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 30th May 2008, 14:07
  #161 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Engine Fire Warning

A published report today says the crew noted an engine fire warning in the cockpit during takeoff roll.

I would post the report, but past attempts have had the whole post removed due to copyright questions.
sevenstrokeroll is offline  
Old 30th May 2008, 15:47
  #162 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere on a RWY
Posts: 26
I fully agree with Jewitts... it is amazing that the wing and engine past over the fence...
I am under the impression that aircraft almost "fell out of the sky" ... Let me try to explain myself. In the picture of the tail (pic 4) below the tail you see a "dent" in the form of the tail in the mud. If the aircraft went nose down the ramp" the tail would never have struck the ground at that position. It would just break/reform on the ridge.
The wing passes the fence / The engines also (almost if the nose was 0 or even a few degrees up) . I can't imagine if any forward force (down/negative pitch due to braking) was happening, that he wouldn't hit the fence with its engines.
Nosewheel went (probably) vertically into the fuselage) and the main gear hitting the fence (which is a "frangible" object) but the main gear (following my humble opinion) hit the ground "almost" vertically causing the major structural damage...

I am just thinking - how on earth is this all posible? (Aerodynamics-wise)

I know, I know we all will have to wait for the FINAL report. But it's always interesting to see what others think/know.

Here's the link to our CAA... have fun !

BravoMike is offline  
Old 30th May 2008, 21:23
  #163 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 9
Today's report

Post a link please.
ExRAFboy is offline  
Old 30th May 2008, 22:34
  #164 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chandler, Arizona
Posts: 183
I was on Leuven to Airport train this afternoon. Went right past the nose. Nose hanging over embankment - A few extra feet and it would have fallen down the embankment onto train line - then I think there would have been an explosion.

Very lucky indeed.
ACARS is offline  
Old 30th May 2008, 22:42
  #165 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,387
I can't quite work out why the unbroken fence isn't visible in more of the pictures.

Edit: Ah I see the fence is at the bottom of the dip so hidden in the rear view shots.
cwatters is offline  
Old 31st May 2008, 17:10
  #166 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standby...call you back..
Posts: 210
Here's the link to our CAA... have fun !


To BM, nothing in relation with the subject...so what ???
roljoe is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 06:19
  #167 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 1
Stop? Go?

For what it's worth:
According to the Belgian press the cockpit crew was arguing whether to abort or not...
Kappetyn is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 08:03
  #168 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 3,829
cockpit crew was arguing whether to abort or not
There you are, the reason for the over run. Assertive co-pilot with no belief in SOPs.

Its OK folks. The hand grenade is a dud.
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 08:20
  #169 (permalink)  
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
How do you know the F/O was against continuing the T/O? The QF Capt. in BKK decided to override the F/O who was PF and commenced the go around when stopped by the Capt. aborting. They finished in the dirt as well.
HotDog is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 08:20
  #170 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,623
Willit Run "YO, Gluball, How do you know so much about what did, or did not happen? Another pilot very full of themselves. When the scenario finally plays out and you get the chance to practice it in the Sim, I hope you are humbled just a little."
From the length of the pavement overrun it is overwhelmingly apparent that the abort was initiated after V1.
Sorry, where I work we don't practice aborts in the sim after V1
GlueBall is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 08:42
  #171 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Among camels and dunes
Posts: 425

You don't practice aborts after V1: So what happens when you pass 1 engine speed, V1, say 129 kts (A340) and have a second failure on the same side and find you're 28 kts below (A340)VMCL-2 (157kts)? You're going sideways and definitely not up. Same would apply to the Boeing! No climb from rotation on two engines from 380 tons in 340-600, config-3. You will visit the end and the fence, as in this case.

No ways can you continue!
Jetjock330 is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 09:02
  #172 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mahlangeni
Posts: 204

It's good to see that some people can think out of the box (even if they live in the sandbox).
square leg is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 09:12
  #173 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Derby UK
Age: 55
Posts: 112
looking at the photo's do they show that reverse thrust was not used ?

and would it be SOP to engage reverse thrust?

