• NC Software is having a Black Friday Sale Event thru December 4th on Logbook Pro, APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook, Cirrus Elite Binders, and more. Use coupon code BF2020 at checkout to redeem 15% off your purchase. Click here to shop now.
  • NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.

Kalitta 747 crash crew battled dual-engine failure on take-off

Dornier 335

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 3, 2005
Posts
1,089
Total Time
10300
Kalitta 747 crash crew battled dual-engine failure on take-off

article

Loss of power in two engines during initial climb, and a resulting near-stall, led to the fatal crash of a Kalitta Air Boeing 747-200F moments after departure from the Colombian capital Bogota.
Although the four Pratt & Whitney engines had functioned normally during the take-off roll from Runway 31R, the outboard right-hand powerplant suffered a persistent surge on rotation.
As the freighter became airborne it struggled to achieve a stable climb. The crew did not keep the airspeed above the threshold for an engine-out ascent and the stick-shaker activated, warning of a stall risk and prompting the pilot to reduce the angle of attack.
Although the airspeed rose, the 747 also lost height and was flying just 400ft above the ground. An attempt to increase pitch generated a second stick-shaker warning, and the pilot responded by pushing the throttles forward to maximise thrust in a bid to gain airspeed and altitude.
But about 20s later the other outboard engine, on the left wing, also lost power after a failure in the low-pressure turbine, which led the powerplant to shed parts.
The precise reason for the disintegration could not be determined, said Colombia's Grupo de Investigacion de Accidentes in its final report into the 7 July 2008 accident.
But it stated that the failure began in the third stage of the turbine, and probably involved the loss of guide vanes or section of air seal.
With two engines malfunctioning, the aircraft was unable to sustain flight in its configuration. It began to experience problems with a third engine, the inboard left-hand JT9D, which repeatedly surged. The remaining engine functioned normally.
The aircraft came down northwest of the airport, at Madrid, Cundinamarca, and was completely destroyed on impact. Two people on the ground were killed but, remarkably, the 747's eight occupants survived.
Investigators have battled to explain not only the double engine failure but also the subsequent poor flight performance of the aircraft. Simulation and analysis showed the 747-200F's expected climb capability with two engines inoperative should have been better than that demonstrated by the ill-fated jet. The simulated flights indicated a 200ft/min better climb rate over the space of 3min.
Even though analysts examined various weight, balance and operational scenarios, the inquiry report said: "The reasons for the performance degradation of the crashed aircraft could not be clearly determined from the available data."
Inspection of the outboard right-hand engine, the first to show signs of problems, revealed no abnormal pre-impact wear or damage. But the inquiry report said the engine, installed six months before the crash, was not operating efficiently because of such factors as "excessive" blade-tip clearance and Bogota airport's high altitude. It put the net loss at 5.8%.
Colombian investigators also found "discrepancies" between the aircraft's maintenance records and manufacturers' maintenance manuals which "may have affected the engine performance".
 

ultrarunner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
4,324
Total Time
10000
I love it...should have climbed at 200 fpm. Ok, yeah, it a perfect world....

Does NTSB comment on investigations it may be a party to?
 

Squirrel29

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Posts
137
Can we re-title this thought this was a new crash. Have alot of people over there I know and thought the worse.
 

Guam360

spam and rice please
Joined
Feb 5, 2002
Posts
808
Total Time
>8000
yea, what is the point of this thread......
 

Capt. Over

Haulin' it on 18 wheels.
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
136
Total Time
8K
ummm...your point?

Apparently this Dornier kid has had his head up something for the past 4 years and thought this would be fun to post as if it happened yesterday. Go back to Japan or at least report on something that occurred somewhat more recent than nearly half a decade ago! I've got some good friends at K4 and I'm sure they love your dedication to old news.
 

OrionFE

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Posts
263
Total Time
1K
Guys relax! The NTSB reports were just released a short time ago. That is where most of this info came from. As aviators we should be interested and learn from others misfortunes. This is interesting, in that, B747 experts from all over looked at this and all the data and several simulator events and cannot come to a conclusion as to why this aircraft failed to fly on three engines, etc....

The crew did a superb job flying this aircraft to the field, which saved many lives! Several returned to work a short time later.

No need to turn this into the typicle "Jerry Springer" thread.
 

ultrarunner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
4,324
Total Time
10000
B747 experts from all over looked at this and all the data and several simulator events and cannot come to a conclusion as to why this aircraft failed to fly on three engines, etc....

Maybe this??

