Cargo Crash at Bagram
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Woodbridge, Suffolk
Age: 71
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is something strange here - the loadings on the straps during acceleration, rotation and initial climb should have been nowhere near sufficient to fracture the straps, which had performed correctly on the last sector.
No doubt those involved in the investigation are looking closely at the individuals who had access to the aircraft during the Bagram stop.
No doubt those involved in the investigation are looking closely at the individuals who had access to the aircraft during the Bagram stop.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a note attached to the original report, (in Afghani), there was reference to the straps being cut rather than snapped, broken, fractured but this may just be a problem with translation.
NY Times Article Quoted
June 3, 2013
Shifting Cargo May Have Doomed Plane That Crashed Near Kabul
By AZAM AHMED and MATTHEW L. WALD
KABUL, Afghanistan — Crash investigators in Afghanistan said Monday that quickly shifting cargo of heavy military vehicles contributed to the crash of a civilian cargo plane on April 29 in which all seven people aboard were killed.
As the Boeing 747 began to take off from the Bagram Air Base, the vehicles slammed into the back of the cargo space so hard that parts of the plane broke off and were left on the runway, officials said. With the center of gravity pushed too far backward, the nose rose too high for the plane to fly.
The cockpit voice recorder did not indicate that the pilots knew what was happening, but wiring at the back of the plane showed damage from the shifting cargo, according to Nangialai Qalatwal, a spokesman for the Ministry of Transportation and Civil Aviation. The crash was http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c32_1367332518 by a dashboard camera on a vehicle at the air base.
The accident may cast new attention on the quality of Defense Department oversight of its contractors. The safety of civilian flights is usually regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, but after a 2004 crash in Afghanistan of an American civilian cargo plane under contract to the American military, the F.A.A., which had no personnel in the country, delegated the Defense Department to oversee safety.
With the American military pullout from Afghanistan in full swing, a vast network of transportation contractors has been employed to ship heavy equipment out of the country. Although most of the cargo traffic is expected to go through Pakistani seaports via road hauling, a huge uptick in outbound cargo flights is also under way.
On May 17, the F.A.A. issued a reminder to cargo carriers with heavy vehicles on board to ensure that their loads were tightly fastened, an indication that American safety officials suspected a cargo shift in the April crash.
But on Monday, Afghan officials cautioned that it was too early to determine the exact cause of the accident, which remains under investigation. The cockpit voice recorder, which was recovered from the wreckage, has offered few clues, Mr. Qalatwal said.
“The only thing that was recorded by the black box right before the crash was a pilot’s voice, who was shouting, ‘Wait! Wait!’ ” he said at a news conference in Kabul.
The plane, operated by National Air Cargo, a Michigan-based carrier, was loaded with three armored vehicles and two mine sweepers, almost 80 tons of equipment in all, for a flight from Afghanistan to Dubai, Mr. Qalatwal said. He said that the plane had been checked twice before takeoff, once two hours before departure and again just before it left, and that neither review had revealed any technical problems.
Aviation experts had speculated earlier that there had been a problem with the plane’s pitch control, and that a part might have fallen off during takeoff.
The charred remains of the cargo straps were recovered from the site and appear to have been cut, but Mr. Qalatwal said it was unclear whether the damage had occurred before or after takeoff. The plane, consumed by fire from the crash, yielded little else in the wreckage, he said.
Under treaties governing aviation, the responsibility for investigating a crash lies with the host country, although other parties, including safety officials from the country where the plane was registered, must be involved. The National Transportation Safety Board sent technical experts to Kabul to assist with the investigation.
If the problem was shifting cargo, it was “a freak accident,” said Mark V. Rosenker, a retired Air Force general who was a member of the N.T.S.B. from 2003 to 2009, and chairman for part of that period. But, he said, “it could be that one broke loose and flipped into the others.” In that case, he said, there would have been “a domino effect” inside the plane.
Azam Ahmed reported from Kabul, and Matthew L. Wald from Washington. Habib Zahori contributed reporting from Kabul.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 3, 2013
Shifting Cargo May Have Doomed Plane That Crashed Near Kabul
By AZAM AHMED and MATTHEW L. WALD
KABUL, Afghanistan — Crash investigators in Afghanistan said Monday that quickly shifting cargo of heavy military vehicles contributed to the crash of a civilian cargo plane on April 29 in which all seven people aboard were killed.
As the Boeing 747 began to take off from the Bagram Air Base, the vehicles slammed into the back of the cargo space so hard that parts of the plane broke off and were left on the runway, officials said. With the center of gravity pushed too far backward, the nose rose too high for the plane to fly.
The cockpit voice recorder did not indicate that the pilots knew what was happening, but wiring at the back of the plane showed damage from the shifting cargo, according to Nangialai Qalatwal, a spokesman for the Ministry of Transportation and Civil Aviation. The crash was http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c32_1367332518 by a dashboard camera on a vehicle at the air base.
