Kalitta splits in two

[Stratofreighter]

Okay,

No heavy casualties. Five POB on board, four lightly injured according to
http://www.deredactie.be/cm/de.redactie/vlaamsbrabant/080525_zaventem_crash .
Click on the image for footage.

More info, see
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=328328
and
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7419280.stm .

[jumbojet1159]

Cargo plane from Mich carrier crashes at Brussels airport

Associated Press - May 25, 2008 9:54 AM ET

BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - Authorities say a large cargo plane from a Michigan-based carrier crashed at the end of a runway and split in two while trying to take off today at Brussels airport.

Francis Vermeiren, mayor of the nearby town of Zaventem, says 4 of the five crew members on board the Boeing 747 were slightly injured. The mayor was coordinating rescue efforts after the crash.

He says the plane was on a scheduled flight to Bahrain. It was not known what cargo the plane was carrying.

The plane came to a halt at the end of a runway, near houses and a cemetery.

The plane is owned by Kalitta Air, a cargo carrier based at Willow Run Airport near Ypsilanti (Michigan).

[5Y744]

brakes up?

[sirloadalot]

I think you will find it was carrying United States Post for troops in Iraq
It looks nasty. Wish a quick recovery to all involved

[kaaremi]

An interesting airline indeed, closely assocated with Uncle Sam's activities in troubled places. I wonder what is going on around the wreck and what the rescue crews should not find.:confused:

[Earl]

Quote: kaaremi Diplomatic cargo...
An interesting airline indeed, closely assocated with Uncle Sam's activities in troubled places. I wonder what is going on around the wreck and what the rescue crews should not find.
Earl
I think that any time someone carries mail for the US postal service or maybe supplies for the US consulate it is considered Diplomatic.
Remember there is a US Navy detachment in Bahrain so this type of cargo is probably normal and everyday.
Sorry guys don't think you will find a conspiracy here.
Good that the crew are OK.

[WhaleDriver]

A pic

http://www.deredactie.be/polopoly_fs/1.311704!image/487399522.jpg_gen/derivatives/large/487399522.jpg

http://www.deredactie.be/polopoly_fs/1.311704!image/487399522.jpg_gen/derivatives/large/487399522.jpg

[Need to Know Basis]

Please don`t go into one out Uncle Sam & Military Cargo. All US Carriers cargo as well as pax are in the CRAF programme. Kalitta, Polar, DHL, Fed Ex, UPS, Evergreen all fly for Uncle Sam and Military Cargo. Nothing unusual. If the UK had a commercial freight carrier, they also would be working for the MoD......problem being there are none left......apart from DHL & GSS.....go figure. :bored:

[hvydriver]

Nothing. I've done that run for DHL many times myself. US Mail, some DHL material, and non-hazardous DOD stuff.

[Perf Init]

Looks like the rear end came to a faster stop than the front end. Body Gear embedding.

But mail (cookies and love letters) is not that heavy or is it?

[Flightmech]

Oh dear,

Looking at the tail it appears to have split into three!

[Stratofreighter]

See http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?regsearch=N704CK&view=true for more photos.

As you can see at http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6255728 (http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6255728) she finally stopped rather close to a railway line...

[MarkerInbound]

I would think if the rear came to a stop before the nose section there would be a gap between the two.

Paper can be very heavy.

[joehunt]

Well, that will be one less aircraft having to be flown to the desert and parked up, when oil hits $200 +/barrel. it is parked up already.

[masterairwaybill]

tThis aircraft N704CK
Was this not the same aircraft which P Bowles was touting around with a coupleof years ago and had it regustered in Banglasdesh at one time ???

[The Blade2]

Sorry but no it is not the same a/c....
Philip Bowels got hold of the Kalita registered a/c N802KH which he managed to get the Bangladesh authorities to put it on their register as S2 ADT.....
Having sat at Manston for quite some considerable time it was purchased and flew off to Germany to be prepared for a new life in Africa....it never happened and was eventually broken up. Obviously the engines must have been worth more than the airframe but thats life..... At least on this latest incident there were no fatalities, now we must wait to hear what actually went wrong...:ooh:

[Joe McDermott]

Nice shot of 704CK on departure from BRU a while back at this link to WorldAirPics.com

http://www.worldairpics.com/photo/1026699/M/

[masterairwaybill]

BLADE 2

Thanks for update - just thought for a moment that P Bowles was still haunting the industry !!!

[bokknai]

That's funny I could have sworn the last time I saw an MK Airlines 747-200 freighter it was flying under G register.........!!??:confused: Get your facts right "Need To Know Basis"

[ex dog]

Its just good news all the crew , managed to get out

Sorry to the Kalitta family for losing an aircraft , but !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[acmi48]

what happens if the FAA find further fault with the classic and issue another expensive AD notice..death of the 200(s)f and end of the iraq war in one go..

get your used 400f's here..

