Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
God, that’s heart-breaking! I’m certainly no expert, but it looked like a classic stall to me. It could be the angle and movement of the vehicle the dash cam is in, but at one point it looked like the plane was hardly moving forward at all, and it seemed to have an extreme nose-up attitude. Even though it’s rank speculation, with absolutely no evidence, I suspect a shift in the cargo contributed.
I agree.
My first thoughts as well.
I know the title of the video says it shows the Afghanistan 747 crash of 04/29, but the timestamp on the video indicates January (or March) of 2013. This may not be actual video of the crash itself.
Awful. The driver is pretty cool and collect given what just happened. I’m pretty sure he was texting on his Blackberry because that static sound is familar to Blackberry’s
“Let’s roll.”
Nice comment ‘tard.
I’m most dreadfully embarrased, you are correct. The exact phrase was “Roll it.”
Now, Afgafistan will fall into it’s own footprint in 9.3×10^6 years.
I agree it appears to have stalled. I wonder if the pilot was taking off at a sharp angle because of the threats in the area. Could have caused a cargo shift.
I’m going with improperly secured cargo.
However, the turn to the right may indicate one or two starboard engines stopped producing power, but I’m going with a stall induced by a cargo shift.
Actually, I don’t think it was a cargo problem because the plane entered spin recovery too well to be that out of balance.
I’m going with starboard engine problem, or some kind of freak microburst.
I can’t imagine how unhappy the PIC was at apogee.
I’ll bet you’re pretty close on this. Cargo shifting is likely and engine stalling during recovery. Something like that.
A trigger event that cascades.
I think you’re right, it was a cascade.
The 747 really recovered well, but of course ran out of altitude.
Was the plane able to naturally recover that well , or did the pilot have to fly the plane into that attitude?
I wonder whether a sharper descent attitude would have saved the pilots? As it landed, the cockpit collapsed on (presumably) the cargo below, possibly rupturing the cockpit floor. If the descent angle had been steeper, I wonder if the cockpit would have been sheered off, dissipating energy, and then fallen forward of the cargo gently crushing the remaining upper nose section, and generally protecting the occupants. The cargo may still have rammed forward into the back of the cockpit.
Thinking some more.
The turn to the left, that preceded the incipient spin to the right, may have caused the starboard wing to stall when the starboard aileron(s) were deflected downward close to stall speed – pushing that wing beyond the critical angle of attack.
I can’t imagine someone taking that kind of risky action so close to the ground in such a heavy plane.
I am afraid this may have simply been a case of showboating, or overly aggressive flying.
For the deceased, I hope not.
Can’t watch the video right now as my sound card is otherwise engaged………..but………..
1. The angles and depth of field for most videos make analysis impossible until you nail it down frame by frame….. and even then.
2. A stall huh? Ok. Either a stall or he FLEW INTO THE GROUND. How do you tell the difference? Nose Up would do it.
3. Cargo Shift?===Impossible. Pallets are locked down within the craft. Ok—that was for effect. Of course its possible. HIGHLY improbable, but possible.
4. Good visibility. Day light. Approach to landing…… odd. I suspect the Hostitute dropped hot coffee in the Pilots lap on short final.
747’s have the ability to do a “power takeoff” that slams the plane into a really sharp angle. My mom saw a demonstration years ago with Air Force One when she was at political convention. In case of a dire emergency, the pilots can get the President airborne alot quicker than normal, and my guess is that’s what happened here — only that an engine blew or maybe the load was too heavy.
Well, that was….. gruesome. Does look like a nose high stall with a clockwise roll with very little forward momentum. Weird. Cargo airline too so they should have the ground crew able to lock the cargo in place AND the crew ability to check for same. Red Tabs on the pallets should not be observable.
Loss of power would not look like this as the pilot would lower the nose to crash as controlled as possible.
Almost more a loss of flight controls….but there are probably two redundant systems if not more by now.
……. so back to cargo shift? Well, thats pilot error. Just about ALL the cargo would have to slide aft. Every single pallet NOT locked? Not a sexy way to go but as Will Munny just said in “Unforgiven:” “Sexy ain’t got nothing to do with it.”
bobbo, “Senior NTSB accident investigator”, what a freaking Blowhard you are; an overly ill informed foolishly opinionated Blowhard!
Very perceptive. We’ll start with that and work up.
What especially rankles you so?
Strong emotions are the quick key to one’s soul.
