747-200F down in Bogota ?
I take it that we still don't have any confirmed facts about an engine fire transmission.
Engine fires to the crew are normally annunciated via the fire warning loop in the nacelle and have little to do with torching out the tailpipe or bad fuel. They also aren't likely to lead to negative climb performance without follow up radio transmissions. So to me there still are no corroborated facts.
Engine fires to the crew are normally annunciated via the fire warning loop in the nacelle and have little to do with torching out the tailpipe or bad fuel. They also aren't likely to lead to negative climb performance without follow up radio transmissions. So to me there still are no corroborated facts.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In-flight gross weight on 3 engines would be well below max
BOG-MIA is a short sector, typically 3:15, so the airplane weight wouldn't have been critical on 3 engines at 10,000' MSL, or 1,600 AGL.
From memory, typical max ZFW on the Classic would be about 267 [Kgs]; add to that about 60 tons for the fuel and it would make the TOW only 327. MTOW on the Classic [at sea level] is 377+ Kgs. Given the high cost of fuel, it's dubious that they would have uplifted more than minimum required fuel.
The airplane was airborne, in climb mode, so something more must have been at stake than just one engine failure.
From memory, typical max ZFW on the Classic would be about 267 [Kgs]; add to that about 60 tons for the fuel and it would make the TOW only 327. MTOW on the Classic [at sea level] is 377+ Kgs. Given the high cost of fuel, it's dubious that they would have uplifted more than minimum required fuel.
The airplane was airborne, in climb mode, so something more must have been at stake than just one engine failure.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In da north country
Age: 62
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA., USA
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bogota Departures
B747-200's operating out of Bogota (carrying flowers) are operating close to their maximum zero fuel weight limit. Doing so places the aircraft at or near it's maximum climb weight limit or it's maximum runway weight limit (depending on flap selection and power used). To carry maximum payload the aircraft most likely would be climb weight limited (flaps 20, maximum thrust) therefore leaving the crew with little or no room for error. Max certified takeoff weight is not a player.
Regards,
bpp
Regards,
bpp
Last edited by bpp; 9th Jul 2008 at 23:04. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Navarre
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really, really resent angryblackman. I personally know.flew, and spent many a hour in the simulator with Richard Dunlap and a better man you cannot meet. If I ran across you angryblackman, I would punch your right in your pie hole. You are definitely at the wrong end of the gene pool.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 58
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huck, seeing the pic in question it seems nr2 throtle is aft, and nr1 is fully forward - can't see nrs 3 and 4 levers (blocked by a hanging seat cushion); all fuel levers are up, at the open position.
I've extracted the relevant pics :
GD&L
I've extracted the relevant pics :
GD&L
Last edited by GearDown&Locked; 9th Jul 2008 at 15:36. Reason: added pics
Usual disclaimers apply!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: EGGW
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the position of the thrust levers, they would have been snapped into those positions by the cables as the airframe folded up.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bpp ... runway limit is irrelevant once airborne. Once the airplane is at 10000 feet it doesn't matter from where it took off. And at that altitude, 1600 AGL, the airplane was 50 tons below its max gross weight. A 3 engine climb at 327 tons is not critical. In fact, at that weight, for example, a GE powered CF6-50E2, at MCT could climb to and maintain FL270 at ISA +10c.
And "climb weight limit" beyond second segment 10 miles west of BOG near town of Madrid, [proximity of La Pincha airport] where the airplane crashed is also irrelevant because the elevation there is the same as at BOG. There is no higher terrain immediately west of the airport. The typical "emergency turn procedure," if required, at BOG has you flying west, circling within 10 miles, or circling over the field. Been there. Done all that.
If you go to Google Earth and run your curser west and west-northwest of BOG you may familiarize yourself with terrain elevations.
And "climb weight limit" beyond second segment 10 miles west of BOG near town of Madrid, [proximity of La Pincha airport] where the airplane crashed is also irrelevant because the elevation there is the same as at BOG. There is no higher terrain immediately west of the airport. The typical "emergency turn procedure," if required, at BOG has you flying west, circling within 10 miles, or circling over the field. Been there. Done all that.
If you go to Google Earth and run your curser west and west-northwest of BOG you may familiarize yourself with terrain elevations.
Usual disclaimers apply!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: EGGW
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also note that the Stab lever is not seen ... also moved by the crash forces?
