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, 15:38
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"80 degrees nose up" comes from an eyewitness report that is likely inaccurate.

Needless to say, the pitch attitude of the airplane was extreme, and the resulting stall was unrecoverable.
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:39
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: on the beach
Age: 68
Posts: 2,027
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Have you ever actually flown a heavy transport category jet airplane?
Oh I don't know, he sounds like a seasoned FS9/FSX pro to me!
Evanelpus is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:40
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 7,372
Received 565 Likes on 355 Posts
Thanks, I had missed that eyewitness report, caveat noted. Roger the rest.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:42
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Saffron walden
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Guys

People died here, so lets remember this.

I have probably 15,000 hours flying 747s over 19 years and I wouldn't speculate or pontificate on the causes of this tragic accident on a forum like this.

I have my personal views on what caused the accident, and I certainly wouldn't publicly air them: there is nothing to be gained from this.

Thankfully there is a video that will help the NTSB, but in the meantime please let's have some decorum and respect our deceased professionals and their families.
Stevewearing is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:44
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
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.

Notadog, you CLEARLY haven't flown an under slung jet airliner.

From A320 QRH (so not 747 but still under slung, swept wing jet) - Stall recovery:

STALL RECOVERY

As soon as any stall indication (could be aural warning, buffet...) is recognized, apply the immediate actions:

NOSE DOWN PITCH CONTROL..................................................... ...............APPLY This will reduce angle of attack

Note: In case of lack of pitch down authority, reducing thrust may be necessary.

BANK........................................................ ..........................................WINGSLEVEL

● When out of stall (no longer stall indications) : THRUST...................................................INC REASESMOOTHLYASNEEDED

Note: In case of one engine inoperative, progressively compensate the thrust asymmetry with rudder.
Read the bit I have made bold and underlined. It's a fair idea to reduce thrust and extend slats if you're struggling with the pitch. Don't be such an aggressive little twerp.

There are those that don't know and those that don't know they don't know. You are the later.

Last edited by WhyByFlier; 2nd May 2013 at 15:45.
WhyByFlier is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:53
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: FL390
Age: 38
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have you ever actually flown a heavy transport category jet airplane?
notadog, no I havent.

I am an ATPL fellow.

The point is that you (and no-one) cant expect every flight crew to react like you would with your experience.

The reaction patterns are of course standardized but in extreme abnormal situations the correct reactions may not be commited to procedural knowledge due to lack of sim training.

Given the lack of time, the exceptionaly high work overload, you may see extraordinary things happening just because something happens "out of the pattern". In fact, declarative knowledge is somewhat useless in such situations because it is not coupled with motor skills.

Many things come into play when thinking human factors, but thats not the point.

(Damn, I hope I am not talking to an FSX pilot!)

Last edited by Lantirn; 2nd May 2013 at 15:56.
Lantirn is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 15:53
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Notadog, you CLEARLY haven't flown an under slung jet airliner.
Clearly.

Thank you for correcting my lack of experience.

The next time I stall my airplane at 1000'AGL on departure with the flaps/slats/gear extended I'll just reduce thrust and push the nose over and recover.

Silly me, I had forgotten it was so simple.

I'll go turn in my B747/757/767/727 and MD11 ratings in now.
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:01
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dorking
Posts: 491
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a layman I'm struggling to understand this:-

If load shift happened as a result (apart from not being locked down) of pitch up, and was not controllable, how did a stalled aircraft manage to pitch over? Wouldn't a massively aft cofg force to it descend nose up? It was far too slow for control surfaces to overcome that?
boguing is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:01
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well you're not considering the pitch power couple - it's a technique to assist lowering the nose. You're never too experienced to learn and given I very much doubt you've done anymore stalls in an airliner than any/many on here there's something you may have missed.
WhyByFlier is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:08
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
(Damn, I hope I am not talking to an FSX pilot!)
No. You are not. I do have a bit of a background in heavy jet operations, including the B747.

I can assure you that that crew was doing all they could to save their airplane and their lives. And in the situation they found themselves in, one of the things they were likely not doing was reducing engine thrust at 1200' AGL as they stalled.

You and others here can spout all of the nice aerodynamic theory and quote all of the checklists you like, but you obviously have zero real world experience, and you simply do not know what you are talking about.

Low altitude stall recovery doen not include reducing engine thrust. Period.

Last edited by notadog; 2nd May 2013 at 16:19.
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:19
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: farmm intersection, our ranch
Age: 58
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They did not pitch over, the nose came down during the time they were at 90 angle of bank. Big difference.
flyingchanges is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:23
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well you're not considering the pitch power couple - it's a technique to assist lowering the nose.
Right.

The "pitch power couple". OK.

Thanks for the reminder.

notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:36
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Notadog, you're not an airliner pilot. Your understanding and argument are weak and without any substance.

Pitch/power couple - ok it should be pitch/thrust couple. It has a significant effect - ask any 73/74 pilot who has done a go around - you have to push forward! In a very high alpha stall with the engines at full chat you'd do well to reduce thrust and increase smoothly out of the stall - note smoothly - a rapid application could take you back to square one.

That's the end of my comms with you - I don't like your attitude, contributions or lies.
WhyByFlier is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:37
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,895
Received 42 Likes on 23 Posts
Sorry for starting the argument but there are certainly aircraft in which a combination of aft trim and underslung engines at high power can cause uncontrollable pitch up at slow speeds, such that stall recovery becomes difficult. Some models of 737, for instance, hence the Boeing and Airbus guidance. All pilots of under-wing engined aircraft should be aware of these effects. If you have run out of other options, it's something to try, much like reducing thrust on the good engine if you're below Vmca after a failure.

If load shift happened as a result (apart from not being locked down) of pitch up, and was not controllable, how did a stalled aircraft manage to pitch over? Wouldn't a massively aft cofg force to it descend nose up? It was far too slow for control surfaces to overcome that?
Relative to the horizon, it does pitch down. Because the rate of descent was of the same magnitude as the forward speed, the angle of attack of the wing was very high, likely 40-50degs. The aircraft, relative to the airflow, was very much tail low still. To unstall the wings would require a further pitch down of c.30degs or more from what we see in the final moments.
FullWings is online now  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:49
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Notadog, you're not an airliner pilot.
Actually I am, but I'll certainly defer to your obvious knowledge that you are clearly demonstrating here.

Your understanding and argument are weak and without any substance.
Duly noted.

Pitch/power couple - ok it should be pitch/thrust couple. It has a significant effect - ask any 73/74 pilot who has done a go around - you have to push forward!
Hmmm...to do a go around one has to push forward? I've been doing it wrong for all these years! I was under the impression that to go up one pulled back on the yoke. I'm really confused. Any 73/74 pilots want to clarify this for me?

In a very high alpha stall with the engines at full chat you'd do well to reduce thrust and increase smoothly out of the stall - note smoothly - a rapid application could take you back to square one.
And this would be done at 1000' AGL in a large heavy jet in the takeoff configuration? (BTW...what is "full chat"?)

That's the end of my comms with you - I don't like your attitude, contributions or lies.
Roger, over and out!
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 16:57
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any 73/74 pilots want to clarify this for me?
Sure. If you're trimmed correctly, at approach speed and you apply TOGA thrust you WILL need to counter the nose up pitching moment caused by the underslung engines, more specifically the thrust line which is below the C of G.

Now, how will you do that?

Also you'd do well to google the Thomson incident at Bournemouth.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 17:02
  #237 (permalink)  
Mistrust in Management
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 973
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
notadog

As a 737 pilot I can confirm that a full thrust go-around, particularly from low altitude, and particularly after the autopilot has trimmed nose up on a dual channel ILS - a nose down input is required. To pull the nose up would end in tears.

Regards
Exeng
exeng is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 17:09
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Age: 59
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Notadog, you're not an airliner pilot.
WhybeFlier - I can confirm that Notadog has a current Airline Transport Pilot licence.

Can't say anything else about the quality of his comments though
eppy is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 17:11
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In my last airline (744F) we used to teach the technique highlighted by Lantirn of applying a large bank angle when recovering from very high pitch up situations (roll wings level when nose is below the horizon). It was often the only way to avoid a stall. It looks to me as though that is what the crew were trying to achieve. The recovery could be achieved in about 3000ft Unfortunately this crew didn't have that available.

A few years ago a 744 carried out a go-around. The F/O, who was flying it, thought that the autopilot was in, but it wasn't. The go-around thrust caused a very high pitch angle. A stall was avoided by the combination of full down elevator and a reduction in thrust to allow the nose to pitch down. Thrust was re-applied when the pitch was reduced.
Airclues is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 17:12
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Now, how will you do that?
Reduce thrust?

Guys, I flew the 747/757/767...

I'm pretty familiar with the go around characteristics.

Apparently the sarcasm was not clear enough.
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.