PDA

View Full Version : OT:Oh crap,that doesn't look good!



wierdscience
04-30-2013, 11:20 PM
Crash at Bagram airfield caught on tape.:(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icfVsql38oc

Wonder what the cause was?

gcude
04-30-2013, 11:32 PM
I had watched the video earlier and had always heard of planes falling out of the sky, but this video truly shows that. Sad for the victims. Hope they can determine the cause to prevent future accidents like this one.

vpt
04-30-2013, 11:41 PM
Where do people get these dashcams from? I would love to have a nice dashcam.

A.K. Boomer
04-30-2013, 11:42 PM
How terrible - and what poor taste having that comic guy laughing.

It's a classic stall - look at the angle of the plane when it's far away - it's looks like it's flying overhead because you see full belly pan...

then it searches to one side - and then dive bombs the other, it totally stalled due to not enough speed and a radical angle of attack...

wierdscience
04-30-2013, 11:47 PM
That's what I was thinking,a stall.God that feeling has to suck,at least it was quick:(

flylo
05-01-2013, 12:00 AM
Classic departure stall. He's supposed to fly the centerline of the runway, looks like he drifted right tried to correct & didn't have enough lift at such a high angle of attact. You feel the stall aproaching & have to push the yoke forward to gain airspeed and/or lift but it's human nature (which has to be broken) to pull back on the yoke, plane breaks right or left & enters a spin if theres enough altitude. Very sad indeed. The US doesn't require spin training for a private pilot which is nuts.

A.K. Boomer
05-01-2013, 12:28 AM
Yes departure stall is better stated,,,
the second that plane comes into view is very close to the point of no return even if immediate action was taken, it's fate is almost or most likely sealed, it's at a radical angle and you can tell there's hardly any speed.

Nose down and full power at that point and it might have had just enough altitude to recover, but a pig like that takes time to respond, and in some cases won't respond at all due to lack of flow across the controls, what a shame indeed... it's not fun to watch things like that knowing all the people lost their lives...

The Artful Bodger
05-01-2013, 12:31 AM
Heavy aircraft are vulnerable to missile attacks at low altitude and in places like Bagram the pilots no doubt try to vary their depature route as far as practical, maybe a bit too far in this case.

Just about every aircraft leaving Baghdad airport when I was there in May/June 2003 did a departure somewhat like that.

However comments on other sites (including PPrunes) say there are not 'tactical departures' and there are also comments that problems were reported by the crew prior to the aircraft pitching up, also four heavy vehicles on board so load shift on rotation is a possibility.

flylo
05-01-2013, 01:02 AM
In that case the w/b may have too far aft which would explain alot.

dp
05-01-2013, 01:11 AM
All the airplanes I've ever flown go nose down right damn now in a stall, but they don't have 4 massive low-slung jet engines. If too tail-heavy they porpoise into the ground and you don't ever want to explore that part of the flight envelope. The falling leaf plummet and nearly no horizontal speed are certainly indicative of a stall, though. I expected it to lawn dart before it hit the world and that didn't happen. I think Flylo has it - tail-heavy and not enough airspeed for the tail plane to control pitch. It came down like an umbrella.

A.K. Boomer
05-01-2013, 01:11 AM
It's obvious to the naked eye what happened - but like you guys are thinking the reasoning for it happening is what all the investigating will be about - everything from the pilot taking too much of a bite to the CG and yes aft is the worst...

could be a plethora of things in combo, like the CG and the pilot and perhaps a strong head gust whilst the plane is at a steep low speed climb angle which would make it immediately gain altitude at the cost of precious speed, then the head wind leaves and the craft drops from the sky like a rock...

danlb
05-01-2013, 01:12 AM
Where do people get these dashcams from? I would love to have a nice dashcam.

Google is your friend. There are plenty of dashcams on Amazon too. The problem is keeping it from being stolen. :)


That was a terrible accident. It was sad to see it stall that way. I can't imagine a situation where the pilot (it was a commercial flight) would not have brought the nose down rather than come down in what looked like the start of a spin. It reminded me of a similar video of a UPS plane where the cargo shifted during takeoff, causing a high angle of attack and subsequent low altitude stall. I don't recall that one bursting into flame.