Looking at those pictures (#6856) that engine was not rotating very fast at impact.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Miami
Age: 59
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AngryBlackMan
AngryBlackMan, your comments are ignorant and misinformed. The presumption that these pilots were at fault simply because they worked for a company that is not at the head of every pilot's career ambitions, is absurd. I work for a "bottom feeder outfit" and I can tell you that the people here are the finest most competent people you could work with. And sometimes people have to make a stop at companies like this on the long career road. No one was born at UPS or FedEx or UAL or BA or wherever, those fortunate enough to be at a top job all worked their way there. Not you? Were you born into the lofty job you apparently hold? Did you forget where you came from? Your arrogance astounds me.
Your suggestion that somehow a College degree is an exclusive indicator of intelligence, capability or competence in aviation is also absurd. It is not an indicator in any profession. Bill Gates didn't finish his degree either, and I assume you would consider him incapable also? Individual circumstances are different for everyone, and your arrogance shines once again by judging people who were perhaps not as fortunate as you to have had the opportunity to benefit from higher education. However, there is one class that it seems you definitely slept through, and that is "public conduct 101".
Finally, with regard to your thread on another topic, relating to how many black pilots are employed in the UK, I have this to say. Hiring pilots should be on the basis of competence, not demographics. You can even demand a degree from an applicant, but as far as I am concerned the quantity of melanin pigment in the skin of an applicant should have absolutely nothing to do with anything. Merit and competence Mr AngryBlackMan, is the only reason anyone should be in a cockpit, and being black or white or yellow or brown or green has nothing to do with that, and having a degree has only a little bit more.
Mr. AngryBlackMan, you are a disgrace to your profession and to your race. Go get some counseling or something and stop rabidly pontificating about matters on which you are grossly biased and profoundly misinformed.
Your suggestion that somehow a College degree is an exclusive indicator of intelligence, capability or competence in aviation is also absurd. It is not an indicator in any profession. Bill Gates didn't finish his degree either, and I assume you would consider him incapable also? Individual circumstances are different for everyone, and your arrogance shines once again by judging people who were perhaps not as fortunate as you to have had the opportunity to benefit from higher education. However, there is one class that it seems you definitely slept through, and that is "public conduct 101".
Finally, with regard to your thread on another topic, relating to how many black pilots are employed in the UK, I have this to say. Hiring pilots should be on the basis of competence, not demographics. You can even demand a degree from an applicant, but as far as I am concerned the quantity of melanin pigment in the skin of an applicant should have absolutely nothing to do with anything. Merit and competence Mr AngryBlackMan, is the only reason anyone should be in a cockpit, and being black or white or yellow or brown or green has nothing to do with that, and having a degree has only a little bit more.
Mr. AngryBlackMan, you are a disgrace to your profession and to your race. Go get some counseling or something and stop rabidly pontificating about matters on which you are grossly biased and profoundly misinformed.
Little Rotational Damage
I agree with gas path. None of the engines show significant rotational damage. Maybe they were shielded by engine structure, but it does seem strange.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA., USA
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glueball
My statement did not imply the aircraft was runway limited. I merely stated that taking off from high altitude airports the max certified takeoff weight is not a player. Almost everytime I've departed Bogota the aircraft was climb weight limited. Understanding the relationship between your actual takeoff weight and the climb limit weight will give a good idea of what to expect in aircraft performance. Your statement assumes the aircraft is clean and at it's 3 eng enroute climb speed. Did you forget that he has to climb to his level off height, lower his nose to accelerate, clean the aircraft up, continue the climb while securing the engine (if it was still operating), trim the rudder for direction control and accomplishing the appropriate checklists? And do it within 1,600' agl (10,000' msl). He may never have reached his engine out acceleration height due to terrain and may not have changed the configuration of the aircraft other than gear up. What does 10,000' and maximium gross weight have to do with anything?
Regards,
bpp
My statement did not imply the aircraft was runway limited. I merely stated that taking off from high altitude airports the max certified takeoff weight is not a player. Almost everytime I've departed Bogota the aircraft was climb weight limited. Understanding the relationship between your actual takeoff weight and the climb limit weight will give a good idea of what to expect in aircraft performance. Your statement assumes the aircraft is clean and at it's 3 eng enroute climb speed. Did you forget that he has to climb to his level off height, lower his nose to accelerate, clean the aircraft up, continue the climb while securing the engine (if it was still operating), trim the rudder for direction control and accomplishing the appropriate checklists? And do it within 1,600' agl (10,000' msl). He may never have reached his engine out acceleration height due to terrain and may not have changed the configuration of the aircraft other than gear up. What does 10,000' and maximium gross weight have to do with anything?
Regards,
bpp
Last edited by bpp; 9th Jul 2008 at 23:19.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As you wrote:
"Later, they had a DC8 literally loose number #1 engine (fell-off) at 35,000 feet while flying over Denver, Colorado."
