Need help researching Boeing 747 incident
Guest
Posts: n/a
Need help researching Boeing 747 incident
I am trying to research an 747 incident that occured around 1988-1990 timeframe, any information would be greatly appreciated. The incident occured when a new 747 took off from a Canadian air field for delivery. The aircraft fuel quantity indicators were calibrated for pounds I believe and the fuel was loaded on in liters. Shortly after take off the pilot started losing engines (from lack of fuel) and eventually ran out of fuel. He was able to land the 747 safely at an old Canadian Air Force Field that was closed down and being used as a drag strip. I think he wrote a book and a made for TV movie was made about the incident. If anyone out there has his name, the flt number or any information concerning this I would greatly appreciate it. I am preparing to do a midterm report and would like to use this event as the subject. Thanks.
Guest
Posts: n/a
It was an Air Canada 767. I believe the intended routing was CYUL to CYEG. You are correct, in that it was a miscalculation in the fuel loading. They had to do a deadstick landing in Gimli, Manitoba where the strip was being used as a racing dragstrip
Cheers, Daedalus
------------------
Cheers, Daedalus
------------------
Guest
Posts: n/a
Air Canada B-767 July 23, 1983 (C-GAUN) Gimli, Canada.
For ReadVideo News footage of the event...
http://winnipeg.cbc.ca/videovault/gimglider.html
For critical analysis of the TV movie...
http://airodyssey.tripod.com/articles/movie-flt174.html
There's a book about the incident...
Freefall (by William and Marilyn Hoffer, St. Martin's Press: New York, 1989)
A description of the chain of events can be found here in the Risks Digest...
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/10.13.html
Anyway, here's the relevant details from a posting to the Risks Digest site...
1. A fuel-metering device failed on a previous flight. A maintenance worker, through trial and error, got the system to work again. A subsequent worker mistakenly flagged the system as inoperative.
2. To verify how much fuel was on board, "dripsticks," a series of fuel-measurement devices mounted under the wings, were used. A flotation device ("donut") is mounted on the top of the stick; when the stick is released, it drops. Where it stops (a length unit, represented by how much of the stick is pointing out) can be used to determine how much fuel is in that compartment. The procedure then is to use a chart to convert the unit read into liters, then to kilos, then, finally, to use a conversion factor to get pounds. All such measurements are then added to determine the total load on board. In Flight 143's case, an incorrect conversion factor was used for the last step. Confusion among ground workers and the flight crew as to the correct conversion factor (the 767 was the only metric aircraft in Air Canada service) induced them to launch with half tanks.
3. The captain launched with his fuel metering system inoperative, in violation of the minimum equipment list (but there may have been justification for doing so, as several references contradicted each other on this point). To overcome the loss of the totalizer, they set the flight management system with what they thought was a full load, which then provided them with a fuel burn total for the rest of the flight. GIGO.
4. They ran out of fuel near Winnipeg, Manitoba, which resulted in a loss of nearly all of their electrical power, including the EFIS and EICAS systems (electronic flight instrumentation and engine control and monitoring in- strumentation). Radios and backup instrumentation was supplied by battery power (and, initially, APU power); some hydraulic power was obtained from a ram air turbine (optional equipment, I believe, on the 767--Air Canada bought them in anticipation of extended-range twin oceanic operations). The turbine serviced basic flight controls, but did not provide power for other surfaces, such as flaps. They were eventually forced to deadstick the plane to an abandoned military base near Gimli. They landed on top of a social event being held on a disused runway, fortunately not killing anyone. The nose gear collapsed, there was a small fire (from the nose brakes) and there was some damage to the airplane, but the plane was eventually put back in service.
5. The flight crew was initially fired, then rehired. The first officer, according to the book, is starting his captain's training.
[This message has been edited by stagger (edited 01 July 2000).]
For ReadVideo News footage of the event...
http://winnipeg.cbc.ca/videovault/gimglider.html
For critical analysis of the TV movie...
http://airodyssey.tripod.com/articles/movie-flt174.html
There's a book about the incident...
Freefall (by William and Marilyn Hoffer, St. Martin's Press: New York, 1989)
A description of the chain of events can be found here in the Risks Digest...
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/10.13.html
Anyway, here's the relevant details from a posting to the Risks Digest site...
1. A fuel-metering device failed on a previous flight. A maintenance worker, through trial and error, got the system to work again. A subsequent worker mistakenly flagged the system as inoperative.
2. To verify how much fuel was on board, "dripsticks," a series of fuel-measurement devices mounted under the wings, were used. A flotation device ("donut") is mounted on the top of the stick; when the stick is released, it drops. Where it stops (a length unit, represented by how much of the stick is pointing out) can be used to determine how much fuel is in that compartment. The procedure then is to use a chart to convert the unit read into liters, then to kilos, then, finally, to use a conversion factor to get pounds. All such measurements are then added to determine the total load on board. In Flight 143's case, an incorrect conversion factor was used for the last step. Confusion among ground workers and the flight crew as to the correct conversion factor (the 767 was the only metric aircraft in Air Canada service) induced them to launch with half tanks.
3. The captain launched with his fuel metering system inoperative, in violation of the minimum equipment list (but there may have been justification for doing so, as several references contradicted each other on this point). To overcome the loss of the totalizer, they set the flight management system with what they thought was a full load, which then provided them with a fuel burn total for the rest of the flight. GIGO.
4. They ran out of fuel near Winnipeg, Manitoba, which resulted in a loss of nearly all of their electrical power, including the EFIS and EICAS systems (electronic flight instrumentation and engine control and monitoring in- strumentation). Radios and backup instrumentation was supplied by battery power (and, initially, APU power); some hydraulic power was obtained from a ram air turbine (optional equipment, I believe, on the 767--Air Canada bought them in anticipation of extended-range twin oceanic operations). The turbine serviced basic flight controls, but did not provide power for other surfaces, such as flaps. They were eventually forced to deadstick the plane to an abandoned military base near Gimli. They landed on top of a social event being held on a disused runway, fortunately not killing anyone. The nose gear collapsed, there was a small fire (from the nose brakes) and there was some damage to the airplane, but the plane was eventually put back in service.
5. The flight crew was initially fired, then rehired. The first officer, according to the book, is starting his captain's training.
[This message has been edited by stagger (edited 01 July 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Where did this reviewer come from???? He gives the move a 7/10. It has to be one of the WORST aviation movies I have ever seen, and there are a lot of bad ones out there. Besides the visual and technical inaccuracies, the acting was really lame. Typical "oh my God captain...what will we do now" stuff.
My advise if you want to learn about this incident is to look up the TSB report and read that. I just looked on the TSB site and the report is not there. You can call the TSB at (819) 994-3741 and ask for report # A83H0006. They will mail it ou to you.
Good luck in your research.
Canuck
My advise if you want to learn about this incident is to look up the TSB report and read that. I just looked on the TSB site and the report is not there. You can call the TSB at (819) 994-3741 and ask for report # A83H0006. They will mail it ou to you.
Good luck in your research.
Canuck
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here is the info on C-GAUN from the Civil Aircraft Register. It shows still in service with Air Canada.
------------------------------------------
Mark C-GAUN Serial No 22520
Make BOEING Model 767-233
Base Of Operation QUE., MONTREAL
File Location Quebec
Reg Purpose Commercial Flight Authority Certificate of Airworthiness
Category Aeroplane Weight (Kgs) 140615
Year of Manufacture 1983
Year Imported 1983
Country of Manufacture United States Transponder 110000000100011010111110
Owner Registration:
Issue date 1992-06-16
Owner Registration 1983-04-07
Engine: Turbo Fan
Number of Engines 2
Owner Information:
Name AIR CANADA
Multiple Owners No
Address DORVAL BASE 14, BOX 9000,STN. ST-LAURENT City MONTREAL Province Quebec
Postal Code H4Y 1C2 Region Quebec
------------------------------------------
Mark C-GAUN Serial No 22520
Make BOEING Model 767-233
Base Of Operation QUE., MONTREAL
File Location Quebec
Reg Purpose Commercial Flight Authority Certificate of Airworthiness
Category Aeroplane Weight (Kgs) 140615
Year of Manufacture 1983
Year Imported 1983
Country of Manufacture United States Transponder 110000000100011010111110
Owner Registration:
Issue date 1992-06-16
Owner Registration 1983-04-07
Engine: Turbo Fan
Number of Engines 2
Owner Information:
Name AIR CANADA
Multiple Owners No
Address DORVAL BASE 14, BOX 9000,STN. ST-LAURENT City MONTREAL Province Quebec
Postal Code H4Y 1C2 Region Quebec
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thanks to all who replied to my message. Canuck, I havent seen the movie, but he was right on about the book...lots of fluff with some good technical information. Quite a story. I managed to find the book at my local Air Force Base library when I inquired about Freefall (one word), not Free Fall. And once I did get my info correct, I found a significant amount of data out there. Canadian Avaition Safety is mailing me a copy of the final report, their data base on-line only goes back to 1994. Thanks again to all and any more technical information will be very welcome.