Dan

lakeside53
05-01-2013, 01:23 AM
My bet is a big cargo shift. Looks like he got the wings level not enough altitude to do anything.

bborr01
05-01-2013, 01:32 AM
A friend took me flying in a Cessna 150 about 25 years ago shortly after he hot his private pilots license. He was practicing touch and go's and told me that the plane could lift off at X knots. At X knots he pulled up and the plane started to lift off. He then steered a little to the side and I thought we were going down. My brother in law, who was also a pilot, told me I was very close to dying. That was the last time I flew with that guy.

Brian

Evan
05-01-2013, 02:09 AM
They stopped spin training in the US when the Grumman Yankee and Traveler came out. They have a laminar flow airfoil and if you get it in a spin it may go flat spin and is often unrecoverable. A few trainees bit the dust that way so they stopped spinning. Stupid, just read the placard.

Second time up my instructor had us at about 2000 feet and then had me cross control the Fleet Canuck while holding altitude and closing the throttle. Suddenly it snap rolled inverted and headed straight down. I used to practice spins in my Cessna 140 just for fun.

flylo
05-01-2013, 02:33 AM
Old planes with no gyros. If you get caught above the clouds & can find a small hole spin down thru it until your clear. I love practicing spins too but it seem to make the passengers nervous?:rolleyes:
On the plane that crashed I bet they find his CG was way aft. Flying is very unforgiving.

dp
05-01-2013, 02:57 AM
When I moved to Washington I took a check ride at the local FBO which was 1/4 mile from my house. The plane was a T-tail Piper trainer and it has the smallest flyable envelope of any plane I've ever flown. Never had to pull fuel from the tank to get two people in a plane before. Flew out over the Snoqualmie river valley and went through the drills and aced them all. I was then asked to demonstrate a stall. I brought up the carb heat and cut the throttle while sliding the yoke back until the stall horn blew, then yanked it hard back to the stop. The plane fell out of the sky like an owl turd. I pushed the yoke forward and hit the carb heat and throttle and recovered in 150' with wings always level. The check pilot had just crapped his drawers and started shouting "Never DO THAT!". I sed calmly - "never ask me to do that". I explained my flight instructor always had us force a true stall. Approach to stall practice is for sissies.

I used to demo my Ercoupe by adjusting the throttle and yoke until the yoke was fully against the back stop. It could fly like that all day, mushing through the air the way I imagine pigs would fly.

lakeside53
05-01-2013, 03:20 AM
I bet that was a POS Tomahawk ("tramahawk"). I have about 120 hours in one of those. Nasty nasty spin characteristics - very tight snap and nose down immediately; if you didn't recover in 2 turns it was ugly and steep. Not a good airframe to inadvertantly cross control in an accelerated stall on takeoff. Also nasty at min controllable airspeed - pull the yoke back FULL (I mean FULL - the last inch is where the trouble happens) slowly and apply enough power to keep it at min air speed and level, then try to hold it level with just the rudder. It will start to buck more and more and by the third or forth it will stand on its tail and drop the nose vertical (or inverted!) in heartbeat. Within seconds you are red-lined and can barely haul the pos out. Don't practice that at home unless you are good or have 3000 feet beneath (1000 seems like a lot but red-line diving eats it up real fast!). The Tomahawk wing has lots of issues. First rev stalled the root before the tip (or was it vice versa?) and they tended to stall/crash with students. So they added a stall stall strip at the root. Still stall/crashes... so they added another on the outboard also! Frigg; let's really mess it up the aerodynamics. And don't get me started on the tail...

I did most of my flying in Montana with runway at 4700ft. Summers day with 2 on a Tomahawk - fly 3000 feet down the runway in ground effect after takeoff with the stall horn on inching for airspeed. Oh.. we had 10000 feet. Just for grins I did get one up to 13,600 on a cool night... just clawing at the sky to stay there.

On the other hand the Piper Archer and Warrior were difficult to spin and made demonstration of spins not very effective. Hands off they tended to recover in a 1/2 turn on their own. Just a big mush event.

winchman
05-01-2013, 05:44 AM
I've always thought having students practice stalling a plane is a bad idea. It teaches you to do something that's probably the last thing you want to do when you're flying in normal situations. If you practice continuing to pull back on the stick when you hear the horn, that's what you're going to do when you hear the horn while five other things are competing for your attention on final with the wife and kids on board.

