of the most well-built commercial aircraft ever built. The design has been around since 1965 for a reason.
James,
“Airbus confirms that some additional cracks have been found on a limited number of non-critical brackets … inside the wings of some A380s,” the planemaker said in a statement…Airbus emphasizes that these cracks do not affect the safe operation of the aircraft.”
http://airnation.net/2012/01/19/airbus-more-wing-cracks/
That’s from this site. Not perfect but a correctable problem. Things like this will happen when you’ve built the most technically advanced airliner ever.
Chris, just because it’s been around since 1965…that makes it a good plane? That’s why American is rushing to get rid of them?
And do I have to start posting recent articles of all the engine and other related issues on the MD-80?
…and might I add when you’ve (meaning Airbus) has built such an amazing plane that it makes it obvious that Boeing should have retired the 747 relic 20 years ago.
Ruler, are you done with your “rant”? You might also consider working on your English as it’s hard for us to understand your point. All of the sources you are citing seem to incriminate your own arguments, which carry little weight.
And I have no idea what you’re trying to say in your last comment, as “you’re” (meaning me?) is not “Airbus” and you neglected to indicate what makes it “obvious” that Boeing should have retired the 747 20 years ago.
Your ignorance is quite obvious.
As I said in the other story Chris…I hear crickets…but no A 380 THE RULER!!! LOL
I hear them too!! LOL. I think it’s time that he “take his toys and go home”… There’s no room for ignorance when it comes to debate.
These types of discussions invariably end with no one being “right”. It’s just unfortunate that there are so many people out there who either lack the ability or willingness to analyze both sides before becoming an “Airbus” or “Boeing” exclusively. When you pick a “side” you lack all merit and ability to make a claim.
You can call it ignorance or whatever you want and that is your opinion. I, however, beg to differ.
I just happen to think that Boeing planes are junk. Fine if you don’t but there is commenting on here (and HOPEFULLY the message board!) so I am entitled to my opinion.
I also believe that my comments have merit.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
Do you realize your rants aren’t appreciated on here? This site is for adults, those who can discuss matters without bigotry.
You may consider reevaluating your “opinions” and maybe we’ll see the merit in your comments. Otherwise, you’re going to continue to be the pariah of this site.
We’re working on it right now A380…got 2 developers on it as we speak. :)