Omega Air B707 crash Pt. Magu California (merged)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The concept of letting it burn is probably a good one as it will minimize the impact of fuel contamination and since the crew were out there was no reason why not.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NTSB sent out an e mail saying that they would investigate and that AN ENGINE FIRE was involved.
that's 30.
PS, is this converted type tanker lacking a flying boom? seems so.
that's 30.
PS, is this converted type tanker lacking a flying boom? seems so.
The OmegaAir Boeing 707 was not fitted with a boom. The primary US clients fly probe-equipped aircraft; the USAF has plenty of its own boom tankers.
Accident investigation?
A non-passenger carrying aircraft...on a US Navy Contract....one of the very last of its kind flying....what issues of interest could be resolved? I would bet there is only Third Party insurance coverage....the crew was unhurt....the crash site was on the airport....with no damage to any structure, person, or vehicle.
Call in the bulldozer, front end loader, dump trucks...and haul the scrap off to the dump. Clean up the site...grade back to level....and off to the Pub.
A non-passenger carrying aircraft...on a US Navy Contract....one of the very last of its kind flying....what issues of interest could be resolved? I would bet there is only Third Party insurance coverage....the crew was unhurt....the crash site was on the airport....with no damage to any structure, person, or vehicle.
Call in the bulldozer, front end loader, dump trucks...and haul the scrap off to the dump. Clean up the site...grade back to level....and off to the Pub.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BBC describes it as a US military aircraft. In fact it's not military and it's Irish. Omega being the child of the McEvaddy brothers. I know them both, this being Ireland after all. Took tea with them several times when they flew in, onboard their Longranger. I remember when Omega Air headquarters was over an ice rink, owned by the brothers in a less than salubrious part of Dublin. The kind of area where you closed the windows and locked the doors of your car and you DIDN'T walk through, your avoided it.
Sad to see an old classic burning, very sad. Not many 707s left.
Sad to see an old classic burning, very sad. Not many 707s left.
not being NEWS that a professional pilot wouldn't want to see.
Wish I could say the reverse was the case
As a former refuelling operator I was interested to hear that there were civilian AAR tankers - hadn't heard of that before. Intersting that it's apparently probe and drogue as well.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: brunswick, ga
Age: 34
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I work for the company that does the scheduled maintenance on Omegas 707s and when i heard the news this morning, my heart sank. I instantly thought of the things that I worked on while we had the plane. All I remember doing was an A and B check on the gear and wheel wells and some stuff on the wings(this was about a month or 2 ago). Needless to say, I am very confident in my work.... and we didnt have any problems on the test flight.
So here is the story I got from my maintenance manager.... ( I have been told this is not N707MQ but it is N707AR but not 100% sure yet)
The plane was loaded with 150,000lbs of fuel... upon takeoff(with a 26knot crosswind), engines 1 and 2 had compressor stall 10ft off the ground. the plane was too heavy to takeoff on #3 and 4 engines so the pilots aborted takeoff. The forced landing torn the gear off and #4 engine. the crew made it out with the cockpit escape lines.
I have been told the Feds will be here Monday to review the paper work but the work done to the plane should be legitimate.
If you guys have any questions about the plane, feel free to ask. I will try to keep you posted on what I hear within the company.
So here is the story I got from my maintenance manager.... ( I have been told this is not N707MQ but it is N707AR but not 100% sure yet)
The plane was loaded with 150,000lbs of fuel... upon takeoff(with a 26knot crosswind), engines 1 and 2 had compressor stall 10ft off the ground. the plane was too heavy to takeoff on #3 and 4 engines so the pilots aborted takeoff. The forced landing torn the gear off and #4 engine. the crew made it out with the cockpit escape lines.
I have been told the Feds will be here Monday to review the paper work but the work done to the plane should be legitimate.
If you guys have any questions about the plane, feel free to ask. I will try to keep you posted on what I hear within the company.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: A tropical island.
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In fact, the KC-135 had a narrower fuselage than the 707/720 series.
Back to the topic at hand...
Accident investigation?
A non-passenger carrying aircraft...on a US Navy Contract....one of the very last of its kind flying....what issues of interest could be resolved?
A non-passenger carrying aircraft...on a US Navy Contract....one of the very last of its kind flying....what issues of interest could be resolved?
Last edited by aviatorhi; 20th May 2011 at 07:06.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The KC-135/C-135 series have a fuselage diameter of 132-inch (3.35 m). This is the same as the "-80" prototype.
The 707 & 720 have a fuselage diameter of 148 inches (3.76 m), as do the C-137/E-3/E-6/E-8s built for the USAF and the NATO TC-49As.
The USAF C-18 are conversions of civil B707s.
The 707 & 720 have a fuselage diameter of 148 inches (3.76 m), as do the C-137/E-3/E-6/E-8s built for the USAF and the NATO TC-49As.
The USAF C-18 are conversions of civil B707s.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: new york
Age: 68
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Omega crash
Just a suggestion,...I was also down in your facility and saw the tanker under maintenance for some months...While an investigation will be directed at your facility, it would be advised you "know nothing"...(speak to my super) you don't know who you are talking to and any word you post online can be misconstreud. Since this event was caused by powerplant failure, it was powerplants you were working on as well as other items...let your super deal with the issues. Investigators, while they may be nice fellows can rip your career and others, out from under you while you thought you were just being helpful. (Just trying to save you some grief)
...it would be advised you "know nothing"...