[/QUOTE]With two engines malfunctioning, the aircraft was unable to sustain flight in its configuration. It began to experience problems with a third engine, the inboard left-hand JT9D, which repeatedly surged. The remaining engine functioned normally.[/QUOTE]

Pretty safe to say #2 wasn't helping them out much.....

Who owned those engines?
 

OrionFE

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Posts
263
Total Time
1K
Maybe this??
With two engines malfunctioning, the aircraft was unable to sustain flight in its configuration. It began to experience problems with a third engine, the inboard left-hand JT9D, which repeatedly surged. The remaining engine functioned normally.[/QUOTE]

Pretty safe to say #2 wasn't helping them out much.....

Who owned those engines?[/QUOTE]

What is your point? What is one of the most common causes for a TF to stall/surge....high angle of attack? It was a high altitude airport, the plane was struggling to stay in the air (high angle of attack/low KIAS), read the report, not the gossip! P&W said they never tested the engines in that kind of environment.
 

Capt. Over

Haulin' it on 18 wheels.
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
136
Total Time
8K
that's funny, I could've sworn you just said...

Strange response from someone who just preached something about being Jerry Springer...I thought Ultra's question was just that, a valid question. Sorry Dad.
 

ultrarunner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
4,324
Total Time
10000
My point?

My point is, it's likely NORMAL the aircraft wouldn't climb on just 2 running engines and a third one that was surging?

And with regard to who owned the engines can point to how the are maintained. Did these engines make it back to Pratt in the US?
 

Dumbluck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Posts
240
Total Time
7000+
I agree, thread title made me a little anxious as well.

any chance of bad gas, water or some kind of contamination? I wonder if there was a slight rollback of N1 or N2, then a re-light? might cause a what could be described as a surge.
 

OrionFE

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Posts
263
Total Time
1K
My point?

My point is, it's likely NORMAL the aircraft wouldn't climb on just 2 running engines and a third one that was surging?

And with regard to who owned the engines can point to how the are maintained. Did these engines make it back to Pratt in the US?

It wouldn't climb on three! After the three were advanced to emergency thrust, #1 failed. As they were flying in and out of stall buffet, #2 was interm. surging. Yes, it was a full NTSB investigation, including all engines being tore down and inspected by P&W, NTSB, FAA, etc...

That is why the report is very interesting to read, several B747 experts all gathered in a round table meeting trying to figure out why multiple engine failures. One thing that was discovered P&W never tested the engines at those altitudes. The same thing happened a few weeks later, the aircraft returned on three engines. All of those engines were removed and inspected by P&W and NTSB as well. Operating out of that field, the engines are at their max EPR and N1 for all takeoffs!
 

TMMT

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Posts
21,655
Total Time
Alot
I tried to update the title to reflect the date of this crash, but I can't.
 

Guam360

spam and rice please
Joined
Feb 5, 2002
Posts
808
Total Time
>8000
see....this is going no where, no need for this at all.
 

embpic1

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2005
Posts
474
Total Time
>10000
And we all know the loaders in Bogota never fudge the numbers right?

I talked with one of our guys who ran this scenario in our sim. They also got better performance in the sim than what the aircraft actually did. So they increased the weight to make the sim perform like the plane. Turned out when they added about 30,000 lbs the sim acted just like the accident airplane. I also know that they were carrying lots of flowers. I heard there was some suspicion that they watered the flowers after they were weighed. That coupled with them 'putting on a little extra' could explain why the aircraft performed worse than it should have. Of course the Bogota authorities would never admit to that.....
 

Dornier 335

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 3, 2005
Posts
1,089
Total Time
10300
Hey Capt. Over!

Running low on your magic blue little pills? This article was posted on FlightInternational's website on 12:15 9 Jan 2012. It is an update/conclusion of an investigation. Not my problem if your reading comprehension is third-grade level. Title and article were copied as they appear on this thread. Why don't you show us all your big cojones and complain to the FlightInternational author!

Peace!

3 3 5
 

ClrdForOption

Amateur MCDU Programmer
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Posts
27
Total Time
Lots
And we all know the loaders in Bogota never fudge the numbers right?

Back in the day we used to have this problem when I 'worked in the back' as an LM - what we would do to keep 'em honest was to pick out 3-6 pallets at random and have them re-weighed on the spot - after making sure that the scale was accurate in the xfer warehouse. If there was any problems then all the pallets were reweighed and we used those numbers.

It was a constant battle.

I also used to keep records of every flight I worked - weights of average pallets based on the number of boxes and different types of flowers. It was my skin flying with the plane and i was always looking for things that were off.
 
Top