The accident may cast new attention on the quality of Defense Department oversight of its contractors. The safety of civilian flights is usually regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, but after a 2004 crash in Afghanistan of an American civilian cargo plane under contract to the American military, the F.A.A., which had no personnel in the country, delegated the Defense Department to oversee safety.
With the American military pullout from Afghanistan in full swing, a vast network of transportation contractors has been employed to ship heavy equipment out of the country. Although most of the cargo traffic is expected to go through Pakistani seaports via road hauling, a huge uptick in outbound cargo flights is also under way.
On May 17, the F.A.A. issued a reminder to cargo carriers with heavy vehicles on board to ensure that their loads were tightly fastened, an indication that American safety officials suspected a cargo shift in the April crash.
But on Monday, Afghan officials cautioned that it was too early to determine the exact cause of the accident, which remains under investigation. The cockpit voice recorder, which was recovered from the wreckage, has offered few clues, Mr. Qalatwal said.
“The only thing that was recorded by the black box right before the crash was a pilot’s voice, who was shouting, ‘Wait! Wait!’ ” he said at a news conference in Kabul.
The plane, operated by National Air Cargo, a Michigan-based carrier, was loaded with three armored vehicles and two mine sweepers, almost 80 tons of equipment in all, for a flight from Afghanistan to Dubai, Mr. Qalatwal said. He said that the plane had been checked twice before takeoff, once two hours before departure and again just before it left, and that neither review had revealed any technical problems.
Aviation experts had speculated earlier that there had been a problem with the plane’s pitch control, and that a part might have fallen off during takeoff.
The charred remains of the cargo straps were recovered from the site and appear to have been cut, but Mr. Qalatwal said it was unclear whether the damage had occurred before or after takeoff. The plane, consumed by fire from the crash, yielded little else in the wreckage, he said.
Under treaties governing aviation, the responsibility for investigating a crash lies with the host country, although other parties, including safety officials from the country where the plane was registered, must be involved. The National Transportation Safety Board sent technical experts to Kabul to assist with the investigation.
If the problem was shifting cargo, it was “a freak accident,” said Mark V. Rosenker, a retired Air Force general who was a member of the N.T.S.B. from 2003 to 2009, and chairman for part of that period. But, he said, “it could be that one broke loose and flipped into the others.” In that case, he said, there would have been “a domino effect” inside the plane.
Azam Ahmed reported from Kabul, and Matthew L. Wald from Washington. Habib Zahori contributed reporting from Kabul.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 3, 2013
Lack of CVR and FDR due to the wires being cut / damaged as the load shifted aft ... will anyone suggest moving those boxes somewhere "safer" or is this a rare enough "one off" to warrant no change?
With "cut" now out in the infosphere, the "sabotage" line won't go to bed any time soon. Awaiting further clarification as it comes out.
With "cut" now out in the infosphere, the "sabotage" line won't go to bed any time soon. Awaiting further clarification as it comes out.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 5th Jun 2013 at 12:49.
Methersgate:
Straps stretch over time and needs to be checked and re-tightened. Any slack with such heavy cargo will cause massive additional dynamic forces on the straps. Wood blocks will also yield and cause slack. Me, I prefer chains or a mix of chains and straps.
I do not know what was used in this case, just a general view on lashing.
There is something strange here - the loadings on the straps during acceleration, rotation and initial climb should have been nowhere near sufficient to fracture the straps, which had performed correctly on the last sector.
I do not know what was used in this case, just a general view on lashing.
Last edited by Jetdriver; 5th Jun 2013 at 14:23.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G load factors for USAF tie downs included in this article - only 1.5 g in aft direction - which would not seem to allow much leeway for snatch loading if something was loose.
http://www.tea.army.mil/pubs/nr/depl...down_Mar10.pdf
So (again) what sort of tie downs attachments are used for this sort of job - there are lots of experts on everything else here...surely someone knows?
http://www.tea.army.mil/pubs/nr/depl...down_Mar10.pdf
So (again) what sort of tie downs attachments are used for this sort of job - there are lots of experts on everything else here...surely someone knows?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Woodbridge, Suffolk
Age: 71
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Ancient Mariner (post 622)
Agree entirely, but can we think of a mechanism whereby straps that had "worked slack" could have caused this ?
They could, for example, permit cargo to move laterally and eventually to become disengaged, but I don't see that mere slackness in the restraints would cause cargo to "slam" into the aft bulkhead and I don't see that there was enough time for enough slack straps to fall off completely. The acceleration acting on the cargo during the take off of a 744 is quite modes,t and has been plotted above. Possibly, if one taut strap were taking all the load, that one would fail, and the others would fail sequentially? But was there enough time for that?
Agree entirely, but can we think of a mechanism whereby straps that had "worked slack" could have caused this ?
They could, for example, permit cargo to move laterally and eventually to become disengaged, but I don't see that mere slackness in the restraints would cause cargo to "slam" into the aft bulkhead and I don't see that there was enough time for enough slack straps to fall off completely. The acceleration acting on the cargo during the take off of a 744 is quite modes,t and has been plotted above. Possibly, if one taut strap were taking all the load, that one would fail, and the others would fail sequentially? But was there enough time for that?
Last edited by Methersgate; 5th Jun 2013 at 20:22.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Torono
Age: 56
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I first became aware of this tragedy I have to say that "interference" was one of the things that came to the forefront of my mind, a thought reinforced by the location of the event.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instead of diving in to the sabotage theories already...
As previously mentioned, Boeing has guidance on how many straps to use and where to place them, however as loadmasters have already stated, it is SOP for many loadmasters to always add many as they have available.
If one of the MRAPs was loaded and secured with insufficient straps then it is not unimaginable that they survived one takeoff/landing but failed on the next one.
How about the state of quality of the straps themselves?
Considering the loads these straps are exposed to over time, it is inevitable that the tension limits will eventually decrease. I doubt there are fixed time limits or specific equipment inspections done to make sure the straps available to the loadmaster are all still up to standard. Most likely done by the eye on day to day operations....
Just ask the big shipping companies about how many vehicles of all types go loose on the big vehicle transporters crossing the oceans, due to strap failure and or insufficient straps.
Just some of the warnings:
As previously mentioned, Boeing has guidance on how many straps to use and where to place them, however as loadmasters have already stated, it is SOP for many loadmasters to always add many as they have available.
If one of the MRAPs was loaded and secured with insufficient straps then it is not unimaginable that they survived one takeoff/landing but failed on the next one.
How about the state of quality of the straps themselves?
Considering the loads these straps are exposed to over time, it is inevitable that the tension limits will eventually decrease. I doubt there are fixed time limits or specific equipment inspections done to make sure the straps available to the loadmaster are all still up to standard. Most likely done by the eye on day to day operations....
Just ask the big shipping companies about how many vehicles of all types go loose on the big vehicle transporters crossing the oceans, due to strap failure and or insufficient straps.
Just some of the warnings:
ALL RATINGS REFERENCED IN THIS WEBSITE OR CATALOG ARE FOR PRODUCTS IN NEW CONDITION. AGE, WEAR, DAMAGE, DETERIORATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE CAN GREATLY REDUCE STRENGTH. ALL PRODUCTS SHOULD BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND ANY WORN, CUT, AGED, DAMAGED, MISUSED, OVERUSED, OR IMPROPERLY MAINTAINED PRODUCT SHOULD NOT BE USED AND SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE AND REPLACED IMMEDIATELY.
Inspect the load binder before each use. Do not use if it is defective, deformed or damaged in any way; do not repair or attempt repair; immediately remove the binder from service.
Last edited by B-HKD; 5th Jun 2013 at 15:14.
Methersgate, as I have no aviation experience I will refrain from speculating as to what might have happened. Suffice to say I have seen quite heavy chains securing trailers on a Ro-Ro vessel snap like strings when the tyres flexed as the ship rolled. I have however no idea of the forces acting on either the vessel's or the aircraft's cargo.
B-HKD:
Not wanting to bring this thread off topic, just like to add that it is not so much a matter of number of straps as how and where they are located. They need to be placed at the correct angles, vertically and horizontally to serve their purpose and to share the load equally. A maze of straps is worst case as you eventually have no clue as to which carries load.
Just ask the big shipping companies about how many vehicles of all types go loose on the big vehicle transporters crossing the oceans, due to strap failure and or insufficient straps.
Last edited by Jetdriver; 5th Jun 2013 at 15:15.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ancient Mariner
Absolutely, and what many seem to ignore or easily forget is that any loading assembly is only as strong as its weakest point. Regardless of how the straps are placed or how many straps are used.
Absolutely, and what many seem to ignore or easily forget is that any loading assembly is only as strong as its weakest point. Regardless of how the straps are placed or how many straps are used.
Last edited by B-HKD; 5th Jun 2013 at 15:18.
A maze of straps is worst case as you eventually have no clue as to which carries load.
Same thing can happen in aviation structures like fuse
-pins (sic). and engine pylons.
Redundancy is fine but indeterminate loads with possible cascading will bite you in the rear
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt there are fixed time limits or specific equipment inspections done to make sure the straps available to the loadmaster are all still up to standard
As an aside all load bearing equipment in the UK [non aviation] is formally tested every 6 months everything is inspected before use. Why would/should aviation be any different.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an aside all load bearing equipment in the UK [non aviation] is formally
tested every 6 months everything is inspected before use. Why would/should
aviation be any different.