Jump to content



Photo

Civilian Cargo Plane crash caught on tape.

video

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Titoist

Titoist

    The Socialistician

  • 2,235 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 06
  • Location: Banff, Alberta
  • OS: OSX, iOS 7.1
  • Phone: iPhone 5S (32GB) Space Grey

Posted 01 May 2013 - 00:18

This is a US Civilian Cargo Plane that crashed taking off from Baghram Military Airport in Afghanistan. 7 Pilots and Crew were killed as the plane dropped like a rock. This was most likely caused by a shift in cargo.



#2 calimike

calimike

    Neowinian

  • 823 posts
  • Joined: 31-October 03

Posted 01 May 2013 - 00:21

http://www.nypost.co...Puu1N6l8iLUTlQM

#3 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 01 May 2013 - 00:24

That's terrible but accidents happen.

#4 Blaze_Zewi

Blaze_Zewi

    Neowinian

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:23

I wounder if they distribute the weight of whatever they are transfering evenly. :cry:

#5 OP Titoist

Titoist

    The Socialistician

  • 2,235 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 06
  • Location: Banff, Alberta
  • OS: OSX, iOS 7.1
  • Phone: iPhone 5S (32GB) Space Grey

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:35

I found it interesting how the plane had a nice speed and incline (from my experience flying) when all of the sudden it just lost all momentum and stopped in midair. An engine loss would still give them some momentum to level out and glide, but this was just a dead stop, faster than a stall too.

#6 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,774 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:40

Looks like they lost power to both engine. :cry:

Nope. You can hear the engines spooling up to TOGA power (a lot of the time big jets won't use full power on take-off because it would destroy the runway faster, could possibly overheat the engines, waste fuel, noises etc).

The most likely scenario was that the cargo the plane was carrying wasn't secured down properly, hence when the plane started climbing, the load shifted to the back and created a rear CG. If the rear CG was severe enough (like in this case) it'll cause the plane to stall and the elevators won't have enough authority to bring the nose back down. So the plane will remain in a stall, possibly spin and eventually crash to the ground (like in this case).

Generally speaking it's the captains responsibility to make sure the cargo he's carrying has been secured down properly and the weight and cg locations are within limits. After years though a lot of them get complacent and just trust that the load master did his job correctly (which they should have done).

If anyone was wondering this was the plane that crashed:

Posted Image

#7 McKay

McKay

    Neowinian Stallion

  • 6,000 posts
  • Joined: 29-August 10
  • Location: 308 Negra Arroyo Lane
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: LG G3

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:45

Nope. The most likely scenario was that the cargo the plane was carrying wasn't secured down properly, hence when the plane started climbing, the load shifted to the back and created a rear CG. If the rear CG was severe enough (like in this case) it'll cause the plane to stall and the elevators won't have enough authority to bring the nose back down. So the plane will remain in a stall, possibly spin and eventually crash to the ground (like in this case).

Generally speaking it's the captains responsibility to make sure the cargo he's carrying has been secured down properly and the weight and cg locations are within limits. After years though a lot of them get complacent and just trust that the load master did his job correctly (which they should have done).


Somewhere, someone is frantically checking signatures of Job Cards, praying to the Gods that his name isnt by it.

#8 OP Titoist

Titoist

    The Socialistician

  • 2,235 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 06
  • Location: Banff, Alberta
  • OS: OSX, iOS 7.1
  • Phone: iPhone 5S (32GB) Space Grey

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:54

Is that a 747? If so, that is one big beast to fall.

#9 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,774 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:59

Is that a 747? If so, that is one big beast to fall.


Yup 747-400. If you look at the video carefully you can see that just before the plane starts it's dive it looks like it's stationary for a second or so. That's the power of 200,000+ lbs of trust. :no:

The cargo that it was carrying was 5 MRAPs ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP ) and apparently the final communication to ATC was a loud banging noise heard from the back which could possibly mean the straps snapped and the cargo fell backwards causing a cascading effect. Each of those MRAPs weighs 14+ tons, so that's going to be a major load shift.

Also btw, what licenses you have since you said you have flying experience?