If I expressly say I don’t know does that make me overly ill informed or only ill informed? How about not expressly but nearly as so by strong implication??
why do you love to take offense nogame?
Ha, ha. Note–indeed, the provided video was a whole lot more clear than so many I have seen. Goes to that expressed vs implied issue.
Can you maintain your argument or have you detumesced by now?
Paranoia will destroy you! “why do you love to take offense nogame?”
No offense taken, just pointing out the obvious!
You aren’t pointing out the obvious when you are wrong.
Support your position.
How am I being overly ill informed? or foolishly opinionated??
How many crash scenes have you investigated??
Was it offering any opinion at all that was not on my knees in prayer?
Just exactly what is your beef???—which leads right into how you can tell a blow hard from a blow soft.
Does your argument crash as soon as your facts shift?===or do you still try to take off??
Senior NTSB crash investigators want to know. Hmmm. Maybe thats it?? You do know I’m not a Senior NTSB crash investigator. Was that it Bunky. You prefer Jr as the prefix to all my evaluations?
Ha, ha. I even bore myself.
Hmm, “How many crash scenes have you investigated??”
Zero, I never proffered I was a NTSB investigator. Nor did I proffer any credentials for that matter!
Why should I or anyone be rankled about a “now only” self-declared illustrious “Senior NTSB accident investigator” trading in idle speculation about a fatal accident?
Why should I expect anything different? It’s not like I or anyone can expect more from you! You are who you are; whatever that is today?
Again, no offense taken, I am just humbly pointing out the simple obvious!
bobbo, with his DynaMax Label Maker with its ThermoPlastic 25 foot roll…….
……………………..
……………………………
………………………………………..
STRIKES AGAIN!!!!!
Ha, ha.
Thanks for playing along nogame. You are too kind.
I may be wrong, but; let me proffer a guess; your mate is a 4 legged DynaMax mascot?
Only after a thorough honest and hard nosed investigation will this make any useful sense. It is a very unfortunate but a necessary means of learning that will benefit the living. Learning from the dead, is a gift they still can give the living!
My condolence and prayers to the family, friends and colleagues.
The aircraft pitched way up on takeoff. Looks to me like his cargo was out of balance with too much weight too far aft. It could’ve been improperly tied down and moved back on the takeoff roll.
Hah!!==or it was out of balance to begin with===something the flight crew cannot easily check.
50 Tons of the Finest Cocaine labeled as 1 Ton of Pistachio Nuts?
THAT actually would make some sense to me. Bad Record keeping screwing the crew and the loaders too.
Good call.
That mislabeled cargo is consistent with my line of thinking. That particular aircraft was owned by Wells Fargo and out of Orlando at that. You know, where every renditioned person gets a layover there at Disney land to make sure that they are not ‘really’ troublesome terrorists before making that last leg to Gitmo.
All the news outlets have that same canned Detroit AP story — Here is a prediction: We will never find out what ‘vehicles’ or ‘other cargo’ may have been on board to contribute to that rather ungraceful splashy belly-flop.
People, you can bet that wasn’t pomegranates and rugs on that CIA plane — Gold and opium is much more likely.
Does my heart bleed for them? Not so much. Anyways, it looks to me like it was downward vertical wind shear off the trailing edge of a bouancy wave from that elevated convection to the right.
My google gives a variety of set owners and operators. Cargo was wheeled vehicles??? Kind of stuff that “ought to be” shipped, but with the malfeasance ripe today in no bid contracts, who can really say??
I don’t think we will get any follow up either.
These CIA Black Bag Operations crop up at the drop of a (Black) hat. The plane was owned and operated by a small group (that REEKS of clandestined affairs. All we need to see is a once a month trip to Laos?
The plane — owned by National Airlines, an Orlando, Florida-based subsidiary of National Air Cargo is already listed as crashed on the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Airlines_%28N8%29
How do we think “Ghost Cash” moves from place to place?
Oh Crap—dear Eds: can you modify my nom de flame to: bobbo, Head Investigator of the World Court for Clandestined Int’l Arms Sales?
since nogame won’t jog, we gotta do something to keep his heart rate up.
Actually, scratch the bouancy wave hypothesis –turbulent, but probably not on such a small scale.
Maybe more like this elevated roll cloud (but without the visible cloud) or Kelvin-Helmholtz waves along the boundary layer but still from those storms:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcus_cloud#Roll_cloud
http://news.yahoo.com/giant-tsunami-shape-clouds-roll-across-alabama-sky-192102289.html
Micro climates/air sheers almost always affect aircraft on landing because their airspeed is low and power is at or near idle without enough time to bring the power back to save the crash.
On takeoffs, the power is at MAX and usually just any lowering of the nose will recover the aircraft from any condition.
That video recording goes on for about 4 minutes total but nothing informative is there. Fires are like that.
“Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect.” /// Captain A. G. Lamplugh
Seems *rotor clouds* have gotten a few before:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_wave#Aviation
*Mach tuck* stuff aside, I guess that would also apply to one which is barely hanging in the air from takeoff (the gear is still down and what are the flaps doing? extended(??) )
Not on takeoff or landing. They occur “at altitude” on the “lee side” of a mountain ridge or mountain top. If the wind is steady, the phenomenon can be steady. If the wind is abrupt, …….
Leeward winds can force a small aircraft near its flight ceiling into the ground as the sink rate exceeds the climb rate.
Turbulance from rotor clouds can affect the integrity of an aircraft if the jolt is very unusually large. Usually… just a bump—but again “at altitude.”
Mack Truck? Air Force Airlift Command terminology. Better than driving a Bus?
BB, you are such a poser.
Thank you. Like anything else, its a skill.
Not everyone can pose though.
Must be “a calling” then?
Ha, ha.
Everybody should pose. “♫ Strike a pose, c’mon, Vogue, vogue, vogue…♫” Hate those cone bustiers. The fan adulation is nice though.
Vogue.
Those rotor clouds can be relatively close to the ground, Bobbo. There does not actually have to be a mountain as sometimes even an up or downdraft will serve as one.
Had a little trouble with a tethersonde one day — it kept wanting to ‘bounce’ down at about 500 ft agl like it was hitting a ceiling. The wind profiler indicated a very low-level jet with periodic vertical velocity shifts indicitave of rolling motion. It was an elevated katabatic flow riding the morning local boundary layer.
” It was an elevated katabatic flow riding the morning local boundary layer.” /// That was so beautiful to read, it brought tears to my eyes. Quite a Senior NTSB Investigator yourself.
I guess arguing what is normal doesn’t really apply when crashes are by experience not normal?
Still….did you switch aircraft in mid crash? leeward winds and rotor clouds are in the main mountain events. The terrain in Afghanistan is not known for katabatic air flows. I can say that because I don’t know sh*t one about the weather in Afghanistan.
Again for the footnote of anyone interested, I have NEVER heard/read of any such weather affecting TAKEOFFS. Landings… yes.
Takeoffs affected by surface icing, birds, turbulence from other too close a/c, …. whatelse? Slant range visibility due to rising sun? Hyper cooled dew point causing a white out? Hot TEA spilled in the lap??
Umm, please disregard my LLJ anecdote as the ‘katabatic’ part is not entirely correct — I left my mail-order resume generator in CRU mode for that one.
Here’s one for Captain Obvious:
Seems the less you know, the stronger your opinions are. From the link paraphrased: its not how much you talk about a subject but rather who you talk to. Talking to people who disagree makes your opinions more nuanced.
I wonder how people who refuse to respond to any challenge at all even on this forum will take that? Course…. they won’t tell us. Kinda, a closed loop.
http://ideas.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/04/30/the_less_you_know
“Seems the less you know, the stronger your opinions are.”
That explains a great deal about you.
What makes you think my opinions are strong? Or strongly held? or how would you phrase it???
What is your tip off?
Ha, ha. I do wish I liked candy.
A 727 crashed like this when the pilots forgot to set the flaps on takeoff.
The plane also appears to be climbing at an unusually steep angle for a takeoff.
Very strange.
Define: “like this.”
A “no flaps” takeoff results in a very FLAT/slow rate of climb potentially with the A/C never leaving the runway and just a fast taxi off the end of the runway.
Different aerodynamics totally. The pilot “cannot” raise the nose up because he doesn’t have the airspeed across the elevator to leverage the nose up. If he does have the airspeed, then he can lower the nose and probably save the aircraft. NO PILOT could overrotate the A/C that way and not automatically recover by lowering the nose. “Something” prevented the pilot from recovery—probably the same something that forced the high angle of attack to begin with:
1. Failed flight controls.
2. Reverse Thrust activated by Fault
3. Bomb in the Cockpit
4. CG too far aft
5. Loose cargo moving aft.
6. Failed trim tab?
7. Hot coffee in the lap does cause a lot of accidents but usually the Co-Pilot will save the Aircraft if he can stop laughing.
