Cargo Crash at Bagram
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no way Boeing are going to publish "tactical departures" for civilian aircraft. It will be a company specific thing, if required or recommended, remaining within the flight envelope.
(Yes, have flown such arrivals and departures in civil aircraft).
(Yes, have flown such arrivals and departures in civil aircraft).
I think I am going to get some popcorn.
Guam, is it your position that each and every takeoff of a cargo carrying 747 is done at an operational limit?
I am not a freight hauler, at least no anymore, so I'd be interested in your explanation for your assertion.
Guam, is it your position that each and every takeoff of a cargo carrying 747 is done at an operational limit?
I am not a freight hauler, at least no anymore, so I'd be interested in your explanation for your assertion.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Planet Claire
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never flown the 747, but surely a V2 (or V2+10) climb, possibly with higher acceleration height and maybe no de-rate, would be within SOPs?
That would probably look like a 'tactical' initial climb to onlookers.
That would probably look like a 'tactical' initial climb to onlookers.
Consider some standard performance metrics:
Best rate of climb
Best angle of climb
Are either of these done near a critical AoA?
Magnus post is about the only post in this thread that has shed any light.
Apologies to all for adding to the chaffe.
Best rate of climb
Best angle of climb
Are either of these done near a critical AoA?
Magnus post is about the only post in this thread that has shed any light.
Apologies to all for adding to the chaffe.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 29th Apr 2013 at 21:31.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: SEA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today is a sad day for aviation, and specially for cargo brothers. All that for a crappy pay check.
The so called, "Tactical departure" and here I am just assuming, must be climb as high as possible, as fast as possible.
If it was load shifting, which it is possible, but the plane had at least one Load Master and US soldiers as loaders, who, and here I am assuming again, checked everything loaded to be in order. That doesn't exclude the possibility, during climb, one or more pallets to snap off and induce a roller coaster effect.
If it was a microburst, it must have been a darn huge one to crash a B 747. I am assuming again, a microburst would have been seen from the ground too, being a very dusty and sandy place. After all we are talking Afghanistan here, which is not the greenest place on the planet.
So, until, some official reports will be out, everything else is just speculation. Personal I incline toward load shifting, due to stress on the load during a steeper turn and climb.
The so called, "Tactical departure" and here I am just assuming, must be climb as high as possible, as fast as possible.
If it was load shifting, which it is possible, but the plane had at least one Load Master and US soldiers as loaders, who, and here I am assuming again, checked everything loaded to be in order. That doesn't exclude the possibility, during climb, one or more pallets to snap off and induce a roller coaster effect.
If it was a microburst, it must have been a darn huge one to crash a B 747. I am assuming again, a microburst would have been seen from the ground too, being a very dusty and sandy place. After all we are talking Afghanistan here, which is not the greenest place on the planet.
So, until, some official reports will be out, everything else is just speculation. Personal I incline toward load shifting, due to stress on the load during a steeper turn and climb.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: EGSS
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cargo Crash at Bagram
Just curious. Who would do the investigation of a civilian aircraft accident at a US military facility in a hostile country. Would it still be the NTSB?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 2004 a Korean Airlines Cargo 747-400F in Oslo, Norway was loaded incorrectly and began its takeoff roll with a CG of 37.8% MAC. Thus being loaded 4.8% past the aft limit of 33% MAC.
The aircraft began to autorotate at 120 (KCAS) and thanks to the commander immediately suspecting a load error, the appropriate action was taken. However, nose attitude reached 19 degrees before sufficient downwards stab trim hab been applied.
Once in the air they contacted KAL operations through SATCOM and determined they could improve the situation by shifting a few pallets in the air. FO and relief FO proceded to shift a few pallets and the flight continued to Seoul.
Aircraft ended up landing with CG 7.2% aft of the limit.
When taking into consideration a possible rapid and extreme load shift far aft of the limit, it becomes evident that even with quick crew action the situation could become irrecoverable.
The aircraft began to autorotate at 120 (KCAS) and thanks to the commander immediately suspecting a load error, the appropriate action was taken. However, nose attitude reached 19 degrees before sufficient downwards stab trim hab been applied.
Once in the air they contacted KAL operations through SATCOM and determined they could improve the situation by shifting a few pallets in the air. FO and relief FO proceded to shift a few pallets and the flight continued to Seoul.
Aircraft ended up landing with CG 7.2% aft of the limit.
When taking into consideration a possible rapid and extreme load shift far aft of the limit, it becomes evident that even with quick crew action the situation could become irrecoverable.