#10 Nashy

Nashy

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,018 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 04
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S5 - SM-G900i

Posted 01 May 2013 - 02:05

I found it interesting how the plane had a nice speed and incline (from my experience flying) when all of the sudden it just lost all momentum and stopped in midair. An engine loss would still give them some momentum to level out and glide, but this was just a dead stop, faster than a stall too.


The first thing I thought when it was going up, that it was pitched far too high for a 747. Then it just stalled. I'd say we'll be looking at a major load shift or incorrect loading.

#11 OP Titoist

Titoist

    The Socialistician

  • 2,235 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 06
  • Location: Banff, Alberta
  • OS: OSX, iOS 7.1
  • Phone: iPhone 5S (32GB) Space Grey

Posted 01 May 2013 - 02:21

Yup 747-400. If you look at the video carefully you can see that just before the plane starts it's dive it looks like it's stationary for a second or so. That's the power of 200,000+ lbs of trust. :no:

The cargo that it was carrying was 5 MRAPs ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP ) and apparently the final communication to ATC was a loud banging noise heard from the back which could possibly mean the straps snapped and the cargo fell backwards causing a cascading effect. Each of those MRAPs weighs 14+ tons, so that's going to be a major load shift.

Also btw, what licenses you have since you said you have flying experience?


When I said flying experience, I meant I travel a lot and I love take-offs and landings. From actual flying experience.... 10 years of Microsoft Flight Simulator :p

#12 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,774 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 01 May 2013 - 02:24

When I said flying experience, I meant I travel a lot and I love take-offs and landings. From actual flying experience.... 10 years of Microsoft Flight Simulator :p

Ah lol was wondering if there was another pilot on Neowin :rofl:

#13 nfiniti9

nfiniti9

    Neowinian

  • 121 posts
  • Joined: 10-February 10

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:06

Yup 747-400. If you look at the video carefully you can see that just before the plane starts it's dive it looks like it's stationary for a second or so. That's the power of 200,000+ lbs of trust. :no:

The cargo that it was carrying was 5 MRAPs ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP ) and apparently the final communication to ATC was a loud banging noise heard from the back which could possibly mean the straps snapped and the cargo fell backwards causing a cascading effect. Each of those MRAPs weighs 14+ tons, so that's going to be a major load shift.

Also btw, what licenses you have since you said you have flying experience?


I wonder what kind of thrust you need to pull out of that. Theoretically you could pull out with a ton of thrust if the frame could even take it.

#14 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,774 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:17

I wonder what kind of thrust you need to pull out of that. Theoretically you could pull out with a ton of thrust if the frame could even take it.

Yeah theoretically you probably could, but reality the plane is just too heavy. You would need massive amounts of thrust to overcome the wings being useless, for an extremely heavy plane like the 747 the airframe would have be incredibly strong. As the plane climbs the engines become less and less powerful, and eventually they wouldn't produce enough power to keep the plane flying (and so it'll stall, spin etc).

Fighter jets can do vertical climbs because they produce massive amounts of thrust compared to their weight. But here's some fun facts for you. 1 747 engine produces almost the same thrust as the f-22's 2 engines do with the afterburner engaged. 1 777 engine can produce just under twice as much trust as the afterburning f-22. Those engines are ridiculously powerful as it is.

F-22 engine with afterburner: 35,000 lbs
747-400 Engine: 63,300 lbs (the 8l has slightly more powerful engines that produce 65,000)
777-300 engine: rated at 115,300 lbs of thrust, but has been tested at 128,000 or something like that.

The other thing is it would be an extremely unstable plane. The thrust would keep the plane in the air but the rear CG would keep forcing the nose up, and you'd have to have a massive horizontal stabilizer to keep forcing the nose back down. But having a massive horizontal stabilizer would make for a very very sensitive plane.

So anyways, yes a massive amount of thrust would theoretically work at first, but the other design considerations wouldn't make it effective. The only real way to fix such a massive load shift would be to well shift the load back to the appropriate CG range. If this plane was at altitude, they might have had the time to be able to do that. But they just took off and it happened so fast (they didn't even have the landing gear retracted) that they were pretty much dead the second the straps broke and the cargo fell backwards.

#15 Enron

Enron

    Windows for Workgroups

  • 9,713 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11
  • OS: Windows 8.1 U1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:26

Looks like the seat backs and tray tables were not in the upright and locked position this time.