Tradewinds 747 Program Done

[Po Boy]

Just heard that Tradewinds has just terminated their 747 program, and all crews are furloughed immediately, can anyone confirm? How many 747s did they operate?

[Sleeping Freight Dog]

According to their website, they have 4 B74Fs in the fleet.

[hvydriver]

My condolences.

[411A]

Hmmm, I wonder...perhaps they were pushed into that direction by the FAA.

[GlueBall]

Having been the lowest ACMI bidder for the Yangtze River contracts conceivably may have burned a hole in their pocket. :{

[Po Boy]

Weren't they also flying for CargItalia out of MXP, that could not have helped matters much.

[slowto280]

It sounds like they may be pulling A300's out of Air Macau also......... Not a good sign.

[tonytech2]

No FAA problems with the B747 fleet - recent audit of AD records, etc came up clean. It is however, further proof that the day of the B747-200 as a viable freighter is over. Still a place for niche marketing of the A300 freighter, Tradewinds is over thirty five years old started with Connies, going to CL44, then L-1011 and on to A300 and B747. It has survived a lot and may well survive $150 oil. Don't count it out quite yet.

One of the furloughed QC folks

[SNS3Guppy]

It is however, further proof that the day of the B747-200 as a viable freighter is over.


Hardly. It's a sign that Tradewinds is having financial problems.

[GlueBall]

Tradewinds' website shows that: In addition to Yangtze River [Y8] PVG-ANC-JFK-BOS schedule, they were operating for China Southern [MU] SZX-LUX via ALA and DXB. :ooh:

[v1vRFLY]

There were far too many problems with the TDX B747 operation to list them all - but you could start with an inept management team and inadequate maintenance. (examples provided upon request).

MIA based captains would literally cross their fingers on each departure in hopes that nothing would happen [Some actual events: loss of all instruments and all INSs, engine failures and shutdowns, air turnbacks, rejected takeoffs, fire warnings without fire bottles available, rudder malfunctions that were deferred for months, planes and crews held/delayed on numerous occasions for lack of permits...shall i continue?]

The Medellin accident hung the crew out to dry...but the ENTIRE company from the top down contributed to that accident. Supposedly they are getting one classic in MIA again. Hope it works out better for them this time around.

[GuppyEng.com]

Perhaps tonytech2 would like to comment on v1vRFLY's post?
Inept management is a problem in most airlines. It all seems to be run by beancounters these days.
But the other scenario's described:eek::confused:

[L-38]

Understand that Tradewinds and Focus have left a small market void that Southern is attempting to digest. More airplanes / crews destined for Southern?

[GlueBall]

The Medellin accident hung the crew out to dry...but the ENTIRE company from the top down contributed to that accident.

. . . and what was the reason for the obvious abort after V1. . . ? :confused:

[Slidder184]

I think someone is a big girly boy!! U talk of things that u could say no to! If things were that bad, I don't believe anyone was holding a gun to the crew head to make them take the aircraft if it was so unsafe! Bottom line on the med. accident, CREW ERROR! Should have continued on takeoff!

[TowerDog]

I don't believe anyone was holding a gun to the crew head to make them take the aircraft if it was so unsafe!

Quite a few of us refused to accept a/c with questionable mx write-ups/corrective action.

Also heard mx supers beg me not to write up compressor stalls..:sad:

Shoestring budget for sure.

As for Medein: Crew should have used reverse power on the abort as well as started the abort earlier.
(If they had contiuned the t/o they would be embedded in a nearby hill)

Rumor says engine exploded because of shaky overhaul by Connie's boys.

Did 3 years for Tradewinds, and sure as clockwork, they screwed me on the last check.

What a way to run a business. :yuk:

[L-38]

Also heard mx supers beg me not to write up compressor stalls..http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/puppy_dog_eyes.gif
Per either Pratt or FAA supervised company mx policy, + three compressor stall write ups = mandatory engine change / overhaul.

[Slidder184]

"Also heard mx supers beg me not to write up compressor stalls.."
U said u worked there, so y do u say u "heard Mx Supers". If they talked to u then I assume u didn't have to "hear"? Your statment makes no sense, true about the budget issue, won't argue about that. However, Mx does not send an A/C out in an unairworthy condition that it is aware of. Hey, all I know is crews have refused to take the aircraft because they didn't have any catering! If it ain't safe, then don't take it, don't get me started on the engine issues, monitoring the engine health was very hard to do when the FE can't fill in the blanks of the trim sheets, or can't write the correct nfo in the correct blanks.......................

[411A]

Rumor says engine exploded because of shaky overhaul by Connie's boys.



Now why ever am I not surprised?
I personally told Connie to his face (some years ago) that the days of maintaining engines the JT3D way were right and truly over.
Some folks never learn...no surprise there.:hmm::rolleyes:

[GlueBall]

TowerDog ". . . If they had contiuned the t/o they would be embedded in a nearby hill"

Not according to runway analysis data specific for runway and airport; and not according to demonstrated 3-engine airplane climb performance. Or are you from the new school of "experienced captains" who individualize procedures and make their own rules for aborting the takeoff after V1? :confused:

[TowerDog]

Not according to runway analysis data specific for runway and airport; and not according to demonstrated 3-engine airplane climb performance. Or are you from the new school of "experienced captains" who individualize procedures and make their own rules for aborting the takeoff after V1?

