Tradewinds 747 Wreck in MDE

[McNugget]

Hey did anyone download and save the video? I can no longer access it on that web site, getting an error message. I've got a buddy of mine that wants to see it and is having the same problem as I am, when he tries to view it on the web.


Thanks

I was able to pull it up and watch it about 5 minutes ago.

 

[kevdog]

I could watch it in explorer but originally had problems viewing it with firefox.

Hope this is the last overrun for a long time!

 

[Draginass]

Crappy runways with little drainage. Crappy weather. Crappy terrain. Crappy radar. Complicated approaches . . . . and crappy company managements make South America a very dangerous and unforgiving place to fly.

 

[kevdog]

Crappy runways with little drainage. Crappy weather. Crappy terrain. Crappy radar. Complicated approaches . . . . and crappy company managements make South America a very dangerous and unforgiving place to fly.

agreed completely, but unless this accident was the result of a mechanical failure, the crew most likely aborted after V1 or made some other mistake. At least nobody got hurt on the plane or on the ground! I hope the best for everyone involved.

 

[Draginass]

agreed completely, but unless this accident was the result of a mechanical failure, the crew most likely aborted after V1 or made some other mistake. At least nobody got hurt on the plane or on the ground! I hope the best for everyone involved.

It is irresponsible to make suppositions like that. Are you naive enough to believe that the takeoff data in the flight manual will apply to runway conditions/factors at many crappy South American airports? Have you ever experienced the braking action on wet heavy rubber deposits in a balanced field length 747?

 

[B-atch]

It is irresponsible to make suppositions like that. Are you naive enough to believe that the takeoff data in the flight manual will apply to runway conditions/factors at many crappy South American airports? Have you ever experienced the braking action on wet heavy rubber deposits in a balanced field length 747?

Actual TO weigh, not W&B numbers might be a consideration too. Balanced field #'s are based on known actual weight. How often are freighters loaded beyond the manifested weight.... Probably all the time. High speed RTO's are dicey on a heavy jet. Throw in wet runway ( probably not crowned), hydroplaning, and delayed crew response time, you will probably go off the end.

 

[McNugget]

It is irresponsible to make suppositions like that. Are you naive enough to believe that the takeoff data in the flight manual will apply to runway conditions/factors at many crappy South American airports? Have you ever experienced the braking action on wet heavy rubber deposits in a balanced field length 747?

I can tell you I have in a heavy DC10, and I bet a million bucks kevdog has too. Da man is entitled to his opinion, and many of us on here have "crappy South American airport" experience.

 

[kevdog]

It is irresponsible to make suppositions like that. Are you naive enough to believe that the takeoff data in the flight manual will apply to runway conditions/factors at many crappy South American airports? Have you ever experienced the braking action on wet heavy rubber deposits in a balanced field length 747?

Hey ass,
Over 90% of my flights this year have been to crappy South American airports. Hell, I was even at MDE a few days before this accident. I agree with what you are saying and yes the RAD isn't 100% accurate. That's why a good crew would take it on the conservative side at at 7,300' field with a wet runway. That's why I have respect for Captains who don't use QNH corrections to offset the wet runway penalty to help the company out. There are reasons high speed aborts are not recommended. I wasn't accusing this crew of doing anything wrong, just saying it was likely to be crew/pilot error. Let's see what the report says.

 

[kevdog]

Actual TO weigh, not W&B numbers might be a consideration too. Balanced field #'s are based on known actual weight. How often are freighters loaded beyond the manifested weight.... Probably all the time. High speed RTO's are dicey on a heavy jet. Throw in wet runway ( probably not crowned), hydroplaning, and delayed crew response time, you will probably go off the end.

I understand this flight was flying for LAN. If it was, I wouldn't be shocked if more flowers were on the plane than on the W&B paperwork, but I would be surprised. I would also think the cargo would have been weighed again after the incident. If I was on this crew I would have insisted on it to possibly cover my ass.

I agree high speed RTO's are dicey. It's also easy with hindsight to say they should have continued the takeoff. At the end of the day the most important thing is that nobody got hurt or killed.

 

[federico]

Mr. Kevdog your entitled to your opinion but your talking about the jobs of 3 guys here. Talk all you want about Tradewinds or Even your crappy Centurion or Arrow Air but not the guys come on grow up.

