737 cargo shift - cooking oil puts tail on the runway
 

And now for something completely different:

link is www.foxnews.com/travel/2017/04/04/airplane-tips-over-when-spilled-cooking-oil-sends-luggage-sliding-to-tail.html

Well it wasn't on the runway, but...

It was a cargo 737 which shows the following cargo capacity:
Boeing 737-200 6LD7 +Bulkhold 70.0m3 19,500 kg

Could it have been carrying fuel in to the airport?

BTW - the airport has some 'interesting' history:
Accidents and incidents[edit]
Wamena airport, the only airport in the region that can accommodate the Indonesian Military (TNI)s Hercules airplanes, was razed by fire on September 26, 2011; all buildings including the departure and arrival terminals were engulfed by fire.[6]

On April 21, 2002 an Antonov An-72 (ES-NOP) of Estonian airline Enimex was damaged in a hard landing at Wamena Airport; a minor fire broke out. Due to the dead battery of the fire truck some firefighters ran to the accident scene with hand-held fire extinguishers. After some 20 minutes the truck's battery was charged, but the aircraft had to be written-off. There were no fatalities.[7]
On December 18, 2016, an Indonesian Air Force C-130H Hercules flew into hills 1700 m southeast of the runway threshold while attempting to land in poor visibility, killing all 13 on board.[8][9]

The aircraft in question was a 737-300F (ex-US Airways).

https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=20130508-0

And another

They carry 44 gallon drums of diesel/petrol/avtur from Sentani on a daily basis.

I am assuming with this that is was bulk loaded and not using pallets or it should not have tipped. If it was bulk loaded I am assuming there was nothing to secure the cargo in each pallet position and prevent cargo shift. I would love to see the weight and balance / Loading manual for this one.

Even if its fastened down the liquid in the drums is still free to move, was once a passenger in a truck full of 5 litre motor oil bottles, the oil had a mind of its own and created an interesting driving experience. Landing and taking off with liquids must be interesting due to the movement of the liquid.

I drove a fire engine (on test) and the surge of water in the tank on corners was something that I had to be aware of.

It's amazing it could happen and lucky it didn't happen in CAT

Nah, we've all been there; my bad day was when we decided that, when loading a CL44 at DXB with gold bars, we would set up a system where the gang of 20 or so loaders would each collect a bar in turn from the truck near the nose, ascend the front steps, walk down the aircraft, stow the bar in a tie down container (10 bars per container, or something like that, as I recall) starting from the rear of the aircraft, and then walk down the back steps and collect another bar.

The elegant raising of the nose as the "critical coolie" reached what I hesitate to call the tipping point and continued rearwards, now downhill, was beautiful to watch, but unintended. What did for us was "starting from the rear of the aircraft".

Oh, man. :eek:

The article seems to imply that the cooking oil was in a bulk tank of some sort. Althoughas I pointed out in my previous post, the article just might contain some inaccuracies.

I have flown diesel fuel into remote ares in bulk loads of around 34-40,000 lbs at a time. The fuel was contined in s bulk tanks in the cargo bay. I didn't notice any handling pecularities.

Simple physics would suggest that full (or nearly full) containers should present minimal dynamic issues as, in the absence of airspace within them, there is limited scope for the liquid to slop around.

True. It's not the mass of the liquid, it's the volume of the airspace. If you have 10,000 kg of water with only a liter of airspace, the most you're going to get is the effect of 1 kg moving around, not 10,000. Our bulk tanks had a bit more space in them on a typical load, but they also have internal baffles.

Re-reading the report, a container of oil was broached allowing oil to escape (onto the floor of the aircraft).
Other items of cargo then slid towards the tail, moving the CofG rearwards and lifting the nosewheel until the tail contacted the tarmac (or concrete).

Obviously the objects that slid on the oil were 'unsecured' (not strapped-down or not on secured pallets/cargo containers).
Whether the aircraft had flown with the load unsecured is a matter of conjecture and the consequence of movement in the air is frightening.

Not with CFM engines, it isn't. :ugh:

As per my previous post, it's a former US Airways -300 subsequently converted to freighter configuration (23743 PK-YGG).