UPS cargo crash near Birmingham AL
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Coast:
Must be something special for your company. Here is the usual list:
8900.206 - Special Pilot-In-Command Qualification Airport List: Addition of Airports - Document Information
ATERPSTER
KBHM in my companies Jepp package is a special airport.
KBHM in my companies Jepp package is a special airport.
8900.206 - Special Pilot-In-Command Qualification Airport List: Addition of Airports - Document Information
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: chicago
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just read the altimeter setting and it was not too far off standard, so I am thinking it wasn't altimetry...29.97 is close enough to 29.92 that it shouldn't have caused the crash...
Question on RNAV RWY 18
Question on RNAV RWY 18 as depicted at Crash: UPS A306 at Birmingham on Aug 14th 2013, touched down outside airport
The point ‘BIDPE’ is additional to those shown on the LOC procedure. What is the purpose of this point other than for terrain clearance at that range?
Is does not appear to be part of the 3.25 deg GS path, and could be misinterpreted as a check altitude (2600ft) – 2000ft AAL, but at 8.7 nm this would be well below the anticipated approach path.
The procedure altitude check appears to be at the FAF ‘BASKN’; there is no altitude-range table to help monitor the approach. Without additional safety aids would the crew rely totally on the RNAV glidepath, and thus depend on the correct interpretation / programming of the procedure – including altimeter pressure setting?
Procedure NA without VGSI ? (PAPI OTS, #60)
The point ‘BIDPE’ is additional to those shown on the LOC procedure. What is the purpose of this point other than for terrain clearance at that range?
Is does not appear to be part of the 3.25 deg GS path, and could be misinterpreted as a check altitude (2600ft) – 2000ft AAL, but at 8.7 nm this would be well below the anticipated approach path.
The procedure altitude check appears to be at the FAF ‘BASKN’; there is no altitude-range table to help monitor the approach. Without additional safety aids would the crew rely totally on the RNAV glidepath, and thus depend on the correct interpretation / programming of the procedure – including altimeter pressure setting?
Procedure NA without VGSI ? (PAPI OTS, #60)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASKN is the FAF - this is where 3 deg slope counts and points before are not subject to the "slope" rule. Also 2600 ft is the minimum allowed altitude at BIDPE, so yes, this is your altitude check, but better be not lower than 2600. Yes, this is your typical non-precision approach so there is no glideslope/glidepath. If you flew this approach in some lowly Cessna you would have no information about your vertical performance except the altimeter.
IF memory serves, birmingham is a special airport (among 16 others) in the US that have special concerns mainly due to terrain.
invite others to double check...don't have my jepps with me
special airports require certain additional study/mainly due to terrain features like TVL etc.
invite others to double check...don't have my jepps with me
special airports require certain additional study/mainly due to terrain features like TVL etc.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Mosquitoville
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a night non precision approach with low clouds makes one prone to visual miscues. hitting trees means the plane was low.
The pic below is from google maps and I put an arrow across where the plane took out the tops of a few trees. The impact point is about 500 feet or so after the arrow or from the house in the pic. (The street pics on google are a little old since some of the trees on the left are not there anymore).
If you go to maps on google (here's the location )
and zoom to street level, where you can see the berm that the front is resting on, you can see how low they where
Last edited by Sorry Dog; 14th Aug 2013 at 20:02. Reason: fix picture
Thanks olasek (#72 / 73). However, the significant point is that the ‘altitude’ is not on the required glide path, which in an RNAV procedure might be confusing.
This is not ‘typical’ of what is required of a commercial RNAV NPA, and does little to help the industry-wide initiative to improve NPAs, particularly with the use of RNAV.
This is not ‘typical’ of what is required of a commercial RNAV NPA, and does little to help the industry-wide initiative to improve NPAs, particularly with the use of RNAV.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's be careful about building fanciful theories or extrapolating the flight data based on FlightAware info. I've looked at several of my approaches that were normal and stable, but Flightaware showed a spike in the data that wasn't factual.
The finite data will be in the boxes. It won't take long before they release some preliminary data from the recorders just to appease the media. Once we get some of that, then we can build our scenarios on facts and not wild speculation.
The finite data will be in the boxes. It won't take long before they release some preliminary data from the recorders just to appease the media. Once we get some of that, then we can build our scenarios on facts and not wild speculation.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did those NOTAMS happen because of the crash or were the posted prior?
!BHM 07/054 (KBHM A0316/13) BHM RWY 24 PAPI OTS WEF 1308022100-1310042100
!BHM 07/053 (KBHM A0315/13) BHM NAV ILS RWY 24 GP OTS WEF 1308022100-1310042100
!BHM 07/052 (KBHM A0314/13) BHM RWY 24 ALS OTS WEF 1308022100-1310042100
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 848
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guess what?