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when we were being trained in how to handle the press / public as part of any disaster containment exercise (we were dealing with hazhems) was to admit NOTHING and refer all questions back to head office.
Even the smallest slightest comment by the most junior member of staff could be taken as a legal admission of liability - and result in the insurers refusing to pay.
The rule was for the head-person on-site to say something like "Yes, there has been an incident (note NEVER a MAJOR incident) and we are investigating along with the regulatory authorities, who will receive our full co-operation. That is all I can say for now - further comments will come from our head office at..."
And never EVER answer any questions unless you've the company lawyer and insurers present and they BOTH agree the answer
Even the smallest slightest comment by the most junior member of staff could be taken as a legal admission of liability - and result in the insurers refusing to pay.
The rule was for the head-person on-site to say something like "Yes, there has been an incident (note NEVER a MAJOR incident) and we are investigating along with the regulatory authorities, who will receive our full co-operation. That is all I can say for now - further comments will come from our head office at..."
And never EVER answer any questions unless you've the company lawyer and insurers present and they BOTH agree the answer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forwarded Email, FWIW
Classic Loss
Posted by Guy Norris at 5/20/2011 3:33 PM CDT
This week’s crash of an Omega Boeing KC-707 air refueling tanker at Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu, Calif, is a big loss to the aerospace industry research and development community.
Although frequently chartered to the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps and international customers such as the Royal Australian Air Force for standard air refueling during exercises, training and deployments, the Omega fleet also plays a key role in supporting research, development, test and evaluation work across the U.S. Together with a sole surviving 707 sistership, and a single KDC-10 tanker – a DC-10-40 equipped with two Flight Refueling hose and drogue wing pods, the fleet provides a rare capability. The KC-707 is fitted with two Sergeant Fletcher baskets on the aft centerline, although only one assembly can be used at one time.
The Omega tanker was left to burn itself out close to the beach. Credit: ABC
The classic jetliner community is also mourning the loss of a rare active 707 (as opposed to the relatively ubiquitous KC-135). According to the FAA, the aircraft written off in the May 18 aborted take-off accident was the older of Omega’s two 707s – a 1969-built -321 model. In an ironic twist it turns out that nine months after its March delivery to Pan Am that year, the same 707 was almost written off in an aborted take-off at Sydney Kingsford-Smith airport, Australia on Dec 1, 1969.
Flashback 42 years - the same 707 survived an aborted take-off in Australia. Credit. John Burgess
On that occasion, the aircraft (N892PA) was substantially damaged after an overrun caused by bird strikes and a related engine failure, but there were no fatalities to the 11 crew and 125 passengers. Thankfully the current crew of the 707, now registered N707AR, also survived the May 18 accident. According to images of the scene, the aircraft left scorch marks across parts of the ground and a taxiway as it ran off the south side of Point Mugu’s 11,102-ft long main 3/21 runway. The 707 came to a rest close to the overrun area and the beach which borders the west side of the Point Mugu facility.
According to sources, the combined Navy, NTSB and FAA investigation team is focusing on an engine failure and fire as the suspected cause of the accident which occurred at around 17.25 Pacific time.
Posted by Guy Norris at 5/20/2011 3:33 PM CDT
This week’s crash of an Omega Boeing KC-707 air refueling tanker at Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu, Calif, is a big loss to the aerospace industry research and development community.
Although frequently chartered to the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps and international customers such as the Royal Australian Air Force for standard air refueling during exercises, training and deployments, the Omega fleet also plays a key role in supporting research, development, test and evaluation work across the U.S. Together with a sole surviving 707 sistership, and a single KDC-10 tanker – a DC-10-40 equipped with two Flight Refueling hose and drogue wing pods, the fleet provides a rare capability. The KC-707 is fitted with two Sergeant Fletcher baskets on the aft centerline, although only one assembly can be used at one time.
The Omega tanker was left to burn itself out close to the beach. Credit: ABC
The classic jetliner community is also mourning the loss of a rare active 707 (as opposed to the relatively ubiquitous KC-135). According to the FAA, the aircraft written off in the May 18 aborted take-off accident was the older of Omega’s two 707s – a 1969-built -321 model. In an ironic twist it turns out that nine months after its March delivery to Pan Am that year, the same 707 was almost written off in an aborted take-off at Sydney Kingsford-Smith airport, Australia on Dec 1, 1969.
Flashback 42 years - the same 707 survived an aborted take-off in Australia. Credit. John Burgess
On that occasion, the aircraft (N892PA) was substantially damaged after an overrun caused by bird strikes and a related engine failure, but there were no fatalities to the 11 crew and 125 passengers. Thankfully the current crew of the 707, now registered N707AR, also survived the May 18 accident. According to images of the scene, the aircraft left scorch marks across parts of the ground and a taxiway as it ran off the south side of Point Mugu’s 11,102-ft long main 3/21 runway. The 707 came to a rest close to the overrun area and the beach which borders the west side of the Point Mugu facility.
According to sources, the combined Navy, NTSB and FAA investigation team is focusing on an engine failure and fire as the suspected cause of the accident which occurred at around 17.25 Pacific time.
