MK Airlines B747 crash at Halifax
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Strategic hamlet
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the loadmaster on board got it off by a few tonnes? The a/c was dragging it's tail when it went off the runway....
A very sad event, my condolences to the crew's families and all the guys at MK.
A very sad event, my condolences to the crew's families and all the guys at MK.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N/A
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do we know about this flight so far?
It had a 103 ton payload.
It took off(ish) from a 2700m(ish) runway.
It was flying to Spain.
It had a tail strike or two close to the end of the runway.
What can we speculate?
It wasn't very heavy(unless it was tankering fuel).
It had experienced crew.
It had a problem of some sort.
The problem was probably one of these,
Incorrect loading.
Aircraft malfunction (engine, airframe).
Pilot error (incorrect or no flap (config warning!?!), incorrect bug speeds(unlikely to make a difference on this length runway)).
Who knows, we can all speculate.
cheers
zzz
It had a 103 ton payload.
It took off(ish) from a 2700m(ish) runway.
It was flying to Spain.
It had a tail strike or two close to the end of the runway.
What can we speculate?
It wasn't very heavy(unless it was tankering fuel).
It had experienced crew.
It had a problem of some sort.
The problem was probably one of these,
Incorrect loading.
Aircraft malfunction (engine, airframe).
Pilot error (incorrect or no flap (config warning!?!), incorrect bug speeds(unlikely to make a difference on this length runway)).
Who knows, we can all speculate.
cheers
zzz
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As this thread progresses, could those who quote directly from the media leave out the bit about the fact that it was carrying fish and tractors etc, it's destination and the fact that it's lost some DC8's in the past. The point being, after 7 pages, it's been repeated umpteen times.
A most tragic event, and one that will hopefully reach a logical conclusion sooner than later.
My condolences to family and friends involved.
A most tragic event, and one that will hopefully reach a logical conclusion sooner than later.
My condolences to family and friends involved.
Guest
Posts: n/a
"The cause of the pre-dawn crash wasn't known, but Paul Sharpe, a JetsGo worker, lent support to unconfirmed reports that the 747 didn't have enough runway to takeoff safely.
He told Canadian Press the plane was supposed to leave from the end of a 2,700-metre runway, but entered through a taxiway at the 2,000-metre mark.
"From where she left, they only had about 6,000 feet and it just wasn't enough runway," he said."
link
He told Canadian Press the plane was supposed to leave from the end of a 2,700-metre runway, but entered through a taxiway at the 2,000-metre mark.
"From where she left, they only had about 6,000 feet and it just wasn't enough runway," he said."
link
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This very unfortunate accident reminds me of a similar one PanAmerican had at KSFO, with a B747, in the very early seventies.
Departure from a shortish (01R) runway, and takeoff calculations/V speeds done, with the expected use of flaps 20, however flaps 10 selected instead, and the error not caught.
The aircraft rotated at the end, with extensive damage to the lower fuselage and tail.
PanAmericans 'fix', so this absolutely, positively would never happen again, was a 'configuration check' as the last item on the before takeoff check, and that it must be done while lined up on the departure runway.
The configuration check consisted of....
Flaps/V speeds correctly set for the departure runway
Spoilers down
Trim in the takeoff range, correctly set
Compass headings all agree with the departure runway.
Two other airlines that I am aware of also adopted this procedure as well.
I wonder, were the flaps correctly set for the runway used with the MK aircraft?
I suspect we will find out sooner rather than later.
A very sad event, nonetheless.
Departure from a shortish (01R) runway, and takeoff calculations/V speeds done, with the expected use of flaps 20, however flaps 10 selected instead, and the error not caught.
The aircraft rotated at the end, with extensive damage to the lower fuselage and tail.
PanAmericans 'fix', so this absolutely, positively would never happen again, was a 'configuration check' as the last item on the before takeoff check, and that it must be done while lined up on the departure runway.
The configuration check consisted of....
Flaps/V speeds correctly set for the departure runway
Spoilers down
Trim in the takeoff range, correctly set
Compass headings all agree with the departure runway.
Two other airlines that I am aware of also adopted this procedure as well.
I wonder, were the flaps correctly set for the runway used with the MK aircraft?
I suspect we will find out sooner rather than later.
A very sad event, nonetheless.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RIP Zimbo pilots
To all the family members of those taken that night, to all my old Zimbo friends and ex Zimbo work mates who work for MK, I am so sorry you have lost these guys. From RR (ex Air Zim pilot.)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
from MK's latest Press Release ....
Captain Mike Thornycroft
Captain David Lamb
First Officer Gary Keogh
Flight Engineer Pete Launder
Flight Engineer Steve Hooper
Loadmaster Chris Strydom
Ground Engineer Mario Zahn
R.I.P.
Captain Mike Thornycroft
Captain David Lamb
First Officer Gary Keogh
Flight Engineer Pete Launder
Flight Engineer Steve Hooper
Loadmaster Chris Strydom
Ground Engineer Mario Zahn
R.I.P.
Any 747 operator able to back-calculate the approximate rotate point from brakes-off assuming that 2700m of RW had been planned in the conditions prevailing?
If the a/c really did enter the RW at Taxiway Delta, why did the tower not query it? The Delta entrance is almost directly outside the tower window.