[layinlow]

You might be very right. The classic is on its last legs anyway.

[layinlow]

It's probably too soon to speculate but I wonder what caused the crew to reject. If they heard a loud sound, could have been the fuselage breaking apart or something else? From the pictures, a very peliminary observation is that the aircraft broke along the splice lines. If it was structural, how many more of these older classics are there running around with questionable conditions? If the FAA and the NTSB look into this, a lot of carriers could get hurt. Part 26 was created just for this kind of situation, very old aircraft running around with potentially dangerous problems. I am afraid this could start the death knell for the grand old lady.

[trashhauler]

A little super glue and a lot paint. Connie will have it up and running in no time.

[Junkflyer]

You say it is too soon to speculate yet you continue and speculate on something that really makes no sense. I guess thats due to all the DC-8's, 727's, DC/MD 10's, Md-80's and 74's just falling out of the sky everyday.

[layinlow]

Don't get me wrong Junk. I dearly love the "Queen of the Sky" having flown it for many years but age is age and there is no accounting for it.

[ex dog]

My opinion only , is this was an unfortunate incident whether the Airframe was 28 years young or not , going back to previous post MD-10/11 707, DC-8 etc etc makes no difference ,as long as there is MX and good MX
There should not be a problem

Like i said my opinion

[layinlow]

Agreed there. But how many "operators" out there are working on a shoestring. I am not putting Kalitta in that group, but there are a bunch of other 747 operators who are. If, and I say if, the investigations point to age and fatigue, you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be a of of dictates come down that would be very expensive. I would hate to see that. There is no other like the jumbo and in my book never will be, but alas, all great things must come to an end. Let's hope it isn't the last great three-man bird.

[trashhauler]

Having flown CKs, I am sure Connie wouldn't put a bad bird in the air and agreed with the previous post. And I am not sure that it was structural failure either. Let's wait for the final results.

[411A]

A little super glue and a lot paint. Connie will have it up and running in no time.

Similar thinking prevailed when he tried to operate L1011 freighters...and promptly found out that a Lockheed (and Rollers) simply would not comply....no matter how loud he crowed.

[Sleeping Freight Dog]

Has there ever been a similar RTO accident that resulted in this kind
of aircraft damage??? I know the LH B747 went backwards down a
ditch, and was repaired, but I can not recall a plane splitting like this
before.

[powerstall]

tis' hard to say but... There's always a first for everything. :rolleyes:

[Junkflyer]

That A340 that let loose during the factory test runs didn't fare too well.

[Check 3 Greens]

Hi guys, I found some amateur footage of the evacuation procedure that particular day...

http://www.deredactie.be/cm/de.redactie/mediatheek/1.312074?mode=popupplayer&clickedMediaId=http://www.deredactie.be/cm/de.redactie/mediatheek/1.312151&fullscreen=false

I sure hope their rejected take-off actions (Thrust,Brakes,Speedbrake,Reverse) were performed a bit faster...:oh:
But no comment there, the crew did a good job.:ok:

Having done the freighter stuff for quite a few years out of Bru myself including the Bah and Dxb routes, I can confirm that Kalitta wasn't/isn't the only carrier with a full load for the US GI's.
The yellow banana's did it aswell.

I'm sure a local Bru operator just started off with 2 74' classics will be interested in some spareparts...;)

Any landing you can walk away from is a good one...

[L-38]

Speaking of that A-340 incident. . . . I had recently heard that it was caused by the ground prox / ground shift cb (or such) being pulled to silence the annoying take off warning horn during it's engine run up test. Doing so put the aircraft into flight mode, releasing it's brakes.

I had also heard that this was done by the acceptance crew of the buying airline.


Anyone else hear this as the cause? Please excuse me if this was old news.

[Perf Init]

Does anyone have a picture of this accident with the thrust reversers showing deployed ?

[ex dog]

Perf , be honest i don't think they really had time for that !!!!!!!!!

[Check 3 Greens]

No time to deploy the thrust reversers?
Come on be serious... you must have had some reject procedure training at one time..?
Let's just wait until they come up with some official comment after they reviewed all the material shall we?
Afterall: job well done by the crew...but have you ever seen an aircraft split up like that?

Until then: Any landing you can walk away from is a good one...

[weido_salt]

If you get a piece of metal and bend or twist it for long enough, it will fracture. Simple. The trick is to find where that piece of metal has decided to begin to fracture, before it actually does.

I have a feeling in my gut, that it was extremely fortunate for a lot of poeple, the crew heard the bang before V1.

[greuzi]

Message deleted

[weido_salt]

greuzi

What happened mate?

Choke on your lunch? Bit of Grissel? Then spit it out if you got something to say!:=

[HalloweenJack]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/05/29/224319/engine-fire-alert-preceded-kalitta-747fs-rejected-take-off.html

Pilots of the Kalitta Air Boeing 747-200 freighter destroyed after overrunning at Brussels rejected the take-off at about the same time as air traffic controllers observed a fire in one of the aircraft’s two right-hand engines.

that seems very plausable - aircraft at V1 or just afer has a fire alert and rejects the take - off, leaving little breathing room for slowing down at near rotation speed for a heavy loaded freighter.

will be a brown trousers moment for any freight dog to suddenly lose an engine at a critical time.

[Mile Hi]

Hey Guy's the main thing is all are OK to fly another day....

Greetings from the past,
BKK, Richard

[layinlow]

Great to hear!!!

[L-38]

N704CK's fractured fuselage breaks are reminiscent of the animated rendition of where TWA 800 broke apart after it's belly blast. Similar fracture points?

[layinlow]

With the fuel load they had the center tank was empty.
structural failure or just and engine puking? Only time will tell

[zerozero]

N704CK's fractured fuselage breaks are reminiscent of the animated rendition of where TWA 800 broke apart after it's belly blast. Similar fracture points?

So, you're suggesting it was either a bomb or it was shot down?

:p

;)

[layinlow]

No. I am just wonder what happened; did it break apart on takeoff or after rejecting for an engine failure? I am sure the investigations will reveal what actually happened.

[Evanelpus]

No. I am just wonder what happened; did it break apart on takeoff or after rejecting for an engine failure? I am sure the investigations will reveal what actually happened.

Don't think the aircraft took off mate, thought it aborted around V1.

One would sincerely hope that the accident investigation DOES reveal what happened.

[trashhauler]

Oh, I am sure they will. They have all the parts, the Belgians, FAA, and NTSB are all on the case. It may take a while. Thank God they didn't burst into flames.

[L-38]

"So, you're suggesting it was either a bomb or it was shot down?"

Yeah - 704 suffered a direct hit, shot down by a midget while laying on his back on the runway centerline. .(just after the nose wheel squished him).

No . . . . . Post #45 should read - common fail point when stressed . . . that's all, nothing more.

[ex dog]

Sorry for my ignorance , but i thought V1 was point of no return

No matter What !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Junkflyer]

It is, but there are rare instances where you don't have a choice-dual engine failure on a 74 etc.

[sidman]

Heard the FO was the one that aborted!! Did they lose two engines on the runway?

[SNS3Guppy]

That operator does not abort takeoffs; it rejects them, and the First Officer does not have the option of rejecting the takeoff. Only the captain does that.

[fesmokie]

PNR or Point of No return ( as you put it) has nothing to do with V speeds. If a very old and Big aircraft such as a 747 classic suffers a major malfunction such as two engines failing during the TO roll or it breaks in half after V1 it may just warrant rejecting the Take Off. :ugh: The experts should find the cause so we don't have to.

[ex dog]

Yes ,you are correct , i don't no the answer , just happy the crew got out
The pictures i have seen look pretty horrendous

[Heavy Cargo]

If 1 eng out ,Get it 50foot in the air ,gear up and start dumping at the fence. Keep going ?
If 2 out do as they did ?

Glad all ok.

[point8six]

Why the hurry to start fuel jettison? The a/c would only be 300-310 tonnes, with a max. landing weight of 285 tonnes. Stick to company SOPs regarding flight following an engine failure. With 2 engines losing power - that's a different story!
So far there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the RTO was started after V1, nor that 2 engines lost power.

[Check 3 Greens]

If you loose 2 engines after V1, it's just not your lucky day...

V1 is a calculated figure which is giving the relation between ASDA and TORA.
At this specific point (speed vs rwy lenght) the decision Has to be made to either stop or go. Make the decision a few knots before V1, 'cause with the acceleration your initiation may well be later than V1...:ouch:
Anything later than that and you're committed to go. That's what you briefed in the first place.
Only with a relatively light aircraft and a very long rwy (not limiting)
there's room for improvisation if it's gonna save your asses.
Try EdwardsAFB...;)

The difficult one is when the problem occures just before V1 but remains unnoticed or the action is delayed until you've already passed the magic number...-> It's now a GO because as per your calculations you Will go off the runway if you try to stop the beast at this point... :eek::=

It's all in the Boeing FCTM if you have one.

Sorry for being a bit academic, but this stop/go discussion was leading us nowhere...:}

Guys take care outthere and I suggest you request Rwy 25 for a while when in Bru.

Chrz,

[kellyoldsmunt]

BUT.....
at least there is one less bag of crap flying around, comming to an airport near you !
glad the crew were safe.

[SNS3Guppy]

BUT.....at least there is one less bag of crap flying around, comming to an airport near you ! glad the crew were safe.


Now there's a wonderfully stupid and ignorant comment to make, isn't it? (it is).

What would you know about that airplane?

[Dutch74]

From Flight International magazine's web-site.

Overrun Kalitta 747 suffered power loss but no engine damage
By David Kaminski-Morrow ([email protected])

Investigators in Brussels have found no evidence of engine damage on the Kalitta Air Boeing 747-200 freighter (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/startup/747f.html)destroyed in a take-off overrun on 25 May, but confirm that one engine suffered a loss of power at a critical speed threshold.
The Belgian inquiry has also determined that the correct aircraft parameters, runway selection and weather data were uploaded to the 747’s computer before departure, and that use of runway 20 would not have posed any problems.
Two pilots, two engineers and a passenger accompanying diplomatic cargo escaped after the jet broke into three sections during the overrun. There was no prior structural failure; the break-up was caused by impact forces as the jet went over a 4m (13ft) drop.
“At this stage there is no reason to make urgent recommendations,” says the Service Public Federal Mobilite et Transports, which is heading the probe.
Analysis of the flight recorders, it says, shows the initial part of the take-off roll was normal, with constant acceleration until one of the Pratt & Whitney JT9D engines suffered a “momentary” loss of power.
This power loss, which was accompanied by a “detonation”, occurred as the aircraft reached the V1 speed – the threshold beyond which a crew normally must commit to becoming airborne, because the aircraft cannot be stopped safely on the runway.
The crew heard the noise and air traffic controllers witnessed flames from the right side of the aircraft.
Two seconds later the engine thrust was reduced to idle and the aircraft decelerated, but failed to stop before the runway end. Thrust reversers were not deployed, although a rejected take-off calculation does not take reverser use into account.
All four engines were operating as the 747 overran and, upon inspection, showed no sign of catastrophic failure. The engine cowlings were not punctured.
Following the indications of a possible problem with one of the right-hand engines, these were subjected to an initial endoscopic inspection of the high-pressure turbine and compressor.
“This inspection, although incomplete, failed to reveal any internal damage,” say the investigators. The fan-blades and low-pressure turbine remained in place and were similarly undamaged.
Specialists are to carry out a more thorough teardown and examination of the engine components.
None of the cargo pallets had shifted significantly during the accident, but the investigators are to check the loading distribution as part of the inquiry. The jet had stopped over in Brussels as part of a service between New York JFK and Bahrain.

###################################################

Preliminary report of the Air Accidents Investigation Unit of the Belgian Federal Ministery of Transport at:

in Dutch
http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/pbs/p080604an.pdf (http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/pbs/p080604an.pdf)

in French:
http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/pbs/p080604af.pdf (http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/pbs/p080604af.pdf)



- no apparent problem as regards the use of RW 20/02 for this flight - all flight data correctly entered in flight computer
- brief loss of power on one engine at about (sic) V1 associated with loud bang and flames, as confirmed by crew cq witnesses/controller.
- 2 sec after the bang, thrust was reduced to idle - no reverse thrust commanded - vigourous braking started and maintained until final stop
- preliminary on site endoscopic inspection of engines 3 and 4 - although very incomplete - didn t show any damange in the HP or LP compressor, HP turbine nor of the fan blades
- cargo found correctly stowed after impact - actual cargo on board being compared with load sheet data
- no catastrophic structural damage before final impact (4m drop)
- L1 door blocked due to structural damage on impact, 'service' door used to evacuate

FDR and CVR will now be analysed further , and engines will be recovered from the wreckage and further investigated upon.

[borghha]

The second part of the previous post is a post I made on the other thread just after the publication of the preliminary report. I don't mind people quoting, but please mention your source if you do so Dutch74.

[Dutch74]

I tried to just direct link it to your sources but one of the links was bad and in the end I got lazy. So I apologize for not naming you as the source....:ooh:

[SMOC]

Plugged in the following for a GE CF6-50E2 (51,800lbs rated thrust) 747

BRU RWY 20 +20C QNH1000 5 Tail and 306,000kg

Came out with Max thrust 112.7 %N1

Flap 20

V1 133
VR 144
V2 158

Also allowed for an addition 30,000kg to be carried.

[Stitchman]

OK, now plug the data in for a PW-JT9D powered 747.

[74tweaker]

Why would no reverse thrust be selected? Would that not be SOP for a rejected takeoff?

[SNS3Guppy]

Why would no reverse thrust be selected? Would that not be SOP for a rejected takeoff?


Again, that would really depend on the circumstances. We have no useful information about those circumstances to explain what occured. Presently one should wait for the facts.

[Dutch74]

Using reverse thrust would be SOP, but reverse thrust is not factored into the runway analysis. So not using reverse thrust would not be a contributing factor to the aircraft going off the end of the runway. So if the crew did everything correctly except not using reverse thrust, the aircraft should have stopped within the confines of the runway.

[Intruder]

Not if the spoilers did not deploy...