Its the folly of man to believe anything man operated will be perfectly safe.
Terminology: if the airplane was “climbing” there would not have been a crash. The airplanes “angle of attack” was extreme/in stall for the given airspeed. All questions of degree and meaning in these interactive equations and definitions.
LoL at #7
It do look rather ‘acute’ but the more I veiw this video the more I convince myself that I can’t say a damn thing about that angle. Perhaps someone with experience can relate it to the guys’ antenna?
Here is a story which still gives me the willies– I live about eight miles from a major airport and right where they are always coming in and making that turn so I see these planes all the time. They still look like they’re doing ‘strange’ things sometimes. One day while driving home, this plane looked a little low and coming head-on paralleling the hiway. The thing is, as I continued to drive it appeared to stay in the same position along the tree line and like it was stationary and pointing a little up. Now I wish I had pulled over but when I got along-side the thing I could read ‘American Airlines’ and see all the windows; It appeared to be low and on my side of the trees. I thought I could see some kind of mast on top with cables going fore and aft. As it appeared completely stationary, I took it to be a ballon; A mock-up.
The thing is, I had watched this thing looking like it was just hanging there for 3 miles yet when I got home just 1/2 mile away and what I took to be in a perfect veiwing location for it, it was gone. I have thought many strange things like it was portending another 911 mis-directioning to an actual *glitch in the matrix* with it being a real plane and really stuck there!
Anyways, here is a movie about an NTSB investigator but with a twist:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097883/
That movie was a total stinker. Not the worst I have sat through though, just bottom percentile material.
UFO’s are just that until you Identify them. “Sounds like” you know the phenomenon enough to have focused your concertration to say: “What am I actually looking at?” But I fall for every optical illusion/trick there is. How about a nearby train painted to look like an airplane? A model? ….. and so forth.
I’ve watched too many video clips of airplanes that look like they are doing one thing but turn out to be doing something else… hence my caution. …. BUT… there is “a lot” in this clip===mostly the “glide” (sic!) angle on impact. The guy wasn’t flying at all–he was in a stalled condition on impact. So, from there, you work your way back. The clockwise roll, or any wing dip, is a common stall sequence. All the flight dynamics are so closely balanced that any little thing can dip that wing then you enter into a stall if you have the altitude to do enough rotations. Not the case here.
fun to speculate. Pick the best explanation. Wait to be lied to.
typo: “….. then you enter into a SPIN….”
Yea, that flick was pretty canadian. I did like the Android quoting Churchill at the end, though.
As to illusions it does look like the plane is hardly moving with respect to the road at the last. And then you see that it actually came down on the right side and there is a sharp curve in the road not seen previously. It must have had enough speed for lift on the control surfaces to right itself though? I mean, if it was just dropping out of the sky would it plane flat like that on it’s own? It seems to have a bit more aerodynamics left to it than just impersonating a baby grand. I take it that the small fireballs shooting forward were the engines and that they were, in fact, still spooled up??
Speculation, yes. I wonder what that dump truck was doing tearing out of there — or what the videographer did to that puppy. But it will have to wait.
Keen Observer yourself.
It must have had enough speed for lift on the control surfaces to right itself though? /// The turning moment is always a combo of lift, drag, propulsion all interacting differently at different speeds and attitudes.
I mean, if it was just dropping out of the sky would it plane flat like that on it’s own? /// It totally “could” because it is “unstable.”
It seems to have a bit more aerodynamics left to it than just impersonating a baby grand. /// Ha, ha. Very descriptive. Watch right at the start of the fall… the a/c takes a slight turn/dip to the left but then turns right. That input could very well have been from the pilot. That said, I think the final righting of the a/c could also have been pilot reflex doing what he could. At the low speeds involved, there could have been more turning vectors caused by engine thrust with rudder control. Hard to say as each design is different and the parameters were far outside the operating (known) envelop.
I take it that the small fireballs shooting forward were the engines and that they were, in fact, still spooled up?? /// I don’t know/no experience/therefore no opinion. I can imagine an argument/explanation either way. Every part of the a/c would have forward momentum with many having gas/oil to splash forward.
At least some engines sound about right (funny what volume control is for). And I think the rise in pitch at the last is more than some doppler-shift effect approaching the ground — Also, you can still hear at least one wind down quick after the fireball.
Here is a comparison video of a 747 thrust reverser in action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqQcg7e8eYc
Here that change in pitch separate from the winding down of the engines? –I think the pilot may have tried to hit the airbrakes in panic. But if they were just then being applied it would seem to rule out a fault condition earlier.
However, I do think I can see some semblance of turbulance coming off the leading edge of the wing but this is probably some artifact of the video compression — Schlieren interferometry would clarify that.
Tim–I can’t tell what you are on about now. You are mixing and matching 5 different issues without connecting the dots. Fer instance: the sound of the thrust reversers has nothing to do with activating the air brakes. Connect those two dots and I’ll listen to the others.
Yes. Sorry. Now I must make a fusion-center report that you really are a stickler for terminology.
When I said ‘air brakes’ I meant the thrust reversers.
747’s can do sharp angle power takeoffs.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BItAOR3MNSM
Sad
well at least no one can claim it was a Stinger or some other sort of SAM
Nope, they will have to claim it was an EMP or narrow focus seizure inducing dazzle array.
From the girth of that guys’ antenna, that may be plausible.
Antenna envy?
Sometimes a very fat bottom-loaded quarterwave Marconi virtual dipole is just a very fat botttom-loaded quarterwave Marconi virtual dipole.
UncDon says:
5/1/2013 at 4:36 am
747′s have the ability to do a “power takeoff” that slams the plane into a really sharp angle. //// Slam?? Every object has a “Maximum Climb Rate” and a “Maximum Climb angle” each for slightly different purposes eventually equalizing at maximum altitude.
My mom saw a demonstration years ago with Air Force One when she was at political convention. In case of a dire emergency, the pilots can get the President airborne /// close… not “airborne” but to altitude
alot quicker than normal, and my guess is that’s what happened here — only that an engine blew or maybe the load was too heavy. /// There was no “enemy” activity in the area. What are you imagining? The simple “weight” of the cargo/gas would speak against an acute climb angle. Losing a single engine in an a/c with 4 is almost meaningless. Even two on the same side if that is the only factor.
This crash “looks” very unusual. Most crashes are a combo of events all coming together as in “Fate is the Hunter” as the show “Air Disasters/Emergencies” shows all the time.
Hmmm….a plane with a fixed aft CG would make that condition known at rotation for lift off. Hard to see how the a/c would have gotten so high in such condition. That argues us back to a shift in cargo. But there is no standard reason for a cargo plane to take off on a steep angle and most cautious truck drivers would avoid a steep take off just as another safety concern as “something could break” and push the cargo aft.
Yeap… several nice little mysteries going on here.
“In the unlikely event that the plane should lose all four engines simultaneously, we will crash into the ground like a fucking dart…” — Billy Connely That is not what happened here, the turbines were working full-on fuck my ears.
Did anyone notice the puff of smoke coming out of all four engines around 0:07?
I looked as close as I could. I saw what I would call Jpeg compression artifacts on the sky elements. But who knows? Engine failures almost always can be discovered by evaluation of the crash debris. Engine failure would also NOT explain the airplanes extreme attitude at the time of the failure either====although I suppose air disruption causing a flame out could have happened at the same time. Most jet engines can pump enough of their own air to avoid that…. but its highly variable.
Agreed about compression artifacts; That particular ‘puff’ probably arises from *b-frames* as the object was moving against changing cloud appearance.
http://forum.digital-digest.com/f20/i-p-b-frames-explained-9785.html
But concerning that ‘attitude’: Is it really all that extreme if we consider that the video is through some wide-angle fisheye kind of lens? Or does it get even worse after the correction?
But concerning that ‘attitude’ /// That could well be the case which prompted my initial post: a single video is hard to go by. “But” again, the video does provide a lot of inf0==especially the crash angle showing little forward speed or a stalled condition. A stalled condition at ground means a stalled condition higher up and the rocking back and forth motion clearly seen is consistent with a stall as well. A stall on takeoff with full power would REQUIRE a very steep nose up attitude or the plane would not stall.
Not too many dots to connect from what is clearly presented.
Warning! Spoilers…
I know this link says ‘brakes’ but humor me here:
*There’s this famous video of a Korean Air 747 doing this horrendous landing at Kai Tak (Although he/she saved everybody’s life), where the 747’s flight path was clearly being controlled with the spoilers,…*
http://airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/85561/
As I’d bet the farm the real flight data will never see the light of day: From this video alone, is there information to be gleened as to what cross-winds were being encountered or what where expected to be encountered?
