Take a look at http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/bulletin/oct02/oyjrw.htm - I watched the end of this. Very lucky more were not hurt. The "small earth mound" is in fact a 15' high bank arroung an old bomb dump.

I don't know where you will find the details, but sometime back, 4-5 yrs ago, an IL-76 departed RAK in the UAE. He got airborne but only to a very low level and finally went off radar screens into the Gulf. It was reported in "Flight" and no doubt found in that year's annual accident survey.

Very common in that part of the world to load IL-76's by volume:eek:

I also recall reading about an Excalibur A.320 taxiing out at LGW looking more like a speedboat - had to come back to stand I think.
Can't remember whether bags in wrong hold or pax in wrong seats, but a serious C of G potential.

A common problem I used to note was when L.188's were either fitted with a front cargo door or a rear one and loaders tended to forget which one they were working in.
With the front end one, you had to keep shuffling the ULD's forward eveytime you took one off. I recall shouting pretty loudly when I felt one about to go:D :D

Hope this is of some help.

SS

One POTENTIAL 'gotcha' occurs in the 747-400. Trim is set relative to the load sheet MAC % and the resultant positioning of the 'green band'. Should the trim not be set correctly with respect to the 'green band', opening the throttles (sorry, thrust levers, for the pedants) will generate a warning. Similarly, that entered MAC% will be checked against the nose wheel oleo compression for gross error and should such an error be present, will generate a 'Stab green band' ADVISORY message. All seems pretty fool-proof so far, doesn't it.
However, suppose an incorrect MAC% is entered and the trim is set to the INCORRECT green band. Since the alerting message is an ADVISORY, there will be NO AURAL ALERT (and I can assure you that it is very easy to miss visual alerting messages) so off we go into the wide blue etc with an out of trim aircraft. But what about the take-off config warning? ( I hear you ask) IT WON'T WORK - because the aircraft has been trimmed to the INCORRECT green band and it is the presence of the trim in the green band logic which triggers the take-off warning!! As far as I know, it hasn't happened yet, but ........... be aware :eek:

There has been more than one example of a load of KGs being mistaken for Lbs. I think an RAF C130 was loaded as such during the Gulf War with unhappy consequences for the airframe. An inevitable incident (some might say) in an operation that uses both.

Also, I think there was a USAF C5 which came to an unhappy end during the Gulf War when an Abrams tank moved in the climb.

Both these stories will need verifying. Can anyone out there confirm?

virgo, I learned about flying from that!

Several years ago, as PF and PIC of a DH8-300 I checked the manual load & trim sheet as prepared by the F/O. I think it was the F/O's first flight post check to line and there was pressure, both self imposed and from despatch staff to get going.

On rotate the aircraft fairly lept into the air. I hate to think how close we came to striking the tail.

Once 'safely' under way I rechecked the trim sheet. The F/O had un-knowingly allocated all the freight to the forward part of the baggage compartment, when in fact is was loaded in the aft part of the compartment. Our C of G was aft of the aft limit.

As PIC the responsibility was mine. I checked the trim sheet, but did so too hurredly to note the error.

On a slightly different tangent, it still surprises me how often manual trim sheets are filled out on the assumption that pax will spread themselves evenly through the cabin,

Just recently I insisted to an F/O that we get actual zone seating numbers to complete the trim. When we did so, the aircraft C of G was found to be forward of the forward limit and we had to move about 30% of the pax aft to trim the aircraft.

To my mind this was a great example of why one should not make assumptions.

I appreciate this is chiefly a forum for pilots, but perhaps I may ask a question as SLF?

Some time ago I was on a KLM flight LHR-AMS which would normally have been fulfilled by a 737. On this occasion the aircraft was a MD-11, presumably for reasons of positioning.

