MK 747 crash in Halifax - new findings
The Oct 12 Globe and Mail newspaper reports preliminary findings, just released by the Canadian Transportation Safety Board, as to the cause of the MK 747 freighter crash in Halifax on Oct 14, 2004.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
POOR TRAINING TIED TO JET CRASH, PROBE FINDS
By Michael Tutton
HALIFAX -- A year after a fiery crash of a Boeing 747 killed seven people, investigators say a lack of crew training on new takeoff software, combined with fatigue from working long hours, were likely factors in the accident.
Last year, after the Oct. 14 crash of the MK Airlines cargo jet at the Halifax airport, investigators at the Canadian Transportation Safety Board said the crash was caused by the throttle being set improperly by a crew member.
As a result, the heavily laden cargo plane, weighing more than 350,000 kilograms, didn't have enough speed or power to make it off the runway.
The tail of the aircraft broke off after striking a berm at the end of the Halifax runway and the plane plunged into a nearby woodland, where it exploded into flames.
But further investigation has turned up problems beyond the throttle setting; specifically, the crew's training on new cockpit software, said Bill Fowler, the board's lead investigator.
The software known as the Boeing Laptop Tool, or BLT, calculates the proper speed and thrust of the plane based on information the crew inputs on weight, runway length and weather conditions.
Mr. Fowler said the software was set for the plane's weight at its previous takeoff in Hartford, Conn., almost 110,000 kilograms lighter than the Halifax load.
After interviewing airline staff, the board concluded the software training process was incomplete.
"The company undertook to implement this [software] package following guidance material," Mr. Fowler said. "The question arose: Did they do it adequately? In our view, not all of it."
Mr. Fowler said the software could allow crew who were unfamiliar with the program to use the previous takeoff's weight data.
The investigator declined to elaborate further, saying the full analysis will become public when the board's final report is published in several months.
When asked about the crew's training in an interview, company spokesman Steve Anderson said it was adequate. He also disagreed with the investigators' concerns about pilot fatigue.
"They'd had sufficient rest at different stages of the journey. It's as simple as that. We don't believe it played a role in the accident."
At the time of the crash, the crew had been on duty for 19 hours. The full trip would have been 30 hours, Mr. Fowler said.
In Canada, regulations allow a similar-sized crew a maximum duty period of 20 hours. In the United States and England, the maximum is 18 hours. But as the plane was registered in Ghana, it wasn't required to follow those standards.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rockhound