Go on I'll bite - how, based on a couple of photos can you tell that the use of 20, as opposed to say 07R is the cause of this accident or indeed has anything to do with it?

:hmm:

Kalitta Airlines....wasn't that the airline started up by Conrad or Connie Kalitta in the sixties with a base at Ypsilanti, Michigan..Land O' Lakes?
Thought that they were involved reasonably heavily in flying cargo to funny places during Desert Shield and Desert Storm?
Just wondered, in an idle sort of way, if there were any truth in the rumour doing the rounds in certain chanceries that the aircraft was on a diplomatic mission to Bahrain?
Just sort of idly wondered.....funny place Bahrain, logistically well sited. And, it has no borders :ooh:

Thks for replies on my comment... rwy 20 is the shortest of all rwys at BRU. Planes taking off from there are much lower when reaching inhabited areas. Thus noise is much louder for inhabitants (B747-200s, B747-400 cargo, MD-11, A330!!!!) and the danger of hitting humans in case of crash is higher, as well.
I am not sure why 25L or 25R would be closed on Sunday for noise regulations? Maybe someone smarter than me can explain.

744BR, could you pls explain to me "rwy 02/20 in use for noise regulations"?

747 Crash "blood seen"
 

Could be this?
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...317110,00.html

PPRuNe = Pro PILOTS Rumour Network...
 

com'on guys, keep them coming :}
any speculation about a write off yet :E


live 2 fly 2 live

yer, fire retardant by the sounds of it, WOW just like Sky to make it in to something HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, Must be a slow news day Ha Ha :=

Supermod Decision Please
 

Some pictures here:

...takeoff... on this site:
http://www.7sur7.be/7s7/fr/1505/Mond...Zaventem.dhtml

...and was landing here...
http://www.dhnet.be/infos/faits-dive...-se-brise.html

Not really. Bird strikes can be messy and blood is like oil in that a little goes a long way.

Sure it's not hydraulic fluid? (Not seen any photos so unsure as to whether this blood/oil/Skydrol/ducks guts is in an area likely to be splashed).

Possible birdstrike?:confused:

tgdxb wrote

dont want to pretend to be smarter than you, but i see you're based at BRU too, so I find it a bit strange you aren t aware of the flight spread scheme at Zaventem airport. As it is located amidst a very densely populated area, the authorities decided to share out the noise levels as evenly as possible over all concerned, taking into account restrictions as wind, a/c TOW etc. Many inhabitants still think they get too much noise, and filed court cases, partly still pending. One of the problems is that the airport itself is situated in Flanders, but that many flights leaving from 25L and R (most used RW in view of prevailing winds) fly over the Brussels Capital Region, that applies more stringent noise level restrictions.

But as somebody already said, I find it premature for you to blame the operational RW for this crash.

Kalitta operates several daily flights from Amsterdam, Brussels and Liege to mostly Bahrain, but Kuwait and Dubai as well.

The cause of the incident will be known soon enough. No need to speculate now. Just glad the guys walked away from it.

Amazing there was no fire with a broken up airplane and likely 250k pounds on board.

Check The Jepp. 10-? Pages for EBBR, they list the preferred rwys. according to time of day and day of week.

borghha,
you are right, I am living under the flight path of rwy 20. Due to shorter rwy & proximity of housing, planes overfly me at about 4,500 ft (heavies appear to be lower) which is MUCH lower than if TO on 25R.
I have always thought that in such a case the consequences of an air crash would be far more damaging. Today's crash was simply a reminder of this evidence.
Of course, I am not speaking about the noise issue for us, especially when EQUITABLE dispersion of the noise means that we are SYSTEMATICALLY overflown EVERY Sunday from 6AM--if not earlier--until 5PM (only exception is with winds from the North, but then we are overflown anyway by landing a/c). That is quite equitable! I would not mind to share this Sunday annoyance with other sides of the airport.
Just to complete, I moved here in 1986 and nobody at the time ever warned not rhought that 20 would be used this way in the near or medium term future.

Zaventem 747
 

Some pictures here:
http://www.7sur7.be/7s7/fr/1505/Mond...Zaventem.dhtml
Say 747 takeoff

http://www.dhnet.be/infos/faits-dive...-se-brise.html
And here say 747 was landing.

http://www.deredactie.be/cm/de.redac...zaventem_crash

De Redactie and HLN show a distinct fracture in TWO places of the fuselage, one being the clear fracture that has everyone agape, the other being just ahead of the tail. De Redactie's photo also shows that the tail section is slightly twisted from the fuselage section.

As for rway 02/20, as tgdxb points out, it is the shortest runway, and the plane stopped short (if it had veered any further west it would've hit it) of the railway line between the airport and Brussels. It would have been a lot worse if the plane had gone the other way (departed on 02 instead of 20):

http://maps.google.be/maps?f=q&hl=nl...39911&t=h&z=15

The residential areas to the north-east are significantly closer to the runway there than to the south west (where there are industrial estates and a major motorway out of Brussels.

S.

lots of pictures here

http://avherald.com/h?article=40738955/0002&opt=0

Wild guess, cargo moved -> tailstrike.

XPM

A point to ponder, though not suggesting it has anything to do with this incident, is the reliability of V1 calculations, especially on very heavy aircraft, like this 742.

There is no acceleration check, and old engines powering a bent and beat up airframe may not push it to V1 at the planned point on the runway.

I used to fly these classics. Sometimes, on an 800,000 pound or more takeoff, I'd look up at V1 and assess whether I could stop in the distance remaining. Always, my answer was, "No Way!"

While conventional thought evolution on the subject sheds reasons to reject after 80 knots, engine failure at or before V1 still generally means reject the takeoff. Given the acceleration factor above, you may be well beyond the real V1 when V1 is called.

In addition, how accurate are the weights used for calculating the data? Would a cargo operator, freight forwarder, or shipper ever have a reason to understate actual weight? Perhaps to get more cargo on board?

Landing data has a built-in pad for stopping on the runway. Takeoff data, except for a brief assumed recognition lag, doesn't.