It would make more sense to have the instructor stall the plane, then let the student recover it. That's the part you want to learn.

I'd rather see more emphasis on stall avoidance training, especially the base-to-final turn with a tailwind situation.

taydin
05-01-2013, 06:08 AM
Way back, I have watched a TV documentary saying that all Cessna planes have a parachute that saves the entire plane in an emergency. It is located at roof of the plane, right at the center of mass, and when deployed, the plane just comes down slowly and hits the ground on its wheels. After fixing the problem and replacing the parachute, you can start your next flying session :)

I am wondering why this can't be done for the large planes.

Euph0ny
05-01-2013, 07:39 AM
How awful for the crew of that 747 and their families. Shocking.




I used to demo my Ercoupe by adjusting the throttle and yoke until the yoke was fully against the back stop. It could fly like that all day, mushing through the air the way I imagine pigs would fly.

I helped in a small way some years ago to restore an Ercoupe which had lost an argument with a concrete fence to airworthiness. I still remember the the little plaque marked 'characteristically incapable of spinning'.

vpt
05-01-2013, 08:24 AM
When I fly I feel that many pilots push the planes to far as far as lift off goes. It seems they like to push it to the limits of how fast they can climb coming off the runway. I was lucky enough to fly a plane once in my life. I have flew more than a few times. I am one of those people that have a very good natural (feel) for pretty much anything I do, ride in, or drive. Many times when taking off I can feel the planes actually slow down while the pilot pulls up farther and farther till it gets to the point where you ca tell it isn't gaining any speed any more but just altitude. Then when they finally start to level off you can tell the plane picks up speed.

jmarkwolf
05-01-2013, 08:31 AM
Way back, I have watched a TV documentary saying that all Cessna planes have a parachute that saves the entire plane in an emergency. It is located at roof of the plane, right at the center of mass, and when deployed, the plane just comes down slowly and hits the ground on its wheels. After fixing the problem and replacing the parachute, you can start your next flying session :)

I am wondering why this can't be done for the large planes.

It's not Cessna's, it Cirrus planes with integrated parachutes, and as I understand it, the plane is severely damaged. It's just that it's survivable.

PonderCreekStudio
05-01-2013, 09:43 AM
Way back, I have watched a TV documentary saying that all Cessna planes have a parachute that saves the entire plane in an emergency. It is located at roof of the plane, right at the center of mass, and when deployed, the plane just comes down slowly and hits the ground on its wheels. After fixing the problem and replacing the parachute, you can start your next flying session :)

I am wondering why this can't be done for the large planes.

It's possible to parachute a 747-8, if you don't mind giving up most cargo space and providing plenty of places of attachment/frame support. Not very practical, though, if the purpose of the craft is to move cargo or large numbers of people. It takes a lot of silk to float 480-something tons. Also, most times when a parachute (probably multiple ones) would be needed, the plane is too close to the ground for a chute to be effective. That's my understanding. I could be wrong.

wierdscience
05-01-2013, 10:06 AM
It's possible to parachute a 747-8, if you don't mind giving up most cargo space and providing plenty of places of attachment/frame support. Not very practical, though, if the purpose of the craft is to move cargo or large numbers of people. It takes a lot of silk to float 480-something tons. Also, most times when a parachute (probably multiple ones) would be needed, the plane is too close to the ground for a chute to be effective. That's my understanding. I could be wrong.

If I am thinking right most accidents happen either at takeoff or landing.Both instances when a chute even if it did deploy would not have time to fully open before hitting the ground.