Also just wondering how effective the ABS would be on Grass as there comes a point when it's better to lock up and dig in rather than roll ?

Bye is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 09:36
  #174 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: France
Posts: 17
Great photos

Re the starboard engines / fence, it appears from the photos that the port wing has totally detached from the airframe / body of the a/c. If this happened prior to the final resting place, would it not have meant that the starboard wing would be much higher than the port wing? If that were the case, it could explain why it cleared the fence before coming to rest vertically just in front of it.

Whether this is the case or not, it is an incredible amount of damage for a relatively low-speed incident, is it not?
NamelessWonder is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 10:00
  #175 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2
from kzinti

Just finished an AAIB approved course. It's great listening to you guys/gals lashing your gums about this incident. and from experience we gain a load of intel here. Hell, we are mud sloggers and turf turners, not flyers so the more we can gain, the better we can make it for the blue sky brigade and the herd behind
kzinti is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 11:18
  #176 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: BRU
Posts: 82
amateur footage of the crew leaving the a/c. Glad they all survived.
Somebody was wondering about the steep downslope earlier on on this thread, well, the video is enlightening I think.

Click the clip entitled "Piloten ontsnappen uit cockpit. (amateurbeelden)"

borghha is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 11:40
  #177 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Amsterdam
Age: 67
Posts: 159
Some pics to be found here: http://s279.photobucket.com/albums/k...h00/?start=all
Capt. Inop is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 11:51
  #178 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 51
Posts: 1,619
jetjock and squareleg,

Whilst there is no harm in discussing the implications of multiple engine failures above V1, the authorities see no need to prescribe regulations for this circumstance as it is considered so remote that to do so would unfairly restrict operations.

In such a case "you are on your own".
As it's so unlikely to happen it's no big deal, and when speculating about what to do in that circumstance the definition of control as prescribed by VMC is irrelevant. The only question should be "will it fly?" straight or not is irrelevant. If you stop you are off the end. If you go you may or may not have enough control to go where you want to go.

We should not let multiple failures cloud our discussion making process for the more common single engine failure case.

Right now we don't know whether this was a multiple engine failure or structural failure or anything else.

If it was a single engine failure and the stop was commenced after V1 then it's a bad call.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 14:06
  #179 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
rwy 02/20 irrelevant for today's a/c

In a TV program today, a pilot instructor explained that such rwys were required 20-30 y ago for a/c were not able to sustain heavy crosswinds. Today's a/c are much more performant in this regard, which makes 02/20 rather irrelevant, suggesting that a LHR-like system si quite appropriate (LHR did remove their cross-rwy from operations).
tgdxb is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2008, 14:12
  #180 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Among camels and dunes
Posts: 425
FE Hoppy,
Somewhat agreed. After the first failure V1 and above, we continue, and if we remember, we can select TOGA. However, should a second failure on the same side happen, as a result of one engine affecting the other (ingestion of spare parts, flame out, bird strikes etc..) you're on your own (below the VMCL-2), but the out come will be better to take the punch on the nose and stop, the aircraft will not fly on two engines from rotation at a heavy weight, never never never! The aircraft will not accelerate anymore, only yaw and lifting the nose would make things worse and everyone knows what happens when below VMCA and lifting a nose! The manufaturers don't count on a dual engine failures on a quad and there are no graphs, nor performance.

So in this case, maybe they elected to stop and not try to continue on two engines in this case, and the outcome was that they walked away. Man, this was better than being a mile further in a very different position.

This is just my two cents worth from 4 engine experience!

Remember that old saying about a good (lucky) pilot has equal landings compared to the amount of take-offs. Keeping that score equal is what allows us to fly the next day and walk home. Had a flight got airborne with two engines out on the same side in a quad, the balance of take-offs would never equal the amount of landings in their careers.

These gentlemen were fortunate indeed, and did well.

Last edited by Jetjock330; 1st Jun 2008 at 18:42.
Jetjock330 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.