There's a fascinating - and IMO highly important dynamic in this thread: the notion of the "what ifs" staying within the context in which they were offered, versus the "waiters" who scorn or reject or look askance at speculation on an Internet message board - one with certain membership parameters to be sure and thus far from the free-for-all left to the hoi polloi, but a mere techno-water-cooler sans geography through which the talk is plentiful and cheap, or cheap and plentiful, depending on your point of view. Regarding those who speculate, maybe it is worth recalling that OF COURSE they know to wait for NTSB's Probable Cause findings analysis & recommendations - they're readin' & postin' here, so this is a given, already. By like measure regarding those who would prefer nothing be said here about possible causality factors, it is worth recalling that OF COURSE this Community wants to share information, in a form and format inconceivable not so long ago, and something good comes of it, even if it just teaches a lawyer or barrister that approach flying is highly complex and causality analysis depends on many many factors and there's isn't a Big Teacher with an answer key to check the NTSB's work. IOW, even if the guesses are uncivilized backside (wild-arse in non-legalese), isn't the quest to lessen and reduce the holes in the Swiss cheese aided by having as many smart and informed fliers in the conversation as possible? That'll be two cents, Canadian of course, svp.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do offer a question of barometric altimeter setting and its possible leading to a low actual altitude.
Just theory if the altimeters were not reset to local station pressure during descent.
Ut Sementem Feeceris
Apologies for asking what may be an obvious question to some. What does OTS actually stand for? I can understand OOS, U/S etc but OTS I'm not familiar with. I was going to ask in the Asian/SFO thread.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: America
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a fascinating - and IMO highly important dynamic in this thread: the notion of the "what ifs" staying within the context in which they were offered, versus the "waiters" who scorn or reject or look askance at speculation on an Internet message board - one with certain membership parameters to be sure and thus far from the free-for-all left to the hoi polloi, but a mere techno-water-cooler sans geography through which the talk is plentiful and cheap, or cheap and plentiful, depending on your point of view. Regarding those who speculate, maybe it is worth recalling that OF COURSE they know to wait for NTSB's Probable Cause findings analysis & recommendations - they're readin' & postin' here, so this is a given, already. By like measure regarding those who would prefer nothing be said here about possible causality factors, it is worth recalling that OF COURSE this Community wants to share information, in a form and format inconceivable not so long ago, and something good comes of it, even if it just teaches a lawyer or barrister that approach flying is highly complex and causality analysis depends on many many factors and there's isn't a Big Teacher with an answer key to check the NTSB's work. IOW, even if the guesses are uncivilized backside (wild-arse in non-legalese), isn't the quest to lessen and reduce the holes in the Swiss cheese aided by having as many smart and informed fliers in the conversation as possible? That'll be two cents, Canadian of course, svp.
Let's be careful about building fanciful theories or extrapolating the flight data based on FlightAware info. I've looked at several of my approaches that were normal and stable, but Flightaware showed a spike in the data that wasn't factual.
The finite data will be in the boxes. It won't take long before they release some preliminary data from the recorders just to appease the media. Once we get some of that, then we can build our scenarios on facts and not wild speculation.
The finite data will be in the boxes. It won't take long before they release some preliminary data from the recorders just to appease the media. Once we get some of that, then we can build our scenarios on facts and not wild speculation.
Isn't it a habit to get the altimeter from ATIS at your destination before you begin the approach? 
Regardless of the runway and approach active, the altimeter setting applies to the whole airport.
Regardless of the runway and approach active, the altimeter setting applies to the whole airport.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
We were discussing the same thing in our office. QNE in SDF was about 3009 and about 2996 in BHM at the time of the accident. Could lead to lower than indicated, and possible instrument error too
If it was never reset to QNE (STD in the 'bus) after takeoff in SDF, they would inevitably get a call from ATC when leveling off in RVSM airspace enroute.
But, as you conjecture, if it was switched back out of standard and then never reset from the SDF QNH, the path guidance on an RNAV (GPS) approach would indeed lead to a point short of the runway.
Previous CFIT accidents have involved severe engine damage both while shredding through trees as well as a bounced impact with the ground where the engines take multiple impact damage before being tossed ahead of the aircraft.
This might be present where one engine is severely damaged while another engine shows little signs of rotating in the fan.
best not to jump to conclusions upon viewing the first couple of days photos.
This might be present where one engine is severely damaged while another engine shows little signs of rotating in the fan.
best not to jump to conclusions upon viewing the first couple of days photos.
Psychophysiological entity
This seems surprisingly low.
The plane was built in 2003 and had logged about 11,000 hours over 6,800 flights, Airbus said in a statement.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This screengrab is from the following web site:
2 killed in explosive UPS cargo plane crash in Birmingham, Alabama - NY Daily News
It looks like the fan was turning very slowly if turning at all on impact.....
2 killed in explosive UPS cargo plane crash in Birmingham, Alabama - NY Daily News
It looks like the fan was turning very slowly if turning at all on impact.....