Even if you were at an altitude high enough for the chute to work,if the airspeed is too high when the chute deploys I could see where the airframe and chute would be torn to shreds by the forces involved.

flylo
05-01-2013, 10:07 AM
BRS chutes have been used in ultralghts for years & has over 200 saves. In that size it's cheap insurance.

outlawspeeder
05-01-2013, 10:25 AM
My thought: on takeoff or more to the point at “rotate”(normally the point where you are committed to the takeoff) the cargo roll to the back of the airplane. When this happens and the CG is outside the operating limits of normal operation the airplane will not fly.
Had that happen to a C141 in Spain back in 1991 before I stated flying. It was one pallet and the crew did a great job bringing it back in. The driver had to have the cushionatomy to remove the seat cushion from his aZZ. Joking aside the whole crew kissed the ground. The CG was so bad the nose tires could not turn the airplane because there was not enough weight on them
Staring at the video for the last 30 minutes it looks like the elevators, leading edge, was full up. That is the normal step to recover CG problems…
Any way you look at it, if you have ever been a flyer you will hold your breath as you watch the jet fold over the top. The other thought is a runaway elevator causing the steep climb to a stall.
I only did stall in the simulator Thank God.

A.K. Boomer
05-01-2013, 12:22 PM
All the airplanes I've ever flown go nose down right damn now in a stall, but they don't have 4 massive low-slung jet engines. If too tail-heavy they porpoise into the ground and you don't ever want to explore that part of the flight envelope. The falling leaf plummet and nearly no horizontal speed are certainly indicative of a stall, though. I expected it to lawn dart before it hit the world and that didn't happen. I think Flylo has it - tail-heavy and not enough airspeed for the tail plane to control pitch. It came down like an umbrella.


Dp, In my view the plane is actually behaving normally, your talking about a typical fairly leveled off stall and this plane is going through anything but that,

To me this plane is going through the classic motions of an extremely steep angle low speed stall and in that case the nose does not try to drop straight down along with its path of flight - it chooses to take the path of least resistance and that would be to go off to either one side or the other...

and that's exactly what it does - it searches - leans a little one way - and then dive bombs the other,,, It was going nose down recovery mode off to the side and was on it's way to doing so - it was stopped short however simply due to running out of room...

Im all ears to the guys who have flown commercial and there's a few of them on here like Lakeside and Pete I believe... due to the shear mass and the time it takes to recover a beast like that I would like to hear their opinion as to when they thought it was "game over",,, I may be way off - it may be many seconds even before the plane appears in the video...




Outlaw;
My thought: on takeoff or more to the point at “rotate”(normally the point where you are committed to the takeoff) the cargo roll to the back of the airplane. When this happens and the CG is outside the operating limits of normal operation the airplane will not fly.


Im not convinced the CG was off that much due to the way the plane was recovering, it did stall - did a quick flail - and then immediately chose a side to dive and then ran with it.., it simply ran out of room due to it not having any in the first place ,,,, I think if it had extremely radical aft CG there would have been more of a tail dragging floundering and some nose porpoising and then it might decide not to dive at all - once it fell off to the side that nose was coming down at a good rate - it's surprising to me how quick that plane was actually on its way to recovery from such a steep angle fuque up...

I think the proof that it could have been flown "normally" lies in how it was recovering - and to me it looks totally normal for the angle of attack it was on...

Rustybolt
05-01-2013, 01:27 PM
Im not convinced the CG was off that much due to the way the plane was recovering, it did stall - did a quick flail - and then immediately chose a side to dive and then ran with it.., it simply ran out of room due to it not having any in the first place ,,,, I think if it had extremely radical aft CG there would have been more of a tail dragging floundering and some nose porpoising and then it might decide not to dive at all - once it fell off to the side that nose was coming down at a good rate - it's surprising to me how quick that plane was actually on its way to recovery from such a steep angle fuque up...

I think the proof that it could have been flown "normally" lies in how it was recovering - and to me it looks totally normal for the angle of attack it was on...


Now National only has two 747-400s. Got off the phone with my brother the 747 maintenance guy. The cargo was armored vehicles and one of his cargo people said it only has to shift 15 or 20 feet to throw the whole thing off. Maybe on recovery the cargo shifted forward again. like you said. The pilot ran out of room.

Euph0ny
05-01-2013, 02:19 PM
It's not Cessna's, it Cirrus planes with integrated parachutes, and as I understand it, the plane is severely damaged. It's just that it's survivable.

Two people survived crashing in a light plane a few weeks ago near Hamburg in Germany (http://www.bild.de/regional/hamburg/flugzeugabsturz/in-haselau-zwei-verletzte-29741566.bild.html), thanks to the aircraft's parachute. If you go to photo 3 of 6 at the link, you can see the 'chute. The plane came down vertically, nose-first.

