Not the first time the NTSB gets things wrong. They often can't spell either!

I guess some have missed the amateur footage where a guy said: "Did you catch the flame on the camera?".

Here it goes:
Listen 0:14 for the loud "bang" and the tyres sreeching thereafter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_Cr7QMs5-s

FAA screwed up also!
 

FAA preliminary report states that the accident occured at Liege (EBLG)

http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/a...a/08_704CK.txt

OH, well done the NTSB etc, not only the wrong runway, they even got the wrong airport. Fills you with confidence :confused:

Incroyable... :eek:

s.

... And they were 5 on board, not 3.

:ugh:its good to know that the NTSB can make mistakes...perhaps some here know of at least one other mistake the NTSB made.

I can think of the Airbus 300 crash near JFK as one of the NTSB's errors.


will the pprunerators remove this post?

Only if you say please.

Duck

Dear Spider from Mars
 

Your post was the single most courageous post I have ever seen on pprune.

My hat is off to you and I fully understand what you are getting at.

Indeed, with the information you have just posted, the decision making process of the crew has a new factor in the equation. Something that I could fully support in the light of your post.

You're apparently not familiar with the company memo directing you to keep your mouth shut...at least until the facts come out.

You don't know why the takeoff was rejected or what went on, but are immediately on a soapbox condemning the company.

You've introduced the guantanamo DC8 mishap, as if that has anything at all to do with this mishap. Are you suggesting that the crew was fatigued and that's the reason this occured? If not, then there's no relationship between the two incidents, and you're merely throwing up smoke to cloud the issue. Hardly a credible act.

The engine separation was fully investigated, is fully reported, and resulted in a new engine being delivered to the company; it resulted from a failed internal wheel, and has no relationship nor bearing upon what's occured here. Again, throwing out the irrelevant to cloud the issue. Do you have some credible information that ties the two together, or are you simply talking out your backside?

You invoke a jackscrew failure or malfunction on an entirely different type of aircraft to prove exactly what in this case?

Find us an airline which hasn't had mishaps, failures, or mechanical problems, and you'll have found us an airline with a) doesn't exist, and b) never flies.

You equate yourself with the company in the first person ("I work for Kalitta.") but then refer to the company as detached, in the third person ("these clowns.). Non sequitor and doesn't help your credibility much. By association then, that makes you a "clown." Perhaps you simply misspoke.

Your description of the events and actions in Oscoda is in error, but it's entirely irrelevant to the mishap in Brussels, too. Again, foolishness and any effort to connect the two hardly passes the smell test.

Perhaps you should refrain from posting further until useful information is available regarding this event.

Taken out of context
 

Folks;

My post was taken out of context, I have removed it so as not to inadvertently offend anyone. I was making no dispersions on anyone or anything; only stating we don't know what has happened and none of us should be in a rush to judge.

Nothing in that post was untrue.

Whoa! Hold the phone right there! I quoted your post...you say you were making no "dispersions" on anyone or anything, and encourage everyone not to judge. What???

You tied multiple past mishaps to this one, went on to call the company "clowns" and stated "I hope none of you ever have to work for a place as shady as this."

Out of context? It's not out of context at all. It couldn't have been much more judgemental.

That seems to be a common theme here, in this thread. All kinds of ridiculous rumors about classified cargo and state department this or that. The fact is that a cargo airpalne carrying mail experienced an unknown problem and was involved in a mishap while taking off. What is known is that the crew escaped. Beyond that, nothing is known, it's all guesswork, and therefore unprofessional and pointless.

Wait for the facts.

I wonder where the heck do I find the belgian Aviation Accident Investigation Board ?
...could it be the heart of Europe is lacking such important authority ?

regards

tgdxb:

In answer to your several posts regarding the runway chosen for departure, can I add to the poster who mentioned the large number of variables which determine runway use. At my airport we sometimes have heavy traffic requesting a slightly shorter runway for departure because although the TORA (take-off run available) is less, once airborne the obstacle clearance and the subsequent required climb profile are both more favourable. Although a longer runway gives more time to get airborne, it might also then require a higher climb rate to meet terrain or noise profiles. This might require taking less payload or using higher power settings. (I understand that a de-rated take-off puts less strain on the engines, therefore reduces the chance of a catastrophic failure and also increases engine life).

[I should also add that I know nothing about the layout and surroundings of Brussels airport, and have no experience of flying anything bigger than a C152. Therefore I'm not prepared to second-guess either the crew, cause or investigation.....great news that they seemed to emerge pretty unscathed though].

RESA, I noticed your complaint about mods pulling your post. The post was not pulled. It's still available in Jet Blast (together with other ramblings):

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=328573

S.

Hi,

Well seem's you missed the statement of the spokeman of the US embassy in Belgium.....
He tell it was classified documents aboard this plane and also a diplomatic case... but no weapons or any dangerous goods.
At today .. US diplomatic peoples (who were stby near the plane) will be allowed to board the aircraft as the fuel pumping is finished.

Search better .. this is one of course :)

autorité belge de l'aviation civile or BCAA


Cheers.

Resa,
is there an equivelant F1 type sand/gravel trap design that works for a 747?

Seems that soft ground and grass doesn't help an aircraft get off the ground nor does stop it in short time?
Not the ideal surface for the end of a runway?


Mickjoebill

It's called Engineered Material Arresting Systems.


http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-d...5080402067.jpg

"What I'm saying is when you work for a good airline and you hear a bang after V1 you take it into the air knowing the odds are very good you'll make it back around. When you work for an airline that doesn't have good maintenance and you hear a loud bang you don't know if the tail is actually coming off the airplane because the maintenance isn't done properly."

So, you are suggesting that in that oft qouted 1-2 second decision time we are to use, that a CPT can hear a bang, think about the fact that in his company the maintenance may be substandard with regards the tails, then determine the "bang" must be related to that supposed lack of quality maintenance, and therefore decide it is unwise to continue with the takeoff, as opposed to those of us who work for companies with acceptable levels of maintenance, and who can then discount potential past maintenance errors in our decision making process.

impressive, was that the case,
however as most if not all rejects are purely reactive based on presented instant information, and it is pretty hard to say a "bang" was the tail coming off, or the upper deck toilet lid slamming.
No, you need a bit more of an indication than that!

I would suggest your version is a bit flawed mate.

In today's press, the Belgian Minister of Transportation indicated that in future the use of BRU's rwys will be dictated by wind (speed & directions) rather than by the prevalent dispersion plan. Belgian experts' view (pilots, ATC) is that the crash is not correlated to the rwy's length (this had already been largely documented in this post).

Belgian news today reporting that the ATC officer on duty noticed a "flame or fire" on engine 3 or 4 during T/O roll....
He immediately called Fire Brigade.
A few seconds later the crew of B747 informed ATC they were rejecting T/O...

wait and see.......