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

[ultrarunner]

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?

 

[OrionFE]

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.

What was strange?

 

[Dumbluck]

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]

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]

I tried to update the title to reflect the date of this crash, but I can't.

 

[Guam360]

see....this is going no where, no need for this at all.

 

[embpic1]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Squirrel29]

Did they ever find the fuel truck?