Last edited by B-HKD; 29th Apr 2013 at 21:47.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hawaii
Age: 54
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am a 744 driver and have been into all the big US bases in Afghanistan. Our company procedures is a standard NADP-1 departure profile. There is no "tactical" departure in a 744 except maybe to turn early but everyone does the same thing. Personally I try to keep it at 250 or whatever we need operationally all the way through FL 180 before accelerating just to get above the service ceiling of the more expensive MANPADS but most of the bad guys don't have that kind of $$$.
off thread
In 2004 a Korean Airlines Cargo 747-400F in Oslo, Norway was loaded incorrectly and began its takeoff roll with a CG of 37.8% MAC. Thus being loaded 4.8% past the aft limit of 33% MAC.
The aircraft began to autorotate at 120 (KCAS) and thanks to the commander immediately suspecting a load error, the appropriate action was taken. However, nose attitude reached 19 degrees before sufficient downwards stab trim hab been applied.
The aircraft began to autorotate at 120 (KCAS) and thanks to the commander immediately suspecting a load error, the appropriate action was taken. However, nose attitude reached 19 degrees before sufficient downwards stab trim hab been applied.
... actually 58kts the nose wheel was off the ground. Aircraft was actually airborne at 120kts. On taxy to the runway the NLG WOG was intermittently air mode. The guys were the luckiest pilots on the planet.
FWIW, the Cm of the flaps is beneficial with an aft cg, MLG retraction is slightly beneficial. burning off the CWT may be wonderful for WBM structural considerations but guarantees the cg shifts aft. The arrival of that aircraft resulted in it departing the edge of the runway, however that is open to interpretation as the NLG was about 3' in the air, over the grass, but the MLG was on the concrete.
Had the AP disconnected in the cruise flight the aircraft probably would have been lost, as even with the AP engaged it exhibited longitudinal instability, and the elevator dP was rapidly cycling as was the elevator TE position in smooth air.
Not the first time, won't be the last time. Loading systems have many opportunities for variation from the expected process due to human ingenuity. A control problem close to the ground is a critical and generally untrained event. The opportunities for crosschecking are limited and need vigilance. I have bene caught out on the same type where 6.5T of cargo bound for the aft cargo comp went into the fwd comp, and we got to see the end of the runway up close and personal, took an extra 3000' of runway to get a rotate in, ended up with a part flap landing and full manual stab trip and still out of trim. Nowhere near as dangerous as the opposite case which appears to be a likely condition at Bagram.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Santos
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lonewolf.
absolutely! it doesn't matter what is in the back, I operate the aircraft the same as it would with any load, it is all weight, that's it, OAIX or not. except horses.
what would you like to know?
Spread da Aloha, yes I agree with you 100%, and yes occasionally we will speed intervene with input programmed in the MCDU for 250/180, without it, it still makes the turn left off of rwy 3, it drags around that turn but does just fine. The extra climb to 180 helps the controllers feel good about changing you to Kabul and sending you on you way with a few vectors before proceeding to you clearance point.
there is enough room in that valley to make the turn without anything other NADP-1
that's enough of this tactical thing....
absolutely! it doesn't matter what is in the back, I operate the aircraft the same as it would with any load, it is all weight, that's it, OAIX or not. except horses.
what would you like to know?
Spread da Aloha, yes I agree with you 100%, and yes occasionally we will speed intervene with input programmed in the MCDU for 250/180, without it, it still makes the turn left off of rwy 3, it drags around that turn but does just fine. The extra climb to 180 helps the controllers feel good about changing you to Kabul and sending you on you way with a few vectors before proceeding to you clearance point.
there is enough room in that valley to make the turn without anything other NADP-1
that's enough of this tactical thing....
Last edited by Guam360; 29th Apr 2013 at 23:23.
Just curious. Who would do the investigation of a civilian aircraft accident at a US military facility in a hostile country. Would it still be the NTSB?
How hostile, how willing is the countries government etc.?. Sometimes only a single designated rep to report back on the findings.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Incorrect stab trim?.
I operate 744, as well as out of Bagram. We ( not National btw ) use a Close-in Noise Abatement procedure. V2 ( to V2+10 ) until 3000' AGL. The pitch may be around 15-17 degrees ( as I recall ). We are usually light, as we have ( in the past ) carried more "in" than "out". With the reduction of force, maybe the load factors are shifting in the other direction ( no pun intended ).
Other than a load shift ( you don't need an aggressive pitch to shift rolling stock ), I am thinking an improperly set stabilizer. Weather looked good ( as per picture taken shortly afterwards in Cargo forum ) to me,and what was described by the witnesses seems to be "a classic" stall to me.
Incorrect stab trim setting, load shift, or some flt control malfunction.
Just another PPRUNE reader, saddened at the loss of fellow aviators, guessing and trying to make sense of a tragedy.
Other than a load shift ( you don't need an aggressive pitch to shift rolling stock ), I am thinking an improperly set stabilizer. Weather looked good ( as per picture taken shortly afterwards in Cargo forum ) to me,and what was described by the witnesses seems to be "a classic" stall to me.
Incorrect stab trim setting, load shift, or some flt control malfunction.