I noticed that although the pax load (and, I would guess, the fuel load) was very light for a MD-11, a great deal of attention was paid to pax distribution. My question is, how far are C of G issues dependent on actual gross loading? To take an extreme example, if we have a 747 with (say) 50 pax on board, how critical is it that those pax be evenly distributed? I presume that a full load automatically ensures proper pax distribution, though presumably MGW issues then come into play.

note that pax are only part of the load carried. imbalance created by pax, often can be corrected by cargo, ballast and non-standard fuel distribution (fuel as ballast)

scary **** indeed
 

met the captain and saw the wreck, very narrow escape

14 CFRPart 135 operation of Air Taxi & Commuter AMERIFLIGHT, INC. Accident occurred Wednesday, August 13, 1997 at SEATTLE, WA Aircraft:Beech 1900C, registration: N3172A Injuries: 1 Serious.

The Beech 1900C cargo aircraft was loaded with more than 4,962 pounds of cargo during an approximate 20 minute period. No scale was available at the aircraft, forcing loaders to rely on tallying either waybill weights or estimates of total cargo weight and center of gravity (CG) during the brief loading period. Additionally, a strike had shut down a major cargo competitor at the time with substantial cargo overflow to the operator. Post-crash examination determined the cargo load was 656 pounds greater than that documented on the pilot's load manifest, and the CG was between 6.8 and 11.3 inches aft of the aft limit. The airplane behaved normally, according to the pilot, until he initiated full flaps for landing approaching the threshold of runway 34L at the Seattle-Tacoma International airport. At this time, the aircraft's airspeed began to decay rapidly and a high sink rate developed as the aircraft entered into a stall/mush condition. The aircraft then landed hard, overloading the nose and left-main landing gear which collapsed. A post-impact fuel system leak during the ground slide led to a post-crash fire.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows.

A stall/mush condition resulting from an aft center of gravity which was inaccurately provided to the pilot-in-command by contractual cargo-loading personnel. Additional causes were overloading of the aircraft's landing gear and fuel leakage resulting in a post-crash fire. Factors contributing to the accident were the pilot's improper lowering of flaps in an aft CG situation and the inadequate company procedures for cargo loading.

There is a good story about a load shifting in 'Fate is the Hunter'.

Saturday afternoon, 1978 or thereabouts. Seletar Airfield, Singapore. Sat on the patio of my old RAF bungalow with a cold one. Chatting with a friend when, from the far end of the runway (which we couldn’t see because of rising ground ) an ex Cathay Convair 880 starts to roll. Conversation ceases as 880's were well before noise was an issue. Noise gets louder, and louder, and louder, behind the rising ground. He should be airborne by now, and in sight. I start walking, and then running, towards the runway. Suddenly the noise ceases as the throttles are chopped. Noise starts again, but this time it's the tyres blowing. Run faster. Get to the top of the rise in time to see the aircraft run off the end and into the gravel. Run even faster. Nose leg has collapsed and aircraft shrouded in dust. Left forward door opens and slide pops out. Captain, dressed for the occasion in uniform jacket, rolls to the ground and sees me, wearing only a pair of shorts, heading in his direction. We meet and he looks at me. I'll never forget his instant explanation, which said it all. 'It wouldn't f---ing fly!'

Nor surprising. The empty aircraft was positioning to Paya Lebar, ten minutes away, for a trip to the middle east with oilies. It later turned out that some smart individual had loaded a huge drill bit, or something similar, in the forward hold. No way that it was going to fly. Mind you, if he had got it off the ground it's unlikely he could have kept it there, and the runway heading took you over a packed residential area. So all's well that ends well.

I vaguely remember reading a report about a US Marine Corps C-130 which was overloaded accidentally; part of the load was a large cross-country capable fork-lift; apparently the guy working out the loading read the safe working load of the vehicle (painted on the forks) as the weight of the vehicle (displayed somewhere not as easily seen). Can't remember what happened but someone else picked it up and it didn't even get as far as starting engines.
US Navy Aviation Safety website may be able to give you some other examples; back in a min with a link.

http://www.safetycenter.navy.mil/med...ch/default.htm

Working at Go, I remember there being a case of a despatcher who forgot 700Kgs of freight in the front hold!

The pilot found out when it came to rotate!!!!:eek: :eek:

Pilot reported aircraft being heavy!