Atlas Air 767 down/Texas

[Capn Bloggs]

Gives me the shivers...

[JH_CAMO]

Long time lurker of the forum, but this particular thread has struck a sad chord.

Just to alleviate the discussion on ADs, this aircraft was in full compliance as are all of the Atlas Air / Amazon aircraft.

I’ve been involved with this project for 3 years and have compiled the AD records for most of the Amazon aircraft, including this airframe.

Reference the splitting of the conversions between the Boeing BCF and the IAI SF, this occurred as IAI did not have approval for winglet aircraft.

A sad day and my heart goes out to the families, and the many good people at Atlas, RIP.

[Airbubba]

From the Chambers County Sheriff's Office Facebook page:

Chambers County Sheriff Brian Hawthorne and Lt. Erik Kvarme had the honor this evening of transporting family members of the 3 pilots that were involved in the crash of flight 3591 to the crash site via the Sheriff’s Office airboats. Each family placed a wreath and flowers in the water in honor of their loved ones. Our thoughts and prayers are with families.

[aterpster]

Originally Posted by JH_CAMO

Long time lurker of the forum, but this particular thread has struck a sad chord.

Just to alleviate the discussion on ADs, this aircraft was in full compliance as are all of the Atlas Air / Amazon aircraft.

I’ve been involved with this project for 3 years and have compiled the AD records for most of the Amazon aircraft, including this airframe.

Reference the splitting of the conversions between the Boeing BCF and the IAI SF, this occurred as IAI did not have approval for winglet aircraft.

A sad day and my heart goes out to the families, and the many good people at Atlas, RIP.

Thank you for your post!

[thabo]

Originally Posted by JH_CAMO

Reference the splitting of the conversions between the Boeing BCF and the IAI SF, this occurred as IAI did not have approval for winglet aircraft.

I mentioned this because originally this aircraft was reported as having been a BDSF (Bedek Special Freighter) but it was in fact a BCF (Boeing Converted Freighter).

Iai only received their STC for 767-300 aircraft with winglets a couple years ago - about 7 years after receiving their regular 763 STC.

Originally Posted by JH_CAMO

A sad day and my heart goes out to the families, and the many good people at Atlas, RIP.

A sad day indeed

RIP

[fdr]

Originally Posted by Zlinguy

Are you positive about the 767 having dual jacks? I'm pretty sure there's only one screwjack ( although there might be concentric load path redundancy in the event of a failure) with dual hydraulic motors/brakes. It's been a few years since I've flown it, though...

Correction:

Zlinguy, you are correct; I was wrong, the B767 has a single shaft with dual motors, controllers, and brakes. there is a single ballscrew actuator assembly, per Ch 27 IPC and AMM.

[VGCM66]

Maybe a sudden load shift forward changing the center of gravity but already too low to compensate or counteract. Maybe...

[thabo]

Originally Posted by VGCM66

Maybe a sudden load shift forward changing the center of gravity but already too low to compensate or counteract. Maybe...

I wouldn't think that very likely unless it was carrying outsized cargo such as vehicles or engines. (Unlikely on 763 flying Amazon cargo).
In normal cargo operation there would be several pallets/containers and even severe turbulence should not be sufficient to rip out enough cargo locks to enable one of the pallets to move forward and affect the cg.
the w&b manual allows for operation with missing cargo locks and in such instances limitations on cargo loads will still ensure that pallets can not tear free under normal operating conditions.

The 747 crash a few years ago which was caused by military equipment moving used a layout where there were no pallets/containers in front or behind the vehicles to prevent then moving if they tore free.

@JH-CAMO - does atlas use pallets or containers on the 763?

[seagull967]

Originally Posted by thabo

I wouldn't think that very likely unless it was carrying outsized cargo such as vehicles or engines. (Unlikely on 763 flying Amazon cargo).
In normal cargo operation there would be several pallets/containers and even severe turbulence should not be sufficient to rip out enough cargo locks to enable one of the pallets to move forward and affect the cg.
the w&b manual allows for operation with missing cargo locks and in such instances limitations on cargo loads will still ensure that pallets can not tear free under normal operating conditions.

The 747 crash a few years ago which was caused by military equipment moving used a layout where there were no pallets/containers in front or behind the vehicles to prevent then moving if they tore free.

@JH-CAMO - does atlas use pallets or containers on the 763?

While I agree in principle, the scenario would not be ripping out locks but rather not engaging locks to begin with. If there are a lot of empty positions the pallet can slide fairly easily It has occurred many times in the past.

[Hotel Tango]

While I agree in principle, the scenario would not be ripping out locks but rather not engaging locks to begin with.

In that case they would already have had a serious problem on take-off!

[seagull967]

Originally Posted by Hotel Tango

In that case they would already have had a serious problem on take-off!

Not necessarily. Depends on where the cans are, etc. Seen that one too!

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Hotel Tango

In that case they would already have had a serious problem on take-off!

Not necessarily.

If, for example, the forwardmost ULD hadn't been securely locked down, but those behind had, then the problem wouldn't have been apparent on take-off, but on descent.

We're not talking about an accident like Bagram where the cargo moved aft.

[Hotel Tango]

Yep, fair enough. But in that case, wouldn't the problem manifest itself earlier in the descent?

[seagull967]

Originally Posted by Hotel Tango

Yep, fair enough. But in that case, wouldn't the problem manifest itself earlier in the descent?

Again, too many assumptions here. And again, the answer is "not necessarily". I should add that I view this as an EXTREMELY improbable factor in this accident!

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by seagull967

Again, too many assumptions here. And again, the answer is "not necessarily". I should add that I view this as an EXTREMELY improbable factor in this accident!

Given the hull loss rate of the 767 (~1 in 10 million departures), pretty much any cause is going to be in the 'very' to 'extremely' improbable range. That's why we never rule anything out until it's shown to be not relevant.

[FIRESYSOK]

Originally Posted by tdracer

Given the hull loss rate of the 767 (~1 in 10 million departures), pretty much any cause is going to be in the 'very' to 'extremely' improbable range. That's why we never rule anything out until it's shown to be not relevant.

I don’t think the ‘extremely unlikely’ loss rate equates an improbable cause. Modern airliners rarely invent new ways to crash. Unlikely to happen, yes. An improbable cause, probably not.

[Machinbird]

Military Accident-Possibly Similar

There was an accident in 1981 involving a military EC-135 that bears some resemblance to this B763 accident.
EC-135 loss of control

[Jackw106]

Condolences to the families

You Tube

[Raffles S.A.]

He forgot Lauda Air Flight 004.

[henra]

Originally Posted by Machinbird

There was an accident in 1981 involving a military EC-135 that bears some resemblance to this B763 accident.
EC-135 loss of control

Indeed there are some similarities. Other flights reported IMC conditions, so the onset and what is going on exactly might not immediately have been transparent to the Crew and some ensuing confusion could have delayed possible corrective actions.
That would definitely be one of the somewhat less alien scenarios in this otherwise rather mysterious accident. Although there would still be the question why the Trim ran away. Let's hope they find the boxes soon. Something like this would be rather easy to determine from FDR data.