Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

747 Crashes over throttle settings...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

FN FAL

Freight Dawgs Rule
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Posts
8,573
N.S. crash likely due to throttle setting

By CP

HALIFAX -- A cargo jet crash in Nova Scotia that claimed the lives of all seven people aboard was probably caused by an improper throttle setting made by a member of the crew, says a flight safety investigator. "We have not found anything technically or mechanically that we see would have contributed," said Bill Fowler, the lead investigator with the Transportation Safety Board of Canada.

"That leaves us with, 'How this situation could have taken place with this crew?' "

Fowler's comments came yesterday after he attended a sombre memorial service in Dartmouth, N.S., and then spent hours briefing visiting families of the dead airmen of the MK Airlines Ltd. flight.

The Boeing 747 jet crashed on takeoff at Halifax International Airport on Oct. 14 in a spectacular fireball. The investigation has been underway for just over two months, examining factors ranging from the weight of the aircraft to two recently changed engines.

At least one widow made clear during her visit to Halifax this week that she expects Fowler will look at the working conditions the pilots were flying under, and check to see if they had enough rest.

"If they look at human error as a possibility, then the next question will be, 'Why was it human error?' It was a very, very experienced crew. It was one of the most experienced crews that worked for MK. You just don't make mistakes like that," said Joanne Buckley-Lamb, the widow of David Lamb, a pilot on the flight.

Fowler said it was too early to come to any conclusions on whether fatigue may have been a factor.

Fowler said the focus is now on the incorrectly set throttle. The setting, which is done by hand, was too low to deliver the power needed for the 350,700-kg cargo plane to lift off, he said.

"The power wasn't set properly," said Fowler.

The crew was using a system known as "heavy crewing," where one crew flies the aircraft while the other rests on board.

Families were flown to Halifax this week to attend several services for the seven crew members, all of whom lived in either Zimbabwe and South Africa.

About 30 people gathered for a ceremony that included taking home a small rock as a remembrance of the crash site.
 
Refresh my memory - - didn't the initial reports on this crash mention they had used an intersection instead of the full length?
 
TonyC said:
Refresh my memory - - didn't the initial reports on this crash mention they had used an intersection instead of the full length?
I believe you are right sir. As opposed to my memory, a fart in the wind.;)
 
RIP

For you future heavy lift wannabes. Do not assume that the takeoff data is correct. If you sense inferior performance past V1, fire wall the sum beech.
 
AAslag said:
RIP

If you sense inferior performance past V1
Oh the possibilities for a first class flame are endless!!!!!!...........I can hardly contain myself.............


OK I'll start............Inferior performance for 100 Alex.........

Who are PFT'ers?
 
AAslag said:
RIP

For you future heavy lift wannabes. Do not assume that the takeoff data is correct. If you sense inferior performance past V1, fire wall the sum beech.
You don't have to be a heavy lift wannabe...it's all relative. Dropping 10 degrees of flaps saved my butt once when the runway edge lighting had turned yellow and there was no place to go but up. Flame away all you want, but it is, what it is.
 
FN FAL said:
You don't have to be a heavy lift wannabe...it's all relative. Dropping 10 degrees of flaps saved my butt once when the runway edge lighting had turned yellow and there was no place to go but up. Flame away all you want, but it is, what it is.
Yeah, it's called a Chinese takeoff.
 
Oakum_Boy said:
Yeah, it's called a Chinese takeoff.
It worked for me...we don't have V1 speeds and I wasn't that heavily laden. I spoke with two other pilots that took off on that runway and they had long take off runs as well. Some airports have wind phenoms...no matter what the AWOS says.
 
This report of improper thrust setting has to be taking with a grain of salt. Don't forget investagators are seldom fully qualified on the eqiupment they investagate. B747 crews use reduced epr settings for takeoff when conditions permit. Combine a reduced takeoff thrust setting with a inadvertant intersection departure mix in fatiuge and who knows? Im sure these guys probably clinked the power but it may have been to late.
 
leardrivr said:
Don't forget investagators are seldom fully qualified on the eqiupment they investagate.
That's quite a charge.

I feel certain that the investigation has/will receive technical information from someone with expertise in the equipment involved. If Boeing doesn't know how 747's work, we're in big trouble.


.
 
TonyC said:
That's quite a charge.

I feel certain that the investigation has/will receive technical information from someone with expertise in the equipment involved. If Boeing doesn't know how 747's work, we're in big trouble.


.
It is common practice among all airframers to send a qualified aircraft accident investigator to accidents to assist in the investigation, gather information for the manufacturer and represent the manufacturer's interests.

GV
 
leardrivr said:
This report of improper thrust setting has to be taking with a grain of salt. Don't forget investagators are seldom fully qualified on the eqiupment they investagate.
This reminds me about an experience I had about a hundred years ago while attending an AOPA sponsered CFI refresher course. One of the instructors was a recently retired FAA senior Air Carrier inspector. This guy put a copy, on the overhead projector, of the ATP certificate that he was issued during the last few years that he was with the FAA. Under limitations it read "UNRESTRICTED", in other words this guy was legal in everything. He mentioned that it came about as a result of an incident where he tried to pull some airline pilot's certificate. The inspector had been in the cockpit of some airliner when the crew did something stupid. The pilot's attorney argued that the inspector wasn't qualified to critique the crew because he wasn't type-rated in the particular aircraft that they had been flying. Long story short, he ended up with an unrestricted ATP. It also was of limited duration, l believe that it was 24 months, like a CFI certificate. He mentioned that the FAA had issued these certificates only to a handfull of their senior inspectors.

'Sled
 
Last edited:
FN FAL,

No disrespect intended. I'm a heavy lift wannabe again.

Good call on the flap drop. It reminds me of a training experience.

Our simulator training, while excellent, still could not cover every contingency.

Most simulator training involves an engine failure past V1, and a pattern circuit to landing at a resonable 200 and a half mile. Maximum engine out flap setting on the aircraft I commanded was 20 or 25 degrees.

Instructor training was more thorough. An engine failure on short final would require a flap retraction in order to comply with precedure and reduce drag. It wasn't part of the sylabus but I appreciated the exposure.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom