Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Cargo Crash at Bagram

Old 2nd May 2013, 13:37
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, not exactly, because the American Air Force Base is treated as "sovereign territory" type real estate, much in the same protocol as foreign embassies are. Afghan authorities may enter by invitation only.
That would be extremely unusual. Military bases are NOT embassys. I can asssure you from all the US military bases in Europe there is NOT a single one that is souvereign territory of the US of A.

Where do you get the information that it is anything but different with the Bagram base? Did you read the SOFA agrrement between US and Afghanistan?

Maybe you just mixing up souvereign territory with jurisdiction over military personnel?

Last edited by janeczku; 2nd May 2013 at 13:40.
janeczku is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 13:42
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 66
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
US military bases in a foreign country are in no sense "sovereign territory", regardless of where those bases may be. Bagram is no exception.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 13:48
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by janeczku
Well they are out of the picture, all right. But that is just because they happen to be a country occupied by american forces and have no say in anything, so...
Last I checked, Afghanistan is a NATO operation. Most if not ALL NATO nations have a presence there, including Germany.
Keep your toxic anti-US and wildly incorrect political BS out of this thread

Back on topic: The NTSB will surely have some input in this investigation.
Does the Afghanistan Government even have the facility for such an investigation?

Last edited by LiveryMan; 2nd May 2013 at 14:16.
LiveryMan is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 13:50
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stall and Roll

Until the mid 80's, the CAA required full stalls during air tests (they changed their policy due to the severe buffet during clean stalls). I was involved in several of these tests, and carried out many full stalls on the 747. On no occasion did I see the slightest hint of a wing drop during the stall or recovery. The ailerons were effective right down to the stall. We always kept our feet away from the rudder pedals as we were told that any rudder input would cause a rapid roll.

Trim Runaway.

I have never heard of a trim runaway on a 744. If it did happen, it is easily dealt with.

Loading Error

Loading can be much more critical on a freighter than on a passenger aircraft. When I flew the 744F, all of the crews were very pedantic about checking the loading of the aircraft and the trim calculations. There are so many safeguards, both manual and electronic, that the holes in the swiss cheese really would have to have lined up on that day

Raising the Gear

The first thing that happens when the gear is selected up is that all of the gear doors open, causing increased drag. The last thing that the crew would want is increased drag if the aircraft was stalling so would have left the gear down. It would have been very confusing, with the stick shake and pre-stall buffet.

Load Shift

With the low fuel load to Dubai the CofG would have been very close to the aft limit. It would only take a small aft movement of a heavy pallet to render the aircraft uncontrollable.

RNAS Portland used to allow us to carry out our stalls in their danger area so as to ensure clear airspace. If anyone was at HMS Osprey on 3rd August 1983, could you please PM me.
Airclues is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 13:52
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Please guys... Stop the drivel about stall, spin etc... Rudder here, rudder there, increase/decrease thrust bla bla bla..

If you end up with 80 degree nose up at 1200 ft in a 747 you are dead. No matter what you do.
Said in a David Attenborough voice - and here we have the flight sim pilot who crops up every 20 posts or so, trying to shout down those with an opinion. No one is being offensive, just interested and together trying to understand. There have been a number of great, insightful points made.

The only one making claims in the basis of made up 'evidence' is you in the last few pages.

Me thinks the lady doth protest to much.

LW50, I don't think it had time to fully develop into a spin but it's my belief that a big rudder input with a stalled wing made the aircraft roll over like that. It was a heck of a lot of yaw.
WhyByFlier is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:13
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Last I checked, Afghanistan is a NATO operation. Most if not ALL NATO nations have a presence there, including Germany.
Keep your toxic anti-U and wildly incorrect political BS out of this thread
You are the only one getting political here.

And - as i already said - the authority over the investigation is with the Afghans and NTSB knows it!

Quote NTSB press release:
The Afghanistan Ministry of Transportation and Commercial Aviation is leading the investigation and will be the sole source of information regarding the investigation.

Last edited by janeczku; 2nd May 2013 at 14:13.
janeczku is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:16
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Descent Rate

The video shows a time of perhaps 7 seconds from when the aircraft began descending until impact. Assuming peak altitude of 1200 feet agl, that makes the descent rate >10,000 fpm.
Sidebar is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:20
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's quite a rate. The word "brick" comes to mind
LiveryMan is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:20
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 66
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, but doesn't that presuppose that the video caught the decent in its entirety?
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:47
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 7,314
Received 488 Likes on 304 Posts
Airclues:
I was involved in several of these tests, and carried out many full stalls on the 747. On no occasion did I see the slightest hint of a wing drop during the stall or recovery. The ailerons were effective right down to the stall. We always kept our feet away from the rudder pedals as we were told that any rudder input would cause a rapid roll.
Thank you. Thanks also to CapnBloggs, WhyBy, and CaptAirProx. With your points in mind, I have watched the sequence of events a few more times. Makes more sense now. Got a better picture of the yaw with the right roll. Also paid more attention to the ground impact and the inertia/forward splash of debris.

Much obliged, gentlemen.

*tips cap*

Enter guesswork here: with Airclues' point in mind, and considering pilots trying to make the aircraft respond (this don't work, that don't work, the other don't work, try this ... ) some chance of a right rudder input made (in desperation ... never give up ... try to make it fly ... get nose down) thus the right wing drop.

And maybe not.
Lonewolf_50 is online now  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:53
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: FL390
Age: 38
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FullWings

Cutting the engine power might possibly have helped slightly but who's to know?
I have an intuitition that they reduced their thrust the last seconds before the fully developed stall. Its an intuitition only, trying to get desperately a little nose down pitching moment. Who knows. FDR will prove.
Lantirn is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:53
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Please guys... Stop the drivel about stall, spin etc... Rudder here, rudder there, increase/decrease thrust bla bla bla..

If you end up with 80 degree nose up at 1200 ft in a 747 you are dead. No matter what you do.
^

This.
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 14:58
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have an intuitition that they reduced their thrust the last seconds before the fully developed stall. Its an intuitition only, trying to get desperately a little nose down pitching moment. Who knows. FDR will prove.
An "intuition"? (I assume your "intuition" is based on your thousands of hours in B747's, right?)

Thrust was REDUCED? The airplane is falling out of the sky and the crew REDUCED thrust?

Right.

Congratulations. This qualifies for the most ridiculous statement in this thread.


Last edited by notadog; 2nd May 2013 at 15:00.
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:08
  #214 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This qualifies for the most ridiculous statement in this thread.
- actually no - whether the dog was whining in the van or the driver was English or American or if he swore - surely these win hands down?
BOAC is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:15
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: FL390
Age: 38
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
notadog

What attitude is this?

Why it is ridiculus. I am talking for the seconds before the fully developed stall not while falling and I said, intuition not something for granted. (but who cares? I am not NTSB, just having some nice talk!)

This type of approaching accidents and hindsight is not the correct approach.

We have no idea what this crew had in mind.

I am not blaming the crew of 747, but thinking of stability and that those engines are below the line of CG, you could understand what I wanted to say with this.

Dont forget, no one could believe before that they could stall it at cruise flight level (AF447).

No I dont have thousands of hrs on 747s.

Last edited by Lantirn; 2nd May 2013 at 15:18.
Lantirn is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:17
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: HKG 'visitor'
Posts: 293
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Speed, altitude, ideas. Pick two... Sadly, not much of any available in this case.

Notadog, I'm sure you're aware that while reducing thrust is counter intuitive, it remains a [jointly developed] standard Airbus/Boeing recovery technique.

Let's wait for the analysis and not half baked intuition.
spleener is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:28
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: FL390
Age: 38
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just adding, from Boeings AERO magazine, Upsets.

I paste here the important aspects.

NOSE HIGH, WINGS LEVEL.
In a situation where the airplane pitch attitude is unintentionally more than 25 degrees nose high and increasing, the kinetic energy (airspeed) is decreasing rapidly. According to the energy management discussed earlier, the energy is actually being stored as potential energy. As airspeed decreases, the pilot's ability to maneuver the airplane also decreases. If the stabilizer trim setting is nose up, as for slow-speed flight, it partially reduces the nose-down authority of the elevator. Further complicating this situation, as the airspeed decreases, the pilot could intuitively make a large thrust increase. This will cause an additional pitch up for underwing-mounted engines. At full thrust settings and very low airspeeds, the elevator -- working in opposition to the stabilizer -- will have limited control to reduce the pitch attitude.

If normal pitch control inputs do not stop an increasing pitch rate, rolling the airplane to a bank angle that starts the nose down should work. Bank angles of about 45 degrees, up to a maximum of 60 degrees, could be needed. Unloading the wing by maintaining continuous nose-down elevator pressure will keep the wing angle of attack as low as possible, making the normal roll controls as effective as possible. With airspeed as low as stick shaker onset, normal roll controls -- up to full deflection of ailerons and spoilers -- may be used. The rolling maneuver changes the pitch rate into a turning maneuver, allowing the pitch to decrease. Finally, if normal pitch control then roll control is ineffective, careful rudder input in the direction of the desired roll may be required to induce a rolling maneuver for recovery.

Only a small amount of rudder is needed. Too much rudder applied too quickly or held too long may result in loss of lateral and directional control. Because of the low energy condition, pilots should exercise caution when applying rudder.

The reduced pitch attitude will allow airspeed to increase, thereby improving elevator and aileron control effectiveness. After the pitch attitude and airspeed return to a desired range the pilot can reduce angle of bank with normal lateral flight controls and return the airplane to normal flight.
You can access the article here
Aerodynamic Principles of Large-Airplane Upsets
Lantirn is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:28
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Notadog, I'm sure you're aware that while reducing thrust is counter intuitive, it remains a [jointly developed] standard Airbus/Boeing recovery technique.
Really? Boeing recommends reducing thrust as a recovery technique during a departure stall close to the ground? Could you point me to where that is published?
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:30
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 7,314
Received 488 Likes on 304 Posts
If you end up with 80 degree nose up at 1200 ft in a 747 you are dead. No matter what you do.
Notadog:

"If you stall at 1200 ft in a 747 you are dead" is tough to argue against. Time and altitude for recovery probably not available. I don't see where "80 degrees nose up" comes from, in this event, based on what evidence is available.

Lantirn:
The reduced pitch attitude will allow airspeed to increase, thereby improving elevator and aileron control effectiveness. After the pitch attitude and airspeed return to a desired range the pilot can reduce angle of bank with normal lateral flight controls and return the airplane to normal flight.
The Boeing article excerpt is of interest, thanks. Of course, that last bit doubtless presumes "altitude/time sufficient to do all that."

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 2nd May 2013 at 15:39.
Lonewolf_50 is online now  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:31
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why it is ridiculus. I am talking for the seconds before the fully developed stall not while falling and I said, intuition not something for granted.
Lantirn...

Have you ever actually flown a heavy transport category jet airplane?

You do realize that the excerpt you posted refers to upsets at high altitude, not at 1000', right?

Last edited by notadog; 2nd May 2013 at 15:42.
notadog is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.