Now your a “Senior NAMBLA Investigator” of the North American Man/Boy Love Association? NAMBLA is a pedophile and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States!
One moment your a “Senior NTSB accident investigator” next your “Senior NAMBLA Investigator”.
You jumped from a respectable false cover to an abominable truth! What are you schizophrenic or do you have some other illness?
You’ve lost me. Rephrase???
Bingo, I knew there was some type of illness occurring.
I will need more observation before I can diagnose. Maybe you should be clinically admitted?
Did anyone notice the timestamp on the video is off by 3 months? Still a nightmare, but is this confirmed of the same incident?
Yea; Probably can’t take too much from that, though. The thing could have been powered down for a long time — at least, it’s not blinking 12:00 am
Scheduled time for takeoff: probably 3:30
Time of crash: 3:33
33!
Tim says:
5/1/2013 at 8:53 am
Yes. Sorry. Now I must make a fusion-center report that you really are a stickler for terminology. /// Hah!! Simply using the wrong word is not being a stickler. Sticky is for much closer divisions.
When I said ‘air brakes’ I meant the thrust reversers. /// Well, thats totally different. No Pilot would try to activate thrust reversers on a crash. The throttle position is in the opposite direction AND the reversers won’t engage until a position switch on the landing gear is depressed.
We’ve gone from Flight of the Phoenix to a Flight of Fantasy to “Good Morning crew. This is National Airlines flight to Oblivion. I’m Captain Potato Face, here to serve you hot fries.”
*the throttle position is in the opposite direction AND the reversers won’t engage until a position switch on the landing gear is depressed*
Yes, sorry for my ignorance. I was only going off your checklist where as point #2. “Reverse Thrust activated by Fault” caught my attention.
Like a microwave oven, input of switches can be bypassed by the curious experimenter…
Look at the time stamp !!!!!!!
Everybody has looked at the time stamp. Whats your point?
Sorry if pointed out all ready. But at work so I could only browse the comments quickly. By the way 33 is a magic number. That’s my point. I hope this explanation makes you happy. Have a great day !0
nogame proving his namesake says:
5/1/2013 at 9:56 am
Now your a “Senior NAMBLA Investigator” of the North American Man/Boy Love Association? NAMBLA is a pedophile and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States!
One moment your a “Senior NTSB accident investigator” next your “Senior NAMBLA Investigator”.
You jumped from a respectable false cover to an abominable truth! What are you schizophrenic or do you have some other illness? /// I’m drawing your attention to something that can be ignored. Its like Salty Language on a Cheeseburger.
THAT is a terrible thing to charge anybody with. If you aren’t a pedophile yourself, you would relate the acronym like the other 99% of us do to the North American Marlon Brando Look Alike association.
that is pretty clearly the relationship everyone here knows I am making given what a fan boi of films and other cultural activities I review as: Jr Art Critic and Cultural Interloper.
Why don’t you pay closer attention?
Fuck the children.. I think you are both derps, can we get back to the plane? Because I’m getting a little antsy here.
Tim–the ball is in your court waiting for further explanation. Yes==blame the posting system Dvorak chose to change to when everything was running just fine. A severe Pilot Error of choice if you agree.
Tim says:
5/1/2013 at 9:46 am
Warning! Spoilers…
I know this link says ‘brakes’ but humor me here:
*There’s this famous video of a Korean Air 747 doing this horrendous landing at Kai Tak (Although he/she saved everybody’s life), where the 747′s flight path was clearly being controlled with the spoilers,…*
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/85561/
As I’d bet the farm the real flight data will never see the light of day: From this video alone, is there information to be gleened as to what cross-winds were being encountered or what where expected to be encountered?
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
bobbo, Senior RIAA Investigator and Take Down Notice Co-Ordinator says:
5/1/2013 at 9:56 am
You’ve lost me. Rephrase???
btw—you can get a higher rating if you remove the www. on your links so that they become active.
I assume this is another choice of DU, even though I think they claim otherwise.
Who EVER takes responsibility?????
Evidently….. only gay men out of the closet.
Ahh. Thanks for the advice. Cut-‘n’-paste + highlight, delete, backspace, and selectively erase is above my pay grade. — makes sense; that -www would save billions of bits and it’s to weed out us ‘tards.