Just another PPRUNE reader, saddened at the loss of fellow aviators, guessing and trying to make sense of a tragedy.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
microburst
The 1982 727 accident report at page 12 indicates that a Cessna Citation crew considered the weather unacceptable and chose a more suitable runway for take-off. The accident aircraft crew was satisfied with the radar returns.
There was less concern with windshear in those days, but that lower understanding is no longer an issue. Nobody think that heavy metal is immune from the full affect of microbursts and windshear.
The reason for the 747 accident is yet to be determined, but no pilot can ignore the lessons of the past unless they are content to risk repeating them.
There was less concern with windshear in those days, but that lower understanding is no longer an issue. Nobody think that heavy metal is immune from the full affect of microbursts and windshear.
The reason for the 747 accident is yet to be determined, but no pilot can ignore the lessons of the past unless they are content to risk repeating them.
Last edited by autoflight; 2nd Sep 2014 at 06:39.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: edge of reality
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking down on the impact signature this morning it would appear that the a/c impacted the ground in an almost completely flat attitude.
Looking over the wreckage it could be seen that the cargo included at least 6 MRAPS (Mine resistant Ambush Proof) Vehicles.. these are large heavily armoured personnel carriers weighing up to around 25000 lb each.
As for all the discussion regarding 'tactical' departures, not being a 747 pilot I'm not qualified to comment other than to say that from our vantage point on the ground it does appear that some departing 'heavies' adopt a noticably higher pitch attitude on departure compared to what we see on typical pax flights at airfields around the world.... we carry out similar profiles when departing from 'sensitive' airfields located close to high ground where insurgents can gain a good vantage point. Also we adopt 'tactical' arrivals which involve arriving overhead at 6000ft agl, flaps approach, gear down then tight spiral (45deg) descent at gear limiting speed.. this keeps us within the confines of small airfields. No manufacturer is going to publish numbers for this type of operation and aircraft are ultimately at the disposal of the crew.
Tactical departures for large a/c were commonly practiced at Baghdad and to the best of my knowledge the A330 that took a hit on departure was not following the recommended 'tactical' departure.
I don't pretend to know the details of that one and would be interested to get the correct story.
Looking over the wreckage it could be seen that the cargo included at least 6 MRAPS (Mine resistant Ambush Proof) Vehicles.. these are large heavily armoured personnel carriers weighing up to around 25000 lb each.
As for all the discussion regarding 'tactical' departures, not being a 747 pilot I'm not qualified to comment other than to say that from our vantage point on the ground it does appear that some departing 'heavies' adopt a noticably higher pitch attitude on departure compared to what we see on typical pax flights at airfields around the world.... we carry out similar profiles when departing from 'sensitive' airfields located close to high ground where insurgents can gain a good vantage point. Also we adopt 'tactical' arrivals which involve arriving overhead at 6000ft agl, flaps approach, gear down then tight spiral (45deg) descent at gear limiting speed.. this keeps us within the confines of small airfields. No manufacturer is going to publish numbers for this type of operation and aircraft are ultimately at the disposal of the crew.
Tactical departures for large a/c were commonly practiced at Baghdad and to the best of my knowledge the A330 that took a hit on departure was not following the recommended 'tactical' departure.
I don't pretend to know the details of that one and would be interested to get the correct story.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe it was an A300 that took an RPG to the wing in Baghdad. But thank you for the info.
From your witness statement, I'm expecting "load shift" as being down on the cause in the final report.
From your witness statement, I'm expecting "load shift" as being down on the cause in the final report.
Last edited by LiveryMan; 30th Apr 2013 at 09:37.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The higher than usual rate of climb or pitch on a 747 out of Bagram could be that we usually are quite empty out and heavy in. With 230 some tons take off weight it tends to climb a bit better than when heavy.
Does the 744F have the required restraint points to secure this type of heavy wheeled/tracked load? If I recall, the rules (that I worked to in UK MoD) say you would apply sufficient restraint to cope with a 4G acceleration forward, 3G aft etc.
If the load was secured correctly, it should probably still be restrained to the floor of the crashed aircraft.
Sounds like the type of load that should be in a C5 or C17 where all the tools needed to apply that are available as a/c role equipment.
If the load was secured correctly, it should probably still be restrained to the floor of the crashed aircraft.
Sounds like the type of load that should be in a C5 or C17 where all the tools needed to apply that are available as a/c role equipment.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These jets tend to operate with a palletised 'flat' floor, all locked in with conventional lower deck type restrain systems. from what I have seen Hummers etc are just driven on and moved into position and restrained to the pallets with 5000lb (usually) restraint devices (strops). Its all rule of thumb stuff really. Interestingly the C17's the RAF were using into MALI with French wheeled APC's, the French Government were using 747F's to move the same out of OAKB - again main deck loads using transfer loaders. Just goes to prove that the routine can jump up and bite. Sad day for the cargo community.