Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

747 Crash At Brussels

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

747 Crash At Brussels

Old 25th May 2008, 20:07
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 211
from the pictures above it looks like the nose gear was stowed when it crashed?

G-STAW
G-STAW is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 20:11
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Amsterdam
Age: 50
Posts: 80
What would you take off and land the plane on a runway where you will never make it.?? That is asking for a lot of trouble. Similar discussion have been there, would you stop after V1....
Tediek is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 20:24
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ***
Posts: 350
I was in BRU today. We landed 25R and also took off 25R, without any delays.
Arrival was at 1220Z, and departure at 1300Z.
The FO was flying, so that gave me a good look at the RWY during the initial left turn towards HUL.

The 747 has overrun by what I estimated to be 300-400m. There were the tiretracks, clearly visible in the grass south of threshold 02. The plane was lying there, fuselage broken behind the wings.

That's all I could see.

Nic
Admiral346 is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 20:25
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 4
Reversers?

Am surprised that they apparently did not use the thrust reversers, normally they would have remained in reverse position after this sort of accident I would have thought.

Mike
Butor is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 20:28
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standby...call you back..
Posts: 210
We just took of about 25 min after the Kalita "incident"..I can tell you that it was quite impressive...we got the 25R instead of the 20..weather was nice...and during all the initial phase of the sid (ap engaged..) we were looking at the scene...what a mess... the nose gear probably collapse when the ac reach end of rwy 20 inbond the fence..and rail road...

Now whatever, the Khalita mission and cargo..., hoppefully no dead, civilian or crew...but probably a lot of bla bla..in the the politics belgian sphere in the coming days..
roljoe is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 20:47
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 844
Quote:Butor

Reversers?
Am surprised that they apparently did not use the thrust reversers, normally they would have remained in reverse position after this sort of accident I would have thought.

Earl:
I was surprised at this also, from the pics it would seem that they are still stowed.
Would have helped them quite a bit.
Thrust reverse is not computed in the V1 speeds, maybe something prevented them from working.
Earl is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 21:25
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: tahiti
Posts: 171
There's speculation of a double engine failure as the first officer told airport staff that there were 2 loud bangs one after the other and loss of thrust on 1 or more engines. It might have been a birdstrike...

Still, why choose the shorter runway when you got a longer one available?Though the loads were not heavy, 3000m on a balanced runway for a B742 that needs 3200 at MTOW... it's challenging.


Safety is a dish best served warm.
nich-av is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 21:32
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: YYC
Posts: 8
Maybe, but that is just my speculation, they did the takeoff calculations based on the (logical) assumption that they would take of on the 25 but were told to use 20.
So, they just assumed that they'd be allright taking off on 20?

That is such a stupid theory, it hardly warrants a response.
opale4 is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 21:51
  #69 (permalink)  
742
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 212
...From my point of view if you do the takeoff calculations correctly (with the correct figures) and you perform the takeoff correctly you should not run short of runway wether or not you do an abort, so obviously at some point something went wrong. If this is not true then why bother doing these calculations in the first place.
There are many, many factors not considered in the dry engineering world of certification. Crosswinds, worn brakes (on older airplanes), failed tires, rubber on the runway….and the list goes on.

IMO one of the most dangerous mindsets in aviation is the idea that performance is “guaranteed”.
742 is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 22:16
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Belgium
Age: 33
Posts: 1
More news (dutch):
http://www.flightlevel.be/080525_kal...n-brussel.html
More pictures:
http://www.flightlevel.be/engines/sh...um=Kalitta+Air
flyboy18 is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 22:43
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Pacific Rim
Posts: 55
There have been countless occasions where the flight crew had planned the take-off data for a particular runway, weight, weather condition or a flap setting and when the conditions changed subsequently failed to do the required corrections.

So whatever the actual cause(s) of this accident, anyone who says that a theory such as above happening here is stupid (#81), has absolutely no idea of the flight deck realities.
Skywards747 is offline  
Old 25th May 2008, 23:04
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Top Bunk
Posts: 206
Ben There.Post #41

Very True!

Just because it says it can do it on the tin, often looks VERY wrong in reality.
Many times(at or near mtow) looked closely at the church steeple near
the end of 25R in BRU many moons ago.
tgdxb... please note runway length is not the sole criteria
Though I do have sympathy with your dilemma.
Cheers

Last edited by 45989; 25th May 2008 at 23:15.
45989 is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 01:12
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: OXF
Posts: 428
bArt2 is correct. If you think British politics is complicated with devolution and the like, you have not seen Belgian politics yet, especially where it concerns Bruxelles... It's insanity. But that's another matter altogether.

25R had to be used because it was the only rway left (25L/07R is too close to the incident to allow flights, although 07R would be more ideal because of the noise patterns).

Oh well. No doubt we'll soon hear what the deal is. BBC still reports that they don't know what's on the plane (r-i-i-i-i-i-i-g-h-t!)

S.
VAFFPAX is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 05:08
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,428
Doesn't look like any evidence of reverse nor spoilers from the pics (even with a complete loss of hydraulic pressure some/most spoilers would have still remained up or near up).

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6255649

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6255648

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6255644

However with such impact damage especially near where all the cable runs go anything could have happened.
SMOC is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 05:55
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UAE
Age: 55
Posts: 88
We operate to Nett Performance standards which are significantly factored for safety from flight testing performance and Gross performance. If they had calulated correctly, stopping at or below V1 should not have ended up with a 400m over run. There is also a factor of safety of 2 seconds built in for recognising an Engine failure at V1 to abandoning the Take Off.
Ayla is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 06:36
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 48
So what came the first, the chicken or the egg?

Did she break up because of the RTO, or did they RTO because of the break-up?
dkaarma is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 08:28
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Out of curiosity, given the airlines' known care for security/safety, could flying crews help me understanding on what basis--weather conditions permitting--, they would accept taking off from 02/20 while knowing that 25R gives them more rwy length? I have to admit that this is a mystery to me.
tgdxb is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 08:40
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 94
So what came the first, the chicken or the egg?

Did she break up because of the RTO, or did they RTO because of the break-up?
We don"t know yet.
But one can speculate reasonably, that had they RTO because of the break up, that the aircraft would not sit there broken in three pieces but all three pieces pretty much in line. So I would guess, the break up happened after the overrun.

Belgian news reports quote the pilots "hearing two loud bangs and after that a loss of power".
Interflug is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 09:03
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wales
Posts: 3
hyperactive

rto?no spoilers no thrust reversers gear apears stowed or at least partialy .port side photos show walking beam with wing gear hanging if gear was down at time .would expect threw top of wing ,as to tail damage its a clean break due on transport joint ,as to main fuse break clean along overwing logeron then up 1241 splice. nothing realy adds up does it? .stop speculating wait for the report .
hyperactive is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 13:20
  #80 (permalink)  
742
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 212
We operate to Nett Performance standards which are significantly factored for safety from flight testing performance and Gross performance. If they had calulated correctly, stopping at or below V1 should not have ended up with a 400m over run. There is also a factor of safety of 2 seconds built in for recognising an Engine failure at V1 to abandoning the Take Off.
Under FARs and, I believe, JARs the reduction of gross to net performance only applies to climb. Runway data is not factored, other than the all engine takeoff distance.

Too many ground school instructors leave too many students grossly overconfident in takeoff performance data. If one is heavy for the runway available (or your company performance system “optimizes” data to get the lowest possible engine thrust setting), a few minutes of serious thought is warranted before takeoff. And there may not be comforting answers to some of the questions.

It is possible that the crew in this accident did everything right, just as the NW crew that overran 32 in ANC had done everything right.
742 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.