Neither Mr. Glueball...They had the wrong level-off altitude on the card..:sad:

If they talked to u then I assume u didn't have to "hear"?


Yeah, bad grammar on my part.
It should say: I was asked to not write stuff in the book. As in heard with with my own ears....Not just rumors.

Hey, all I know is crews have refused to take the aircraft because they didn't have any catering!

TDX did dispatch a 3 leg all nighter, 14 hour duty day trip without catering.
Instead we were promised we would be catered down line. That did not happen so we were a bunch of hungry and cranky guys back in the MIA the next day.

Per either Pratt or FAA supervised company mx policy, + three compressor stall write ups = mandatory engine change / overhaul.

Yeah, we went through a few engines back then as compressor stalls was almost a daily occurence. Both during high altitude take offs such as Bogota and Quito, and stalls during reverse on landing @ sea-level, etc.

[TowerDog]

Link to video of the crash in Colombia:


ASP - (http://everyvideoevermade.com/Artist/ASP/Video/wj8UPEfO1Oo/VideoTitle/Tradewinds+Boeing+747+Rejected+Takeoff+Crash/Default.aspx)

[WhalePFE]

I personally told Connie to his face (some years ago) that the days of maintaining engines the JT3D way were right and truly over.

Yeah, I am sure you did!:8

[Cessna120]

To my knowledge the Medillin Accident was a landing NOT a takeoff.

[Lowrider2]

From the news report:

The accident happened not long after the aircraft's departure from Bogota's El Dorado Airport. AFP quoted Colombian Civil Aviation official Donald Tascon, who said, "The plane crashed when it was trying to return to Bogota after reporting a fire in one engine."

[TowerDog]

To my knowledge the Medillin Accident was a landing NOT a takeoff.

Your knowledge is flawed in that case.:confused:

The plane crashed when it was trying to return to Bogota after reporting a fire in one engine."

You must be thinking of the Kalitta crash in Bogota...?

This here thread is about Tradewinds Airlines and a crash in Medellin, Rio Negro airport in 2006.

There is even a link to a security camera video of the crash above.

[Slidder184]

agree with towerdog, it was during take off. I have seen the video and also have two cd's of two different views, also much paperwork, reports, etc. First hand knowledge of the accident.

[v1vRFLY]

DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND ME....I am not saying the crew was NOT AT FAULT.

The low time Captain was allowing the newly trained FO (125 hours of OE) to do the takeoff, at night, at a Special Airport, on a WET, UNGROOVED runway with pooling water, without using a WET V1, at an operation with shoddy engine maintenance. Even after attempting to reject after V1, they did not use FULL REV until the last 500 feet. They might have made it if they did. So YES they screwed up.

But I AM SAYING that more heads should have rolled for those responsible for this accident... from the DO, schedulers, maintenance, etc, on down the line, but only the crew 'was hung out to dry.'

With this being said, all the training in the world cannot prepare you for what happened to them. Sure, you will say I NEVER attempt a reject after V1...AHEM AHEM...I have seen this done countless times in the SIM by seasoned pilots who think they CANNOT make it by taking it airborne. When asked afterwards, their common answer: "it was a gut reaction I had to make in a split second." ...even though it goes against all the principles of aviation and countless years of training.

When this engine went, a fire ball shot forward of the cockpit and shuddered the entire aircraft (according to reports). The Captain took control and attempted to reject. His gut feeling told him that something terrible had happened and in that split second, he did not think the plane to be airworthy. Blame him if you want...but he is still walking in his shoes...something you cannot do.

[GlueBall]

" . . .to do the takeoff, at night, at a Special Airport, on a WET, UNGROOVED runway with pooling water . . . "

The video shows it to be daylight in light rain. MDE/SKRG 3500m [11,483'] Rwy-36 is significantly sloped up hill, [58' higher at Rwy18 threshold] with hardly any propensity for water to be "pooling."

" . . . all the training in the world cannot prepare you for what happened to them. Sure, you will say I NEVER attempt a reject after V1...AHEM AHEM...I have seen this done countless times in the SIM by seasoned pilots who think they CANNOT make it by taking it airborne."


"All the training in the world" at most carriers teaches captains to get their hands off the throttle levers by V1 and to keep them off! In the past 20 years I haven't seen any pilots in the sim aborting after V1 because they had "thought" that they couldn't get airborne, . . . perhaps because they would bust their sim check! :{

[Slidder184]

"When this engine went, a fire ball shot forward of the cockpit and shuddered the entire aircraft (according to reports)."http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/eek.gif
What reports r u reading?? http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gif LOL Never saw that on the vid's, either of them!

[Dutch74]

This thread is full of idiots. Watch the video.

[thedude1]

The problem is, there are 2 videos. The one you see on youtube is the security cam and only show the later portion of the abort. There is supposedly another one floating around that show the entire incident. I am still trying to get my hands on that one.

[v1vRFLY]

Not reading any reports....this comes from talking directly to the flight crew while they were awaiting incarceration. I merely stated what the crewmembers told me of the incident, but all you monday morning quarterbacks and video analyzers know better than what the crew told me, Im sure.

As previous check airman and GS instructor for the B747 fleet at TDX, i had an interest in what happened and incorporated all info into a CRM class about the matter, which did not settle well with many in the company....found that every department, as i previously mentioned, was at fault in some manner or fashion. In the end, the crew were the only ones to be fired.

But of course, this thread is full of idiots like some have mused. :=