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, 18:54
  #261 (permalink)  
The Cooler King
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,703
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
My apologies, I'd have pushed forward.
Are you serious?!

Can you please tell me how pushing forward with the C of G barreling towards the back galley and the airspeed dropping off like the proverbial lead balloon with control surface authority disappearing at the same rate, is going to get the nose down?

I'm not trying to be smart. I just fail to understand your logic.

Last edited by Farrell; 2nd May 2013 at 18:56.
Farrell is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 18:56
  #262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 7,358
Received 544 Likes on 343 Posts
notadog, what I got from his post was he'd push forward, reduce power, the nose should (may?) have dropped, but he'd be dead anyway due to running out of altitude while trying to recover, as the mishap crew did.

Farrell, what I think he's getting as is pitch reduction by power reduction, since there appears to be a consensus that any pilot in that situation will already be pushing forward on the yoke to get as much pitch authority as is available.
I may be reading something into this that he didn't mean.
As noted before, reducing power at that time and place in the take off might also contribute to a losing airspeed, so you're in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, still falling ...

(I am not sure what pitch trim augmentation or assist might be available in such a situation, and his post didn't seem to address it).

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 2nd May 2013 at 19:04.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 18:59
  #263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
This occurred on a military base, so the Afghans are out of the investigative picture, I'm told. Let the NTSB review the evidence and announce the cause.
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...

Other than that, the international law is pretty clear here:
The accident occured within Afghan airspace/territory.
Furthermore this was a civil aircraft and not a military/state aircraft.
The investigation is therefore under the authority of the Afghans - read Art. 26 Chicago Convention.

In the unlikely case that an Afghan investigator should show up at the gates of Bagram airbase, they would have to let him in to do his job.
Last edited by janeczku; 2nd May 2013 at 06:10.

Reply:

If reports are true, the Afghans have stated they will not investigate. In any case, the NTSB would have a major role, regardless of the Chicago Convention. Afghanistan these days is about as Third World as it gets.

I think, given the state of the country (see above sentence), the NTSB folks will fly into Bagram AFB directly. Getting through the gate to investigate a CRAF aircraft accident on a military base would be a non-issue, especially if they are already "inside the wire" to be housed in transient quarters.
Desert185 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:04
  #264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And the flap would attempt to lower the nose, the slat lower the stall speed and the reduction in thrust to lower the nose.

And yes I'm serious, pushing forward should lower the nose! Past the aft limit, at rotation they'd have needed to push forward.

I do not believe in any aircraft the stall procedure is not a memory item. Utter crap.
WhyByFlier is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:07
  #265 (permalink)  
The Cooler King
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,703
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
Lonewolf...

I dunno. Maybe.
Thing is, I get a lot of ATPL holders with a TR who got through the exams with a Question Bank DVD and the six months of trial and error until the whole thing is memorized.

I'm not saying that this is the case here, but it's showing up all over this forum of late. Answers are known, but the 'why' and 'how" are not there.
Neither is there any appreciation of external factors including moments, vectors, lines of force etc.
It seems common even for some to see the aircraft as the whole situation, rather than it being one item in a fluid environment. Kind of like the tortoise and the hare analogy equated to say, engine spool-up racing against the line of force of a moving cargo palette. Who will win?

The most powerful questions I have in my interview arsenal are "how?" and "why?".
You'd be astonished at the number of blank expressions and periods of silence I get.

"Children of the magenta line" was what one pilot called them

All that being said, I'm sure "WhyByFlier" has his head screwed on, though.

Last edited by Farrell; 2nd May 2013 at 19:14.
Farrell is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:08
  #266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 7,358
Received 544 Likes on 343 Posts
WhyBy, if the slats deploy and reduce the stall speed, but you are already stalled, you still need time (altitude) for that change to help your corrective action. Someone previously mentioned inertia. Time is/was in short supply.

411 hit on a good point, which I think is embedded in the term "upset" as applied to this mishap. Somewhere in and around vref, rotation, lift off, and initial climb, control of pitch wasn't as expected/normal.
Very brief window of time to salvage this upset, if it can be.
That last is not yet known. If the load moved (or for some other reason CG got/was too far aft) this may not have been salvageable despite anyone's most perfect efforts.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 2nd May 2013 at 19:15.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:12
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lantirn: "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."

You nailed it in the first sentence...and then went downhill afterwards...rapidly.

Funny, I believed I could stall at flight levels BEFORE AF447.

I do have thousands of hours and years in the 747. There is very little pitch up moment as a result of increasing thrust in the 747...unlike some other four engine airplanes I have flown. Under those circumstances (from my present perspective in watching the video), I would not have reduced thrust.
Desert185 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:17
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And the flap would attempt to lower the nose, the slat lower the stall speed and the reduction in thrust to lower the nose.

And yes I'm serious, pushing forward should lower the nose! Past the aft limit, at rotation they'd have needed to push forward.
It should unless there was damage to the airplane that prevented the controls from functioning normally. Where do you suppose a 25,000 pound MRAP would be going if it broke loose? Why do you suppose the crew of this flight apparently couldn't get the nose down?

I do not believe in any aircraft the stall procedure is not a memory item. Utter crap.
Your choice to believe what you wish. Perhaps it is a training item and not a QRH item?
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:27
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WhyByFlier,

I wonder at how effective the controls would be in the latter stages of this incident. When the aircraft is rolled over on to its' straboard side would the fin have more effect in laterally levelling the aircraft than the ailerons and increase the forces to rotate the nose downwards, for instance.

