Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Nypsy on April 30, 2013, 02:44:46 PM
-
Terrible to watch. 7 crew died.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=icfVsql38oc
-
Goodness me. Speechless.
-
Sickening, prayers go out to the families.
:salute
-
Absolutely awful.
They're saying weather may have played a role?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/04/30/weather-may-have-played-role-in-horrifying-bagram-airfield-crash/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/04/30/weather-may-have-played-role-in-horrifying-bagram-airfield-crash/)
-
Speach less
-
:frown:
Appears to be too heavy, or trying to climb too fast, or engine failure?
Sad deal.
-
nasty, they had a long time to appreciate how that was going to play out. unsecured cargo?
-
Just rumors at this point, but the transport company's internal speculation is that one of the MRP's was either loaded incorrectly or shifted in flight.
-
:cry :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry :uhoh
-
My bud does that flight for evergreen on a 747 and he thinks it was a load shift that caused AFT CG making recovery nearly impossible.
It looks like they went full stick forward and were probably cranking the trim in addition to the alternate trim to get enough authority to get the nose down.........which don't move very fast or they might have recovered with enough altitude.
-
:pray
-
Ugh. Nose high power on stall right after takeoff... Could be a few causes, none of which really mattered to the crew. I do hope they find out the problem so maybe it could prevent it from happening to another flight.
Still...
Trim incorrectly set for takeoff
Flight control or hydraulic malfunction
Uncommanded elevator movement
Incorrect CG before takeoff
Load shift after takeoff
Elevator failed to move for whatever reason (not sure if these things have control locks?)
Physical damage suffered on the ground or shortly after takeoff leading to flight control malfunction
Pilot error
Pilot seat shifts aft at rotation and pilot doesn't release controls (I talked to someone who saw a Cessna 172 do this on takeoff...)
Many of these can probably be ruled out (or confirmed) by wreckage analysis. Not a fun job though, made more difficult by the location.
-
:pray
-
Speculation/theories over on a pilot board are that a weather event caused the nose to pitch up, which caused a load shift, which caused a stall.
In other news... locally there was a midair between two 172s. One made it down on a golf course. Other augered. Sad couple of days in aviation.
RIP and prayers.
-
Nightmarish.
-
From NYCAviation:
National Air Flight 102: A Preliminary Report
ANALYSIS
Informal analysis: (based on observations, assumptions, and deductions). Note, investigators will be reviewing all evidence, and the conclusions will be more soundly reasoned than this analysis based solely on the video footage.
The fact that the gear was down indicates that the crew was experiencing problems immediately after takeoff that focused their attention elsewhere. From the video, you can see the aircraft’s speed was deteriorating. There is a transient smoke stream from the engines just before the stall, which is an indication of an acceleration of the engine core’s RPM – the crew were likely firewalling the throttles. There was a light dip of the left wing at the beginning of the stall. The pilot likely countered with right rudder, a correct but excessive input that caused the aircraft to enter a spin to the right. At this point, airspeed appears to be nearly undetectable but probably around 100 knots.
Swept wing aircraft, especially ones with high angles of sweep like the 747, pitch up at the last moment of a stall before the nose drops and airspeed is recovered. In the video, the nose does not drop until the aircraft is on its side and rapidly loosing altitude. Once the aircraft is on a knife-edge, the airflow will cause the vertical stabilizer to weathervane. This brings the nose down. During this time, the right rotation also stops. If there had been an engine failure, the rotation would have continued in the direction of the failed engine. As the wings are brought level, the nose down attitude remains stable through impact. At this point, there are vapor trails from the horizontal stabilizers and wing. This indicates a high pressure differential which is clearly from the high angles of attack on the surfaces.
The crew had a controllability problem that was present from rotation. Pilot training and instinct is to lower the nose if the aircraft is pitching up. This wasn’t possible. To put this aircraft in the position it was would have required excessive nose up elevator or excessive rear Center of Gravity (CG). Since this was a routine flight and the aircraft had not likely had major maintenance causing a critical failure of the flight controls, a rear CG is the likely problem.
This is also indicated on the final moments prior to impact. Had the CG been in the proper location, the nose down pitch would have continued as the CG forward of the wing’s lift would have accelerated towards the earth from gravity while the wing resisted this acceleration due to airflow (drag) on the wing, even with a major failure of the trim or elevator. Just prior to impact, the pitch remains mostly stable, indicating the CG was between the wing and tail, and the weight on each was proportional to the lift being generated. The proportion of the surface area of the wing to tail surface would be equal and inversely proportion of the CG between them. Ie, if the surface area was 70% wing and 30% tail, the CG would be 30% back from the wing, or 70% forward of the tail.
There are many other possibilities, example pilot error. Though this is unlikely, these must be considered until conclusively found otherwise.
-
Has anyone explored a blocked pitot tube and misread speed indicators?
-
Has anyone explored a blocked pitot tube and misread speed indicators?
That's an airbus trick. :noid
-
Has anyone explored a blocked pitot tube and misread speed indicators?
I wouldn't look twice at it. A daytime visual departure with a load of heavy stuff in the back a crew wouldn't pitch to such an extreme angle which is significantly beyond any normal deck angle for departure. This crew had a problem that they might not have know about until potentially even after the airplane rotated if it was a load shift.
Ernie Gann wrote about this happening to him in Fate is the Hunter. That day a crew member in the back moving the heavy stuff by hand saved the day. No such luck with MRAPs if something similar happens to be true. A mis-set trim is unlikely because of a configuration warning I would expect this airplane to have. A flight control failure, runaway trim which you couldn't interrupt (shouldn't happen) or some other failure could be plausible. Either way I wouldn't expect this to be the result of purely a lack of stick and rudder skills.
The Navy lost a COD airplane some years ago to a load shift incident occurring during the cat shot. There is video and it's not too dissimilar from this accident.
-
The Navy lost a COD airplane some years ago to a load shift incident occurring during the cat shot. There is video and it's not too dissimilar from this accident.
9 soles lost.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlDmMwI9cik
-
All the watercooler talk yesterday was saying it was a shift in weight load due to improper cargo securing. Heaviest cargo in 747s goes closer up front, infront of the wing spar, and if it isn't secured it'll cause a domino effect on climbout that shoves everything aftward. By the time the pilots realised what was happening it was too late, all their cargo had shifted tail-most. The video cam is lucky to of been at the right place and time to catch it.
This is extremely unfortunate but nobody wants to rush and conclude before the official report is done, because if the rumors are correct that it was an improperly secured load (extremely common out of Bagram) then you know it was human error and someone caused this accident, either intentionaly or negligently, but ultimatley that more than a few people didn't do their job and this could fo been avoided.
And a very thurough report will follow, all 7 lives lost onboard were Americans.
-
RIP to the crew, very sad.
That's an airbus trick. :noid
Not really
Birgenair Flight 301 was a flight chartered by Turkish-managed Birgenair partner Alas Nacionales ("National Wings") from Puerto Plata in the Dominican Republic to Frankfurt, Germany via Gander, Canada and Berlin, Germany. On 6 February 1996, the Boeing 757-225 operating the route crashed shortly after take-off from Puerto Plata's Gregorio Luperón International Airport.[1][2] There were no survivors at all. The cause was a pitot tube blocked by wasp nests that were built in it as it had been some time since the plane had been on any flights and it was not covered up properly when stored.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birgenair_Flight_301
-
9 soles lost.
One crewmember only had one foot? :uhoh
-
Souls. My bad.
-
I get confused easily so it's all ok. Caveman pilot, that's me.
-
One crewmember only had one foot? :uhoh
If they only find 1, 9 are lost I guess...
-
That's an airbus trick. :noid
Indeed. We all know Boeing instruments work on magic, not something so crude as Pitot tubes and static ports...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birgenair_Flight_301
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroper%C3%BA_Flight_603
-
Indeed. We all know Boeing instruments work on magic, not something so crude as Pitot tubes and static ports...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birgenair_Flight_301
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroper%C3%BA_Flight_603
The magic in boeing products is that the pilot flies the plane, not HAL. Makes it more likely (in my opinion and experience) that a pilot used to actually flying the plane will be able to recognize avionics malfunctions and revert to good old stick and rudder skills learned early on in flight training. No matter what the airspeed indicator says, good old known pitch and power settings can save the day when dealing with almost any pitot/static malfunction. Unless HAL is interfering...