Well sir (angryblackman), the issue of "literally loose (fell off)" as you mentioned and the aircraft was not at "35,000 feet" are slightly different as "I" remember them.
And I "know" that you were not aboard that aircraft.
The aircraft was at 31,000 feet enroute from Dayton, Ohio to San Jose, CA. The aircraft was weight capable of 35,000 but the lower was chosen to the report of light to moderate turbulence at the front range.
Severe clear turbulence was incurred at the front range upon which the #1 engine was "ripped" off along with all the leading edge outboard of #1. Upon separation the wiring bundle was carried over the top of the wing and caused numerous nuisance fire warnings until landing.
It occured about 60 miles west of Denver Stapleton. The leading edge was found the next day and the engine some four months later.
There was no fire, injuries, nor fuel spillage. A very soft landing was made on 17L at DEN.
The record of the event can be found in a public record NTSB report.
There were NO findings against any of the crew NOR were there any against the Kalitta certificate.
Lastly, all three of the crewmembers are college degreed and currently are employed by majors.
So "angryblackman".......any other details you would like to know about that day "sonny" !
"Later, they had a DC8 literally loose number #1 engine (fell-off) at 35,000 feet while flying over Denver, Colorado."
Well sir (angryblackman), the issue of "literally loose (fell off)" as you mentioned and the aircraft was not at "35,000 feet" are slightly different as "I" remember them.
And I "know" that you were not aboard that aircraft.
The aircraft was at 31,000 feet enroute from Dayton, Ohio to San Jose, CA. The aircraft was weight capable of 35,000 but the lower was chosen to the report of light to moderate turbulence at the front range.
Severe clear turbulence was incurred at the front range upon which the #1 engine was "ripped" off along with all the leading edge outboard of #1. Upon separation the wiring bundle was carried over the top of the wing and caused numerous nuisance fire warnings until landing.
It occured about 60 miles west of Denver Stapleton. The leading edge was found the next day and the engine some four months later.
There was no fire, injuries, nor fuel spillage. A very soft landing was made on 17L at DEN.
The record of the event can be found in a public record NTSB report.
There were NO findings against any of the crew NOR were there any against the Kalitta certificate.
Lastly, all three of the crewmembers are college degreed and currently are employed by majors.
So "angryblackman".......any other details you would like to know about that day "sonny" !
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, GearDown&Locked,
The only thrust lever fully visable in that photo is #1. If you zoom the photo you can make out that the pilots knob is up high, and the flight engineer's knob is down low. Both knobs have a numeral one on them. Pilot's throttle knob 2 is against the firewall in the background (you can just make out the numeral.) Throttle assemblies 2 ,3, and 4 are mostly obscured by the seat cusion, but appear to be at high power since the throttle slots are completely visible and engineer knobs 2,3 and 4 are out of view (consistent with what you would expect to see in a high power postion.) Throttle one appears to be at idle because it's slot is completely absent (the slot you see near it is actually slot #2 from an angle.)
The photo, however, is taken flat down low (not as you would if you were standing on the floor.) This means that all four start levers are now are probably in the cuttoff position.
It appears to me that quite possibly a great amount of right rudder trim is evident by the "bald" spot on the rudder trim knob. If I remember correctly, it's a two piece affair: the lower worn, back illuminated indicator (trim units) circle rotates opposite the upper trim knob motion.
Corrections/disagreements welcome
pac "Sherlock" plyer
.
The only thrust lever fully visable in that photo is #1. If you zoom the photo you can make out that the pilots knob is up high, and the flight engineer's knob is down low. Both knobs have a numeral one on them. Pilot's throttle knob 2 is against the firewall in the background (you can just make out the numeral.) Throttle assemblies 2 ,3, and 4 are mostly obscured by the seat cusion, but appear to be at high power since the throttle slots are completely visible and engineer knobs 2,3 and 4 are out of view (consistent with what you would expect to see in a high power postion.) Throttle one appears to be at idle because it's slot is completely absent (the slot you see near it is actually slot #2 from an angle.)
The photo, however, is taken flat down low (not as you would if you were standing on the floor.) This means that all four start levers are now are probably in the cuttoff position.
It appears to me that quite possibly a great amount of right rudder trim is evident by the "bald" spot on the rudder trim knob. If I remember correctly, it's a two piece affair: the lower worn, back illuminated indicator (trim units) circle rotates opposite the upper trim knob motion.
Corrections/disagreements welcome
pac "Sherlock" plyer
.
Last edited by pacplyer; 10th Jul 2008 at 03:03. Reason: better description, throttle #2 knob correction, start levers off
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts