Puerto Carreno cargo 722 crash
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kulverstukas:
The Jepp charts have takeoff minimums for both Runway 07 and 24. I suspect Runway 07 requires Bogota ATC to coordinate with Maioquetia ATC, which probably results in some delay.
It seems because of the state border there was no option for using another course for takeoff.
I agree with mostly with what nomoreflying is talking about. Having spent a lot of time in cockpits in and around the third world my observation is that some of these guys just dont see the threats, they dont know the pitfalls and have no deep understanding of the accidents that have occured throughout history. Many crews i have flown with would view my attention to detail as simply nerdy paranoia.
"It's a cultural thing. The Western obsession for the sanctity of life is just that, a Western obsession"
I disagree. Everyone values life, make no mistake there will be much wailing and nashing of teeth by the families of these dead 727 pilots. A fatalistic culture combined with normalization of deviance maybe
"It's a cultural thing. The Western obsession for the sanctity of life is just that, a Western obsession"
I disagree. Everyone values life, make no mistake there will be much wailing and nashing of teeth by the families of these dead 727 pilots. A fatalistic culture combined with normalization of deviance maybe
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting IFP tidbit about this airport. Take-off minimums are authorized only for Categories A and B. Same for the VOR Rwy 7 IAP. But, the new RNAV IAP (which I posted earlier) is A/B/C.
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
. From this set of circumstances I would conclude that this "operator" knew what they were doing, and that they were cutting corners in a big way.
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't think they knew what they were doing, at least if one judges by the results
Everyone who operates a jet aeroplane thinks they know what they are doing according to their level of understanding of the manuals. The acid test is whether the aeroplane agrees.
The difference is found between wishful expectation and dumb mechanical inevitability.
In this case dumb mechanical inevitability won.
Last edited by noflynomore; 22nd Dec 2016 at 23:42.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new RNAV SID states "A/B/C." I guess the Colombian aviation authority needs to do some reconciling for this airport.
I suspect this airport is suddenly high on their list.
I suspect this airport is suddenly high on their list.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Costa Rica
Age: 55
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EMAS in this case
Just a question out of curiosity and none of my research has given me an answer. What would have happened to the plane/pilots in this case, if they hit an EMAS (Engineered Materials Arrestor System) at those kinds of speeds? Would the EMAS simply destroy the gear? I assume if it didn't destroy the gear, it would have absorbed enough energy that the plane would never get airborne. Any speculation?
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a question out of curiosity and none of my research has given me an answer.
One would imagine no effect as the aircraft was all but airborne and there was next to no weight on the wheels. The EMAS might get some shallow tyre tracks across it but that's about it. If the wheels don't dig right into the stuff there is little retardation, and they only do that when much of the aeroplanes weight is on them.
EMAS doesn't destroy the gear under any circumstances, or it isn't supposed to.
Last edited by noflynomore; 23rd Dec 2016 at 11:13.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Costa Rica
Age: 55
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice reply noflynomore....keeping it classy. Unlike you, I don't know how much weight was on the wheels at the time it passed the end of the runway. I also don't know the weight it takes to crush the material in an EMAS instillation. I also don't know the height difference between the bottom of the EMAS materials and the height of the ground at the end of the EMAS. This is why I asked the question and solicited speculation. But since you seem to have all the data, fill me in...
PVT
I liked your last response! Your early post was a perfectly reasonable question about EMAS - I'm sure nfnm was having a bad day and is not usually so aggressive/rude.
I suspect the crew may well have realised all was not well during the take-off, but continued as by then it was probably their only option; too late now if they made an error in their perf calcs.
Had a suitable EMAS been fitted it may have given them another option, but I suspect it would still have been a messy outcome. If they had lowered the nose, almost the full weight would be transferred back to the gear and hence EMAS. However at that speed even the stumpy gear on a 72 would probably depart the fix, but it may have given them a chance to walk away from it.
I liked your last response! Your early post was a perfectly reasonable question about EMAS - I'm sure nfnm was having a bad day and is not usually so aggressive/rude.
I suspect the crew may well have realised all was not well during the take-off, but continued as by then it was probably their only option; too late now if they made an error in their perf calcs.
Had a suitable EMAS been fitted it may have given them another option, but I suspect it would still have been a messy outcome. If they had lowered the nose, almost the full weight would be transferred back to the gear and hence EMAS. However at that speed even the stumpy gear on a 72 would probably depart the fix, but it may have given them a chance to walk away from it.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Midlands
Age: 78
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Using reverse thrust to back up a 727 to the end of the runway- incredible! If that's a regular occurrence, then its quite possible the engines won't be giving the thrust they are meant to due historic FOD damage.
Last edited by Old and Horrified; 23rd Dec 2016 at 07:36.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old and Horrified :
As Iron Duck ( got it right this time 
said, quite normal on some types . First Air ( from Canada ) did this regularly on their 72s. as the airfields they went in the Arctic did not have push backs tugs. Nothing wrong with it.
Using reverse thrust to back up a 727-incredible!
said, quite normal on some types . First Air ( from Canada ) did this regularly on their 72s. as the airfields they went in the Arctic did not have push backs tugs. Nothing wrong with it.
Aviation Herald now has a picture after take-off showing they lost right inboard flap during the overrun.
While that is probably damage severe enough to cause LOC all by itself, I wonder if it could also lead to a hydraulics loss?
Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno on Dec 20th 2016, overran runway on takeoff
While that is probably damage severe enough to cause LOC all by itself, I wonder if it could also lead to a hydraulics loss?
Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno on Dec 20th 2016, overran runway on takeoff
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So much for "Wouldn't have happened if there had been a flight engineer..."
The underside of stbd wing struck the stone hut a massive blow which must have removed the inner flap and possibly the gear too - no sign of it in the in-flight photo but that could just be the angle. A big dust and debris cloud appears above the wing right after the impact. I also see an exhaust smudge from No.s 1 and 2 but nothing from 3. Again, might be the light/angle but with the amount of stone that engine must have ingested I'd be surprised if it was playing any useful part by then. Certainly there were considerable exhaust flashes during the impact sequence apparently from 2 and/or 3 - can't tell which - indicating severe mechanical strife.
The underside of stbd wing struck the stone hut a massive blow which must have removed the inner flap and possibly the gear too - no sign of it in the in-flight photo but that could just be the angle. A big dust and debris cloud appears above the wing right after the impact. I also see an exhaust smudge from No.s 1 and 2 but nothing from 3. Again, might be the light/angle but with the amount of stone that engine must have ingested I'd be surprised if it was playing any useful part by then. Certainly there were considerable exhaust flashes during the impact sequence apparently from 2 and/or 3 - can't tell which - indicating severe mechanical strife.
Last edited by noflynomore; 23rd Dec 2016 at 16:06.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mexico
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the right wing hit in the middle of the top part of the hut. Certainly there was damage to the slat, and by looking at the picture perhaps to the aileron as well. Unfortunately they had enough lift to get airborne.
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: IAD
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh man, that picture is some scary stuff.
I can't really fault them for not attempting to retract the flaps - considering they barely got into the air in their current config.
If the mechanisms were in the correct location, but the physical flaps were gone - there would have been zero indication anyways - so they wouldn't have known.
As speed increased, I'm guessing the lift asymmetry became more deadly.
That is seriously scary to look at.
I can't really fault them for not attempting to retract the flaps - considering they barely got into the air in their current config.
If the mechanisms were in the correct location, but the physical flaps were gone - there would have been zero indication anyways - so they wouldn't have known.
As speed increased, I'm guessing the lift asymmetry became more deadly.
That is seriously scary to look at.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Costa Rica
Age: 55
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lost gear
In one of the first videos that shows the Captain's side of the airplane during the takeoff run, one of the spectators repeatedly shouted "Ese avion boto una llanta" or "that airplane lost a tire". Guess his observation was right on after seeing this new photo.
Last edited by PuraVidaTransport; 23rd Dec 2016 at 18:04. Reason: syntax
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Age: 67
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As speed increased, I'm guessing the lift asymmetry became more deadly.
And the missing flap: damned if you do, damned if you don't. Too slow and the wing will stall; too fast and the asymmetry rolls you over in the same direction. Which is it?