DICKEYBIRD
05-01-2013, 02:36 PM
He corrected left, it snapped right. They (almost always) snap to the side with the downward deflected aileron.

He would've had plenty of warning before that big fellow snapped. Either gross pilot error (I doubt it) or mech. failure. Elevator failure, flap failure, cargo shift as mentioned. Who knows? Poor guys. Couldn't watch that but one time.:(

The Artful Bodger
05-01-2013, 04:54 PM
I think the proof that it could have been flown "normally" lies in how it was recovering - and to me it looks totally normal for the angle of attack it was on...

I tend to agree with this, if the runway were not 6000' (?) AMSL he might have recovered it.

dp
05-01-2013, 05:20 PM
I tend to agree with this, if the runway were not 6000' (?) AMSL he might have recovered it.

It was in a nearly flat fall, forward velocity incompatible with flight. It had no significant ground slide indicating it had no effective forward velocity. That is what happens when you brick a jumbo.

It is difficult to imagine how much altitude would be required to get air over the wings in that situation.

outlawspeeder
05-01-2013, 05:22 PM
I just got word. The AC called in that the cargo had shifted. The aircraft was owned by National. It was hauling MRAPs. A full load for a 747 converted is 5 and the true cargo 747 can haul 6.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP_(armored_vehicle) 14 tons of fun on rollers. CG shifted aft out of limits.

God bless the crew!

The Artful Bodger
05-01-2013, 05:34 PM
I have been close to one load shift incident and the aircraft, believe it or not, was a De Havilland Rapide, they were flying bundles of pipe to a remote survey site. The bundle was well tied down but a few pipes in the middle of the bundle slid to the back just after take off by which time the aircraft was over the sea. We watched as he flew out of site down a fjord obviously in ground effect and not willing to attempt to turn back. It was about 20 minutes flight to the destination which was a beach landing and the closest airstrip apart from the one he left from. He landed safely.

Alistair Hosie
05-01-2013, 06:00 PM
God bless the poor dead souls we had another three Scottish soldiers die in Afghanistan today in an improvised road bombing.My heart goes out to them ,and their poor wives children and families. Alistair

Ohio Mike
05-01-2013, 11:36 PM
A shift of somethings as heavy as an MRAP would be catastrophic. If I recall correctly a regional jet crashed on takeoff a few years back. The pilot took off then everything went crazy. Turns out the aircraft was close having its CG out of whack and when they put the gear up the weight shifted aft just enough to make it unflyable.

A.K. Boomer
05-02-2013, 12:30 AM
It was in a nearly flat fall, forward velocity incompatible with flight. It had no significant ground slide indicating it had no effective forward velocity. That is what happens when you brick a jumbo.

It is difficult to imagine how much altitude would be required to get air over the wings in that situation.



DP - don't be fooled by the shear size of the beast and the little bit of elbow room it had to work with - watch the vid again, it was in the beginnings of a nose dive recovery - even in that short of distance the nose was the first thing to hit the ground...

Had this thing had some ceiling to work with this most likely would have looked like a normal recovery for the unbelievable angle of attack it stalled out on,,,

Im just stating what Im seeing and by no means am blind to other input -
They will figure this one out - between the black box and the vid there is all the information needed to find out if the CG was way off just in the way the plane was at least trying to recover,,, from the vid alone all's they need to put together is how fast the vehicle with the camera was going, and then they have the planes horizontal speed, altitude gain, and then rate of descent and how it's position was coming back around...
of course true air speed is the main variable but they should know enough of what the conditions were and if there were any anomaly's...

lakeside53
05-02-2013, 12:49 AM
You can't read too much into what you see from the video. If the load shifts to the rear and causes a stall, it could easily have moved forward again when the attitude drops.