*Rephrase*… I’m a hammer. Everything is a nail. My premis is the plane had zero input from the pilots because priority one is pissing in cup for that cushy keep your mouth shut cia job when the AI fucked up because it encountered unexpected air. Kinda like the 2003 Columbia breakup– a piece of foam gains enough KE to damage the tiles falling 60 ft. under the accelleration of the craft or, upon re-entry, it encountered atmosphere where it was not expected?
What I find to be the most shocking part of this entire film clip is the complete calm by the occupant of the vehicle. WTF has this guy seen so many aircraft falling out of the sky that it does’t even get a comment until he pulls over and then it sounded more like disgust than a person witnessing the event. I understand that I’m probably not a hard core person living/working in Afghanistan but I find it hard to believe nothing comes out of this guys mouth.
That is a good question (and I don’t mean that in a ‘that not a good question’ kind of way.
That particular airbase is littered with Soviet Union wrecks and not very many are shown to be from projectiles (or haarp). It’s the Bermuda Triangle of the sky and this time it’s not going to be blamed on methane. — there is a doctorate in this for someone — help a nigga out.
thats the most shocking? Not the crash itself huh? You must be one of those types that Tim is referring to himself as. You know…. always talking regardless of whatelse is going on.
I just read the word for that.
Escapes me now.
Tim……which way did you come in?
I’m not sure I understand the question. *Which way?* Whether it was the ruskies or the yanks, skill set #1 is ‘piss in this cup to demonstate your loyalty to the furer’. — Therefore, the plane was totally die-by-wire. I’m just wanting to pin down how the bot failed. Did I mention I lost not many tears over these guys even though there’s lots of stories coming out about their beautiful families now? (none about cause of fuck-up).
Piss off, Doug; Give me real seeds.
egocentric?? I suppose I might resemble that remark.
Yes, Bobbo. Words do matter. Please don’t hold these words against me… after all, I’m really a redneck at heat:
youtube.com/watch?v=3Uup-4mGYCY
Also, I really desire that kid’s shirt.
You mean that Fat Kid at the start, white T-Shirt that Says: “Colossus took My Nuke, and all I got was this Lousy T-Shirt”–?
any T-shirt, even ones as shitty as this one, can be made one-off at home for about $1.25.
go LARGE….. and make it so.
That would be the shirt, Bobbo. Unfortunately, my 3-d printer is all tied up making these cellulose-based bullets.
The date says 2013/02/01 and the time says 03:..33..:xx.
Suspicious? You bet your bippy!
Red Herring? Maybe
False flag? Why is this coming up NOW … way later?
Meh. Pilots sleep on duty all the time. I’m going with the flight crew picking the wrong time to catch a nap.
Don’t be so stupid! If you don’t know, keep your mouth shut – the crew died in this – let’s not pass judgment so quickly!
It was God’s own judgement John. You wouldn’t want to interfere in THAT would you? God makes us all sleep too. Talk about being ordained!!
Sad the heathens think they can come to DU and just drop any load they wish.
Where’s the broom?
It is not beyond reason to entertain a hypothysis that the *crew* was nothing more than several discrete assortments of silicon chips plugged into the fly-by-wire system there in drone central.
Those real persons that are labeled deceased may not have earned that particular merit badge on that particular flight.
Gee, I hope that was glaze and not Santorum.
Deviating from Numerology as the greatest insight the world has yet stumbled on, Jon Stewart just defined Congress as:
“Do-Nothing Fucktards who couldn’t solve a problem if it was eating them alive anus first.” /// Then he said it was defined that way on Urban Dictionary.
He is right. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=congress -or– http://urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=congress
Some days, its just worth getting up early.
It now appears that the cargo load shifted aft on climbout which moved the CG seriously outside the envelope. The plane then pitched nose up, became unrecoverable, stalled, and crashed.
Source? Link??
Or your best guess?
Someone really screwed up loading that one- ie. out of balance or perhaps overloaded.
Or not tied down
Tim stuck on page one says:
5/1/2013 at 11:38 am
I’m not sure I understand the question. *Which way?* /// You said you needed help of the out kind. Its an old joke. Too much cultural bias?
Whether it was the ruskies or the yanks, skill set #1 is ‘piss in this cup to demonstate your loyalty to the furer’. /// That may be true in a vacuum but makes no sense here. I like saving such private reveries to my nom de flame or sign off. The cognoscenti can then appreciate it for what it is.
— Therefore, the plane was totally die-by-wire. /// Clever word play.
I’m just wanting to pin down how the bot failed. /// Cargo shift is consistent with everything we can guess at. Could be a combo of that plus more.
Did I mention I lost not many tears over these guys even though there’s lots of stories coming out about their beautiful families now? //// Who would read about them before the crash?
(none about cause of fuck-up). /// because there is no news beyond the initial report, quick followup.
Can you very specifically identify what more you would want that is actually available??? You know…. live in the real world??
“Cargo shift is consistent with everything we can guess at. Could be a combo of that plus more.”
I’ll offer something else to guess at — the plane took off into a slight headwind of 100 deg (as expected) but was, in actuality, moving into a nearly parallel elevated outflow *river of air* at 300 deg off that convection. When they intersected (let’s just assume the outflow was ~50 kts) that river of air is now a tailwind causing the tail to loose lift and drop down first. Also, the left wing stuck into it and also lost lift and ‘dipped’.
It seems to have been able to correct it’s attitude too easily with so little airspeed for it to be a tail-heavy condition; Or did something they did magically make the loose cargo slide back forward?
It is a tragic thing, spooks or not. I wonder if they had turned left instead of right if they had known the flow was there…… might have shot up like a kite.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20130429-0
I guess the shipping costs on all that opium is so expensive that they couldn’t afford one of these systems:
ll.mit.edu/mission/aviation/faawxsystems/tdwr.html
Addendum:
They had a collision avoidance radar system but only a ground station for wx, it seems.
McIDAS is Man-computer Interactive Data Analysis System:
Added station KQSA, Bagram Air Force Base, Afghanistan,
http://ssec.wisc.edu/mcidas/software/x/fastrack2012.2_changes.txt
Here is the detailed info for the airfield just in case it’s time to pull out GoogleEarth:
http://motca.gov.af/?id=42
“a tailwind causing the tail to loose lift”
Tails don’t lift up. They normally push down.
Well, it was working pretty good then.
*normally* but this was not yet straight and level flight.
“In S&L flight, any change in nose up pitch would tend to increase the lift of the wing, hence further increasing the angle of attack. This pitch up tendency is countered by the similar pitch up affecting the tailpane, hence lifting the tail and restoring the S&L flight situation. If the tail produced lift in a downwards direction, such a pitch up of the wing would result in further pitch up and hence lead to an unrecoverable stall.”
http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-268888.html
Also, there were downdrafts in the area as can be seen in the smoke plume. Initially it is vertical but as the surface winds responded to whatever was above, that warm and boyant plume is being driven all the way to the ground as it progresses up the runway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcus_cloud#Roll_cloud
As to the driver’s silence, it appears he stopped to send a text. You can hear the radio interference — when I first heard it, I thought my phone was sitting next to my speakers, but it was in the next room. This is probably procedure, since the cell towers can get overloaded quickly when everyone grabs their phones and makes a call — texts, being easier on the infrastructure, get through when the voice circuits are all busy.
No idea what’s going on with the dog, but that’s really of no importance. Also of no importance, just mentioning in passing, the driver sounds like he has a Brit or possibly Australian accent when whispering to the dog.
He may have been texting, but that sound is the same cadence and racket of one just ‘packeting’ it’s geo-location and status. Turn one off and lay it on your stereo to see that it periodically does the same thing — I had one that would do that every 10 minutes like a clock; It’s lying along-side the interstate somewhere now.
Has this site devolved into crash porn?
Ha, ha. I thought the same thing. Scary Huh?
Same sense of humor in opposite packages???
Was anyone injured?
Are you asking “bobbo, the FAA Certified Avionics Repair Craft Person”?
You see that and you know you don’t need an ambulance. All you need to do is prevent the fire from spreading then do clean up.
Did anyone notice the dashboard cam said 3:33 right after the crash?
This clip had to have been edited. You hear the plane’s engines, alright. But then there’s no crash noise, and the video skips ahead at that precise moment. Now why would the actual crash (a second or two of video) be edited out? That’s suspicious. I’m thinking the authorities got to it, and censored it. So you’re seeing a badly doctored video.
In any case, it appears the plane stalled on takeoff. Perhaps not having its flaps extended for takeoff, so it didn’t have enough lift for its climbing speed. That would be pilot error, if it’s true. Hydraulics failure, could be the another reason. But that should have been noticed before taking off. Very rarely does anything ever quit working, after all the safety checks have been performed. And I don’t what pilot, in their right mind, would take off with dangerously low hydraulic pressure.