Obviously sweep back of the main wings will help as well. It is very difficult to understand what the forward velocity component is.
hval is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:27
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Somewhere in and around vref, rotation, lift off, and initial climb, control of pitch wasn't as expected/normal.
Very brief window of time to salvage this upset, if it can be.
Lonewolf_50...

It may very well be that there was no pitch control available to the crew.

Some here are assuming that the airplane was controllable in pitch, and that the nose could be lowered normally by a combination of pitch/thrust. That may not be the case.
notadog is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:28
  #271 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Canada
Age: 49
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
back on topic a little...

As to whom have experience in cargo and the 744 in question...
  • how many would have been on the flight deck and who apart from the pilots (loadmasters for example jumpseat or cabin rear for example)?
  • How much time would have passed from V1-VR to say the moment the aircraft was first captured in the video(probably seconds, but how many +-)
Regards
b263354 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:37
  #272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
WhyBy, if the slats deploy and reduce the stall speed, but you are already stalled, you still need time (altitude) for that change to help your corrective action. Someone previously mentioned inertia. Time is/was in short supply.
You're right of course.

Anyway I'd suggest that as they'd just got airborne then the flaps and slats would be partly deployed already, increasing the flap setting, in the absence of any other available action, merely deepens the stall and requires a larger pitch change to get unfu**ed.

Last edited by Lord Spandex Masher; 2nd May 2013 at 19:37.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 19:46
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
b263354,

I reckon that we are unable to see approximately four seconds from when the aircraft left the runway.

Last edited by hval; 2nd May 2013 at 19:48. Reason: Whoops! Can't write the correct figure down correctly
hval is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 20:09
  #274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I reckon that we are unable to see approximately four seconds from when the aircraft left the runway.
Based on what exactly?
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 20:15
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Based on what exactly?
Metar for KQSA, a bit of a guess at the load mass (70 to 80 tonnes) with a full fuel load and Boeings 747-400 operating procedures.

Then assuming that 1200' is the altitude agl the aircraft reached plus a stop watch.

So a fair few assumptions then...
-------------

KQSA 291155Z COR 33008G17KT 9999 -TSRA SCT050CB BKN090 BKN170 13/04 A2990 RMK CB OHD MOV N SLP139 WND DATA ESTMD ALSTG/SLP ESTMD 60000 70000 51014=
KQSA 291059Z 35011G17KT 9999 FEW050 BKN065 BKN090 14/05 A2993 RMK WND DATA ESTMD ALSTG/SLP ESTMD=
KQSA 291058Z 35011G17KT 9999 FEW050 BKN080CB BKN150 14/05 A2993 RMK LTG DSNT NW SLP124 WND DATA ESTMD ALSTG/SLP ESTMD=
KQSA 291055Z 02007KT 9999 FEW040 BKN080CB BKN150 18/06 A2994 RMK PK WND 06026/1005 WSHFT 1027 LTG DSNT NW CB DSNT NW SLP124 WND DATA ESTMD ALSTG/SLP ESTMD=

Last edited by hval; 2nd May 2013 at 20:31. Reason: Metar Included
hval is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 20:22
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
in a vain attempt to get the thread back on track

so if the cargo had already flown one sector and was checked on the ground in Bagram this would indicate that it was something other than just poor loading that would have caused the alleged cargo shift. I wonder if the cargo ripped out the fixing points on the fuselage.

Last edited by STN Ramp Rat; 2nd May 2013 at 20:25.
STN Ramp Rat is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 20:26
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
STN Ramp Rat,

The fact that the aircraft had already flown loaded, and was stopping at Bagram to take on fuel had not eluded me either.
hval is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 20:33
  #278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: the dark side
Posts: 1,121
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I wonder if the cargo ripped out the fixing points on the fuselage.
Perhaps an element of the MRAP cargo failed, (eg an axle collapsed, unlikely I realise), that then lead to abnormal forces on other loading points and a movement of part of the cargo outside the C of G envelope.
jumpseater is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 21:31
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No, of course in this instance (and all swept wing airliner take offs bar the 767 under certain circumstances I believe????) slats would already be extended. My point was, if the nose wouldn't go down through all the pushing and thrust reduction then I would consider extending flaps further as there effect is to lower the nose. I appreciate it also lowers the Alpha at which stall happens but if the nose won't go down it's something I'd try - at least to this day - with further thought, study and discussion, in the future I may not! It'd probably be as fruitless as rolling it to get the nose to drop at this height.

Last edited by WhyByFlier; 2nd May 2013 at 21:52.
WhyByFlier is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 21:36
  #280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Wow! Having read your posts, suffered through your arrogance, and now wittnessed your vast array of type ratings, coupled with your vast experience that exceeds by far that of everyone else on the forum, together with your USA origin, and the glow from your literally awe inpiring wisdom I can only conclude that you must be a full fledged Deltoid. Sorry, I know I shouldn't "profile" others but yours is so obvious I just couldn't resist.

Thank you for allowing the rest of us to worship at your feet. I will now return to doing so in respectful silence.

PS: Here's a tip for you free of charge:

You should know that for most professional airmen pomposity is not highly regarded. In fact it's down right tacky.

Last edited by surplus1; 2nd May 2013 at 21:40.
surplus1 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.