A.K. Boomer
05-02-2013, 01:23 AM
It's a good point - but it kinda seems like it's putting the chicken before the egg as it would take a natural correction by the plane itself as is - to get the attitude to drop to then get the weight to shift back (back to forward)--- and I can understand this fact with a plane at a milder angle of attack and more horizontal speed - but this thing was dead in the water and steep,,,

yet with nose fully up it then dive bombed into recovery mode... the plane was self correcting before any weight shift back... (back to forward) but - granted maybe after a certain point of attitude it was helped along at a faster rate due to a shift... (a shift of the weight back to forward) ?

dp
05-02-2013, 03:30 AM
DP - don't be fooled by the shear size of the beast and the little bit of elbow room it had to work with - watch the vid again, it was in the beginnings of a nose dive recovery - even in that short of distance the nose was the first thing to hit the ground...

I'm not sure what you are saying. My position is that I agree with Flylo, the plane was out of balance aft. If that is the case it can fall 100,000' and never recover. A plane that is tail-heavy as may happen if an armored vehicle slides into the tail cone cannot recover no matter the altitude if that load is stuck there. I suppose in a moment of serendipity and enough altitude a loose 14-ton armored vehicle could slide forward to its original position, righting the aircraft which limps on to a safe landing, but the inertia wank in me suspects it might just keep going until it falls out the cockpit windshield. Meanwhile the aircraft is going to go into an uncontrolled dive and the nose will pitch down and past the vertical and at that point the loose armored vehicle is most likely to drop out of the airframe entirely.

But it is extreme speculation to suggest recovery given it was a take-off situation and ignores some aerodynamics which says a conventional aircraft has the natural tendency, left to its own devices, to go into a death spiral that, given time and altitude, will pull the wings off the thing. The ship had, except for throttles, no influence or control from the moment the tailslide began. When everything goes to hell in an airplane as happened here its behavior becomes indistinguishable from a lawn dart.

Rustybolt
05-02-2013, 10:14 AM
I just got word. The AC called in that the cargo had shifted. The aircraft was owned by National. It was hauling MRAPs. A full load for a 747 converted is 5 and the true cargo 747 can haul 6.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP_(armored_vehicle) 14 tons of fun on rollers. CG shifted aft out of limits.

God bless the crew!


Yeah I kinda said that before.

A.K. Boomer
05-02-2013, 11:07 AM
I hear what you guys are saying - and esp. with a cargo plane carrying those kinds of boat anchors it would be the first thing you would think of - all im saying is the investigation has just begun,,,

I just did a brief search and yes I found the info about a possible cargo shift;

this news blog was updated yesterday http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/04/30/180107632/video-may-show-747-jets-last-seconds-before-bagram-crash


"Several observers on the ground reported the National Air Cargo Boeing 747-400 had just lifted off and was climbing through approximately 1200 feet when it's nose sharply rose, the aircraft appeared to have stalled and came down erupting in a blaze... According to a listener on frequency the crew reported the aircraft stalled due to a possible load shift."


But in the reading right after found info that states the exact thing I stated back in post 11;



"Others have suggested that a sudden powerful blast of wind may have disrupted the plane's climb."

And just for the record to verify that im not seeing things immediately after that statement there's confirmation of the plane NOT being in some kind of lazy flat-fall but more-so the nose starting to lead in a recovery effort, and it never would have got there if it had not initiated it in the first place,,, you don't get aft load shift going back to normal with a plane standing on its tail in a dead stall...


In the video, the driver of the vehicle with the dashcam slows and reverses his direction as he sees the plane's nose turn back toward the earth.

now Im not saying it's not a load shift, and maybe the tail at that kind of a "plow angle" was able to hold allot of the aft weight and in doing so pitch the nose off to the side,,, all im really saying is we don't know enough yet,
but there's no doubt we will - because even at those radical kinds of angles there's certain flight dynamics that have predictable characteristics that should aid in diagnoses, and to have the last death throws on video like that is priceless - although granted very tough to watch if your not trying to analyze what went down....

saltmine
05-02-2013, 11:12 AM
I was appalled by the crash, too. (figured by the way it fell, the cargo could have shifted). Somebody mentioned dash cams. I looked into it. It seems that in the middle east, and Russia insurance companies won't just "take your word for it" or place any value in a police report. So...many automobile owners, to protect their investment, buy and install dash mounted video cameras. Video evidence is admissible in a court of law and an insurance claim.

I guess the true cause will come out when they find an MRAP in the trunk or glove compartment.