-
Unfortunately reality differs with your opinion. Boeings are just as automated as Airbuses these days. The only real difference is the fly-by-wire system. It's the autopilot systems that has killed people in planes from both manufacturers, not the flight controls.
-
However, you hit upon an important problem with modern aviation; the pilots lose their basic flying skills. I think it would be a good idea to require that civilian pilots get some sort of minimum number of hours every year in basic stick-and-rudder aircraft. Preferably something crude and mechanical that they need to work to fly.
-
Unfortunately reality differs with your opinion. Boeings are just as automated as Airbuses these days. The only real difference is the fly-by-wire system. It's the autopilot systems that has killed people in planes from both manufacturers, not the flight controls.
and I thought it was the ground that had killed them all
semp
-
If you want to get pedantic, it was really the sudden stop...
-
If you want to get pedantic, it was really the sudden stop...
The sudden stop certainly contributed but in reality it was the stress incurred when the sudden stop didn't happen at the exact same time for the plane and people. Even a mild sudden stop can kill if not all the pieces stop at the same time.
-
Unfortunately reality differs with your opinion. Boeings are just as automated as Airbuses these days. The only real difference is the fly-by-wire system. It's the autopilot systems that has killed people in planes from both manufacturers, not the flight controls.
Ah, no, they are not. Autopilots don't kill anyone anymore than spoons make Rosy O'donnell fat.
-
A Korean Air Cargo plane crashed in 1999........
It was dark when the plane took off from London Stansted Airport, with the captain flying. When the captain tried to bank the plane to turn left, his ADI showed it not banking and the comparator alarm sounded repeatedly. The first officer, whose instrument would have shown the true angle of bank, said nothing, although the flight engineer called out "bank".[1] The captain made no response and continued banking farther and farther left. At 18:38, 55 seconds after take-off, Flight 8509's wing dragged along the ground, then the aircraft plunged into the ground at a speed between 250 and 300 knots, in a 40° pitch down and 90° left bank attitude.[1] The aircraft exploded on impact.
Following the plane's departure from Tashkent on the previous flight segment, one of its inertial navigation units (INUs) had partially failed, providing erroneous roll data to the captain's attitude director indicator (ADI or artificial horizon). The first officer's ADI and a backup ADI were correct, a comparator alarm called attention to the discrepancy, and in daylight the erroneous indication was easily identified. The ADI's input selector was switched to the other INU and the correct indications returned.[1]
At Stansted, the engineers who attempted to repair the ADI did not have the correct Fault Isolation Manual available and did not think of replacing the INU. One of them identified and repaired a damaged connecting plug on the ADI. When the ADI responded correctly to its "Test" button, they believed the fault had been corrected, although this button only tested the ADI and not the INU. The ADI's input selector was left in the normal position.[1]
-
Ah, no, they are not. Autopilots don't kill anyone anymore than spoons make Rosy O'donnell fat.
Contribute to killing people then. A lot of the "controlled flight into terrain" incidents are because the crew have mismanaged the automated navigation systems allowing the autopilot to fly the aircraft into terrain. It's like a pedantic convention in here.
-
Contribute to killing people then. A lot of the "controlled flight into terrain" incidents are because the crew have mismanaged the automated navigation systems allowing the autopilot to fly the aircraft into terrain. It's like a pedantic convention in here.
Apparently, your vast flying experience in both types makes you the "go to" expert on the subject. I yield to your vast expertise.
-
I don't need flying experience in any aircraft to read accident reports.
-
The guy driving that dashcam had nerves of steel
-
The guy driving that dashcam had nerves of steel
I think he dug his nails into his pet dog. towards the end of the film you can hear the dog.
semp
-
Just once in a while airline pilots should do this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-u-MCDi7Gk
Great piece of flying.