Kalitta B747 209F overrun EBBR 2505 2008

[TowerDog]

...if the captain followed his own brief and continued the takeoff.

Which he did not.


Quote:
...in light of poor decision making and poor actions on the part of the captain.

Looks like some of the misfits are still present.

Rumor says the Captain was a US-Air type, not the regular lifer non-sced.

[cactusbusdrvr]

If he was original US Air then that makes it more likely that he screwed up.

Where was the "no reverse" call? or the "no spoilers" call? This illustrates that there must be crew coordination and backup. If the skipper screws up then the F/O and the F/E need to step up and make the calls.

[LeandroSecundo]

Hi,

Methink Kallita Air is a top notch company

The airline provides domestic and international scheduled or on-demand cargo service and support for the requirements of the Department of Defense Air Mobility Command

If the US Dept of Defence use them .. they can be only the best !
BTW.. the flight at Brussels was hired by the US Dept of Defence.

Bye.

[oceancrosser]

Hi,

Methink Kallita Air is a top notch company


If the US Dept of Defence use them .. they can be only the best !
BTW.. the flight at Brussels was hired by the US Dept of Defence.

Methinks you have big tongue in cheek!

[JamesA]

Towerdog,
I take it you are a current or ex- Connie driver. My informant told me, the man himself wouldn't invest in tooling necessary for -7Q overhaul. Therefore, he never had the approval to carry out overhauls on the motors. I know a number of current CK crew who were of the same opinion as yourself until corrected.

As for the general opinion of CK crews, I have met up with several of them and found them a pretty good bunch with the mandatory quota of tossers, as per all companies.

[Trentino]

LeandroSecundo

me think you suffer blunt trauma or...

me think you making a funny

[sb_sfo]

LeandroSecundo:

If the US Dept of Defence use them .. they can be only the best !
BTW.. the flight at Brussels was hired by the US Dept of Defence.

Think Arrow Air at Gander- also a DoD operation. Need I say more?

[Earl]

LeandroSecundo,
Think you should check your numbers.
Quite a bit of cargo is being hauled now by the russians with the IL-76.
Been in and out of Iraq and Afghanistan last month, quite a bit
Who would have ever thought 20 years ago we would see so many Russian planes on a US controlled military field.
Guess National decided on the cheapest bidder to move the goods!
I doubt Kalitta's good or bad reputation has anything to do with it!!!

[SNS3Guppy]

Think Arrow Air at Gander- also a DoD operation. Need I say more?

Yes, perhaps you should say more. A lot of good men died. Are you attempting to draw a parallel between that event and the one in Brussels? Are you attempting a condemnation on the United States Department of Defense? Are you attempting to insinuate that the DoD could have prevented either loss? Are you attempting to suggest that those who contract with the Department of Defense are, by some affiliation, substandard? Yes, you really do need to say more.

[punkalouver]

That Arrow Air crash was never 100% agreed upon. The Safety Board at the time was so divided(5 to 4), that two fully separate reports were published. One said it had to be ice on the wings, the other(dissenting report) said it couldn't and strongly suggested explosion of weapons carried on board.

It led to the end of the Canadian Aviation Safety Board eventually replaced by the Transportation Safety Board(investigates all transportation accidents).

The CVR was destroyed and the old FDR provided little info.

Any thoughts or theories from Arrow Air drivers at the time would be appreciated.

Here are some excerpts from the report on fatigue and maintenance.
Gander : The Untold Story - Canadian Aviation Safety Board Majority Report
Gander : The Untold Story - Canadian Aviation Safety Board Majority Report

Here is the dissenting report.
Gander : The Untold Story - Canadian Aviation Safety Board Minority Report

[JW411]

Well, I was flying with Arrow at the time. I knew the three guys in the flight deck (and the girls down the back for that matter) and had flown with the F/O and the F/E on the DC-10. They were first class operators and so was the captain who used to be Chief Pilot.

Most of us who were around at that time were of the opinion that they were blown out of the sky by a PLO bomb which had been put on board in Cairo and was timed to go off over US territory. The unscheduled fuel stop at Gander meant that it went off shortly after take-off.

One thing I know for sure is that there is no way that the crew would be screwing around with going flying covered in ice or anything like that. They were real professionals.

[lomapaseo]

Most of us who were around at that time were of the opinion that they were blown out of the sky by a PLO bomb which had been put on board in Cairo and was timed to go off over US territory. The unscheduled fuel stop at Gander meant that it went off shortly after take-off.

One thing I know for sure is that there is no way that the crew would be screwing around with going flying covered in ice or anything like that. They were real professionals.

As long as were on thread drift

The issues in choosing between the two causes "Ice" or "explosives" is that with a possible explosive the evidence is there to be seen.

While with ice the evidence melts and a flight performance analysis is used to choose between the two possibilities.

[JW411]

"With a possible explosive the evidence is there to be seen".

Normally I would agree with you but when the aeroplane is already stuffed full of explosives then it might be a little bit more more difficult to isolate exactly which bit came from where. In addition, it might also be politically expedient not to come to that conclusion. That is probably why half of the investigation board refused to go along with the icing theory.

I have even read a report that suggests that they (the US authorities)wanted the crash site covered over as quickly as possible for reasons that might involve a geiger counter.

[TowerDog]

Towerdog,
I take it you are a current or ex- Connie driver.

Negative..Ex-Evergreen, Ex-Tower Air, Ex-Tradewinds and ex a few other 747 operators.

[RetroFire]

Question...

Where I come from, taking off from an intersection with out take off data for that intersection is illegal, no matter what anyone thinks about how the aircraft will perform at whatever weight.

Was there any mention in the report of the flight engineer recaculating the T/O data for a B1 departure?

[WhalePFE]

They did not take off from an intersection. Read the report, they declined a POS & HOLD because they needed full length. If anyone has ever flown out of EBBR, the way they taxied onto the runway they were not able to get the full effect of RWY 20. RWY 20 is not normally used and they were thinking full length the whole time. We are all aviators, read the report, learn from others misfortunes and don't eat your own!

[GlueBall]

RetroFire: "Where I come from, taking off from an intersection with out take off data for that intersection is illegal"

That's interesting, because just the other month, at JFK 13R we took intersection PD because another airplane was sitting at PE intersection with a delay. We didn't have Runway analysis for PD, but because the pavement length altogether is 14,500+ feet, we used our collective good common sense and took off at PD; . . . because our manual, at the very beginning, says something to the effect that we are not constrained from using common sense. And if we would have had an abort of sorts, we would still be "legal" because the pavement length still exceeded operational criteria. No abacus needed.

[MU3001A]

Was there any mention in the report of the flight engineer recaculating the T/O data for a B1 departure?

Checking out EBBR on Google maps, it looks like they should have been able to achieve close to the full published length of 9,800' from B1, according to the satellite photo.

[WhalePFE]

Approx. 9100'

[MU3001A]

I would have thought it should be possible to achieve a little better even than that, close to the length available from W4.