 

[heilhaavir]

"If I was on this crew I would have insisted....": Kev, how do you know they haven't?

"incident": is that what it is in your book?

"There are reasons high speed aborts are not recommended": So you know the reason why they aborted?

YDM Kevdoggydog :uzi:

 

[Kruger Stellman]

I understand this flight was flying for LAN. If it was, I wouldn't be shocked if more flowers were on the plane than on the W&B paperwork, but I would be surprised. I would also think the cargo would have been weighed again after the incident. If I was on this crew I would have insisted on it to possibly cover my ass.

"If I was on this crew I would have insisted....": Kev, how do you know they haven't?

"incident": is that what it is in your book?

This is going to be fun, I can tell! Some of you "kids" haven't got a clue

 

[Draginass]

Hey ass,
Over 90% of my flights this year have been to crappy South American airports. Hell, I was even at MDE a few days before this accident. I agree with what you are saying and yes the RAD isn't 100% accurate. That's why a good crew would take it on the conservative side at at 7,300' field with a wet runway. That's why I have respect for Captains who don't use QNH corrections to offset the wet runway penalty to help the company out. There are reasons high speed aborts are not recommended. I wasn't accusing this crew of doing anything wrong, just saying it was likely to be crew/pilot error. Let's see what the report says.

How very "professional." You resort to name calling, then agree with me that we should wait until all the facts are in . . . but not before announcing the "likely" cause of the accident. "Wet runway penalty?" Which penalty is that? . . a V1 reduction, a weight reduction?. . . or are you talking about a "clutter" penalty which is different from a "wet" runway? Or just maybe you don't know squat about 747s nor Tradewinds' FAA-approved takeoff data and runway analysis.

You're a poster child for why pilots are their own worst enemy. You should get a job on CNN.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

You should get a job on CNN.

I think Miles - I am a private pilot and know EVERYTHING about aviation - O' Duma$$ Brien has that one taken.

 

[Crizz]

This board sucks more every day.

 

[McNugget]

This board sucks more every day.

Agreed.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

True, there are some very good reasons high-speed aborts are not recommended. There are also some very good reasons why they're performed. We don't know what happened here. Could be an accumulation of small mistakes, could be just one big mistake. One thing is for sure...at this point, there is absolutely NO reason to believe that ANY of those mistakes originated in the cockpit of the 747.

I don't have as much SA experience as some of you guys, but I have some. While I'm not aware of any "intentional" overloading of planes down there, I am aware of one incident (and I'm sure there are others) where the numbers on the W&B form indicated "pounds" where they should have read "Kilos." The result was that the A/C was overloaded by a considerable amount...enough that the fuel burn to TOC was seriously out of whack, as was the performance at altitude.

Again, we don't know. But given the location and the operator, if I had to make a guess at this point, I'd guess the problem was outside the cockpit.

 

[kevdog]

How very "professional." You resort to name calling, then agree with me that we should wait until all the facts are in . . . but not before announcing the "likely" cause of the accident. "Wet runway penalty?" Which penalty is that? . . a V1 reduction, a weight reduction?. . . or are you talking about a "clutter" penalty which is different from a "wet" runway? Or just maybe you don't know squat about 747s nor Tradewinds' FAA-approved takeoff data and runway analysis.

You're a poster child for why pilots are their own worst enemy. You should get a job on CNN.

You are making every excuse possible how it wasn't the crews fault, do you know? All I did was state that crew/pilot error statistically is more likely to have contributed to this accident more than scientific data that is supposed to stop things like this from happening. I am sure the Tradewinds FAA approved RAD is completely different than everyone elses out there. Give me a brake (no pun intended). Sure, high altitude airports, poorer maintained runways (wet), fatigue, possible loading error are all possibilities. Sorry to have gotten you all excited, but please try to relax a little...you'll live longer.

If you have any good leads to that CNN job, please PM me and let me know, I'm sure it pays a lot more than aviation.

 

[kevdog]

I think Miles - I am a private pilot and know EVERYTHING about aviation - O' Duma$$ Brien has that one taken.

Tradewinds is lucky they didn't have passengers on this plane. Could you imagine the media coverage?

 

[Draginass]

Keep digging. You'll wind-up based in China in a few more posts.