I once flew a simulator sortie from Colorado Springs at MRTOW and the 'modelled' RW on the visual was the older RW, whereas we'd planned the newer, longer RW and had been re-pos'd at the holding point to save time. When you see the end of the RW unexpectedly rushing towards you between V1 and Vr, it's quite horrifying even in a simulator. What would you do for real? Well, an RAF TriStar was once confronted by an idiot army driver in a truck who'd crossed the RW without clearance - and by going to max thrust and rotating well below Vr they cleared the truck (just) but I can't recall whether the tail struck the RW.
My condolences to the bereaved.
If the a/c really did enter the RW at Taxiway Delta, why did the tower not query it? The Delta entrance is almost directly outside the tower window.
I once flew a simulator sortie from Colorado Springs at MRTOW and the 'modelled' RW on the visual was the older RW, whereas we'd planned the newer, longer RW and had been re-pos'd at the holding point to save time. When you see the end of the RW unexpectedly rushing towards you between V1 and Vr, it's quite horrifying even in a simulator. What would you do for real? Well, an RAF TriStar was once confronted by an idiot army driver in a truck who'd crossed the RW without clearance - and by going to max thrust and rotating well below Vr they cleared the truck (just) but I can't recall whether the tail struck the RW.
My condolences to the bereaved.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Ontario,Canada
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC
I stand to be corrected here but it may be the case that CYHZ tower is unmanned at that time of the day. If so, the only ATC coverage would have been a Flight Service Specialist probably without a direct view of the airport.
Can you confirm Smurfjet?
Can you confirm Smurfjet?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The Attic
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With all respect to the men who lost their lives,
For another possiblity for the cause of this accident one could look at another 747 classic that had problems becoming airborne and crashed in 1974 at Nairobi, Kenya.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/1974/741120-0.htm
I don't want to jump to conclusions or blame anyone prematurely for the accident, I'm merely interested in the hows and whys of all accidents as a student of aerospace engineering. I have some knowledge of the 747's systems, but remember I'm a student, not aircrew. 
I imagine this could still be possible with one of todays (heavier) classics, but please, correct me if I'm wrong.
My sincere condolences to ones who lost someone dear.
For another possiblity for the cause of this accident one could look at another 747 classic that had problems becoming airborne and crashed in 1974 at Nairobi, Kenya.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/1974/741120-0.htm
Narrative:
Boeing 747 D-ABYB was taking off for the last leg of the Frankfurt-Nairobi-Johannesburg flight when the crew felt vibration or buffeting following lift off. The captain, suspecting wheel imbalance, raised the gear. A lack of acceleration forced the crew to lower the nose in order to maintain airspeed. The Boeing continued to descend however and contacted the ground 1120m past the end of runway 24 and struck an elevated road 114m further on. The aircraft broke up and caught fire before coming to rest 454m past the initial point of impact.
PROBABLE CAUSE: "The accident was caused by the crew initiating a take-off with the leading edge flaps retracted because the pneumatic system which operates them had not been switched on. This resulted in the aircraft becoming airborne in a partially stalled condition which the pilots did not identify in the short time available to them for recovery. Major contributory factors were the lack of warning of a critical condition of leading edge flap position and the failure of the crew to complete satisfactorily their checklist items."
Boeing 747 D-ABYB was taking off for the last leg of the Frankfurt-Nairobi-Johannesburg flight when the crew felt vibration or buffeting following lift off. The captain, suspecting wheel imbalance, raised the gear. A lack of acceleration forced the crew to lower the nose in order to maintain airspeed. The Boeing continued to descend however and contacted the ground 1120m past the end of runway 24 and struck an elevated road 114m further on. The aircraft broke up and caught fire before coming to rest 454m past the initial point of impact.
PROBABLE CAUSE: "The accident was caused by the crew initiating a take-off with the leading edge flaps retracted because the pneumatic system which operates them had not been switched on. This resulted in the aircraft becoming airborne in a partially stalled condition which the pilots did not identify in the short time available to them for recovery. Major contributory factors were the lack of warning of a critical condition of leading edge flap position and the failure of the crew to complete satisfactorily their checklist items."
I imagine this could still be possible with one of todays (heavier) classics, but please, correct me if I'm wrong.
My sincere condolences to ones who lost someone dear.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: The World
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although CYHZ tower is manned 24/7 at that time of night there could have been only one hat doing both the job of both ground and tower controller. It is quite possible depending on traffic, that the flight was cleared to position on runway 24 the taxi route being at their discretion. There are so many different scenarios that could have taken place that speculation is hopeless so it’s best to wait for the investigators to complete their job.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: The World
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNAM
This is a media quote;
"Investigators working in scorched wreckage and driving rain began Friday to reconstruct the final, harrowing seconds of the doomed flight of the MK Airlines Ltd. cargo plane. What they've already learned is that the tail of the wide-body jet struck the runway twice during takeoff early Thursday, then broke off after hitting a mound, or berm, topped by an antenna"
This is a media quote;
"Investigators working in scorched wreckage and driving rain began Friday to reconstruct the final, harrowing seconds of the doomed flight of the MK Airlines Ltd. cargo plane. What they've already learned is that the tail of the wide-body jet struck the runway twice during takeoff early Thursday, then broke off after hitting a mound, or berm, topped by an antenna"