Site Notices
10/30/2014 3:55:04 PM
Page:  / 6
Author
Message
4v50
Member
Offline
Posts: 38959
Feedback: 100% (5)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:42:11 PM
Deepest condolences to the families of the crew and all those who were killed/injured on the ground.
Dagger41
Member
Offline
Posts: 9196
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:42:43 PM
Sad loss and prayers out to the families and responders.

I hope the cause can be found quickly, I got nothing when it comes to why this happened.

Screechjet1
No friend of America
Military
Offline
Posts: 30114
Feedback: 100% (1)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:43:38 PM
That's tailor made for a black-hole approach illusion. You'd be looking high, and set up a sink to catch.
"It is one thing to pursue realpolitik, and another thing to pursue stupid realpolitik." David Goldman
MSC182
They call me Hoot.
Offline
Posts: 9359
Feedback: 100% (3)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:45:02 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Luchs:
Originally Posted By MSC182:
Originally Posted By 94five0:
Fuel issue is what I heard. I don't know shit about aviation I do know there is no such thing as coasting on fumes in a 767.

No chance


Um...

The Gimli Glider is the nickname of an Air Canada aircraft that was involved in an unusual aviation incident. On 23 July 1983, Air Canada Flight 143, a Boeing 767-233 jet, ran out of fuel at an altitude of 41,000 feet (12,000 m) MSL, about halfway through its flight originating in Montreal from Ottawa to Edmonton. The crew was able to glide the aircraft safely to an emergency landing at Gimli Industrial Park Airport, a former Royal Canadian Air Force base in Gimli, Manitoba.[1]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

I'm aware of the Gimli Glider and I'm telling you there is no chance that that aircraft crashed due to fuel exhaustion. The amount of fire alone rules that out.
Proud member of Team Ranstad

Member of the National Rifle Association, the Texas State Rifle Association, the American Silencer Association, and the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association
KR35RR
Member
Offline
Posts: 227
Feedback: 100% (55)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:45:30 PM
Me thinks CFIT. The approach to 18 is very visually misleading. Furthermore there is no ILS to that runway. PAPI's are there though.

A heavy pilot would be tempted to take a lower than normal glidepath to attempt to land on "brick-one" due to it being a shorter runway.

All of this is purely speculation on my part, however I am very familiar with KBHM...
Luchs
Member
Offline
Posts: 2308
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:46:22 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By MSC182:
Originally Posted By Luchs:
Originally Posted By MSC182:
Originally Posted By 94five0:
Fuel issue is what I heard. I don't know shit about aviation I do know there is no such thing as coasting on fumes in a 767.

No chance


Um...

The Gimli Glider is the nickname of an Air Canada aircraft that was involved in an unusual aviation incident. On 23 July 1983, Air Canada Flight 143, a Boeing 767-233 jet, ran out of fuel at an altitude of 41,000 feet (12,000 m) MSL, about halfway through its flight originating in Montreal from Ottawa to Edmonton. The crew was able to glide the aircraft safely to an emergency landing at Gimli Industrial Park Airport, a former Royal Canadian Air Force base in Gimli, Manitoba.[1]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

I'm aware of the Gimli Glider and I'm telling you there is no chance that that aircraft crashed due to fuel exhaustion. The amount of fire alone rules that out.


Oh, okay. I thought it was a "767's can't glide". Misread. Do the newer models still have a RAT?
BubbaDog81
Offline
Posts: 1998
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:47:06 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By 94five0:
Fuel issue is what I heard. I don't know shit about aviation I do know there is no such thing as coasting on fumes in a 767.


That is incorrect. With enough altitude and a safe place to land, you can glide any cargo or passenger plane down without power. Angles, how do they work
DeltaAir423
Missing Wayne!
Offline
Posts: 8835
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:52:07 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By 94five0:
Fuel issue is what I heard. I don't know shit about aviation I do know there is no such thing as coasting on fumes in a 767.



Read up on the Gimli Glider. That was coasting on fumes in a 767.
Arthur Dent: ALLRIGHT, WHERE IS SHE?!?!?

Vogon Receptionist: Who, the director of robot arm repair?

Xbox Live GT: DeltaPlaneMech
PSN ID: DeltaAir423
MoS# 42
AmericanPeople
Offline
Posts: 1359
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:52:27 PM
I glanced through the KBHM NOTAMs but did not see any reason why they would not have used runway 6 or even runway 24 if the cargo area is near taxiway A1. Did I miss something?
Dog1
U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30, M1
Offline
Posts: 38885
Feedback: 100% (408)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:56:15 PM


I know quite a few UPS pilots out of the hub in Louisville and shoot USPSA with one...
Hansan: "This is a .30 caliber, gas operated, clip fed, semi-automatic rifle....."
Soldier: "Look, you ain't sellin it to me, you're only showing me how it works."
KR35RR
Member
Offline
Posts: 228
Feedback: 100% (55)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 3:57:45 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By AmericanPeople:
I glanced through the KBHM NOTAMs but did not see any reason why they would not have used runway 6 or even runway 24 if the cargo area is near taxiway A1. Did I miss something?



You're absolutely right man. There is a displaced threshold on approach end of 24 but even with that, there is 10k ft available! Heavies RARELY use 18/36 because its only 7099ft.

AmericanPeople
Offline
Posts: 1360
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:00:51 PM
From Airport info, the tower is continuously manned (if still current) so there should be info on radio traffic that is relevant.
xenophon21
Offline
Posts: 2698
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:01:22 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By AmericanPeople:
I glanced through the KBHM NOTAMs but did not see any reason why they would not have used runway 6 or even runway 24 if the cargo area is near taxiway A1. Did I miss something?

You're absolutely right man. There is a displaced threshold on approach end of 24 but even with that, there is 10k ft available! Heavies RARELY use 18/36 because its only 7099ft.


Well either way, they didn't even get close, so runway length is irrelevant. The LAX crash, at least they hit part of the runway (well, sorta of, threshold). This one was way off :/ Prayers to the families.
Bushamster21
Offline
Posts: 610
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:04:28 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By xenophon21:
Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By AmericanPeople:
I glanced through the KBHM NOTAMs but did not see any reason why they would not have used runway 6 or even runway 24 if the cargo area is near taxiway A1. Did I miss something?

You're absolutely right man. There is a displaced threshold on approach end of 24 but even with that, there is 10k ft available! Heavies RARELY use 18/36 because its only 7099ft.


Well either way, they didn't even get close, so runway length is irrelevant. The LAX crash, at least they hit part of the runway (well, sorta of, threshold). This one was way off :/ Prayers to the families.

LAX? Or SFO?
CFII
Kiowa Driver
Military
Offline
Posts: 15485
Feedback: 100% (34)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:05:58 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Screechjet1:
That's tailor made for a black-hole approach illusion. You'd be looking high, and set up a sink to catch.


Crater illusion?
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
there is no room for free loaders or cowards in a functioning society.
AmericanPeople
Offline
Posts: 1362
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:08:50 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By xenophon21:
Well either way, they didn't even get close, so runway length is irrelevant. The LAX crash, at least they hit part of the runway (well, sorta of, threshold). This one was way off :/ Prayers to the families.


It is relevant. Unless out of service, both runways 6 and 24 have ILS for vertical guidance.
redfish86
It's Not A Zombie Bite
Offline
Posts: 7640
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:12:20 PM
Anyone have a cross section topo of the approach?
Happiness is the greatest agent of purification

Bikini Bottoms underneath, but the boys hearts still skip a beat, when them girls shimmy off, them old cut offs
Der_Hans
Offline
Posts: 6913
Feedback: 100% (8)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:13:49 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By fxntime:
Originally Posted By Killbot:
Rumors keep flying - Facebook seems to think 40 houses were hit.


If it was a big plane and hit in a burb neighborhood, it's very possible.


Ban high capacity assault airplanes, for the children!
Steelburner
Member
Offline
Posts: 140
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:19:47 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Der_Hans:
Originally Posted By fxntime:
Originally Posted By Killbot:
Rumors keep flying - Facebook seems to think 40 houses were hit.


If it was a big plane and hit in a burb neighborhood, it's very possible.


Ban high capacity assault airplanes, for the children!

Nothing funny about your statement.....
I love my Country....I fear my Goverment
FBHO and the Wookie he rode in on
bmick325
Sandfly
Offline
Posts: 5177
Feedback: 100% (18)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:21:08 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Dog1:


I know quite a few UPS pilots out of the hub in Louisville and shoot USPSA with one...


I believe we have at least one member here who has flies an Airbus for a major cargo carrier. It came up in a Boeing vs. Airbus thread a while back.

Prayers out.
No one likes to pick up the ruck marked "personal responsibility-Screechjet1

RIP eodtech 2000
Der_Hans
Offline
Posts: 6915
Feedback: 100% (8)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:25:30 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Steelburner:
Originally Posted By Der_Hans:
Originally Posted By fxntime:
Originally Posted By Killbot:
Rumors keep flying - Facebook seems to think 40 houses were hit.


If it was a big plane and hit in a burb neighborhood, it's very possible.


Ban high capacity assault airplanes, for the children!

Nothing funny about your statement.....


Have your sarcasm detector recalibrated.
Events like this are the kind of things that make liberals come up with stupid new laws that will drastically change our life so that they can feel better.

Kinda like this one
dragfan66
Member
Offline
Posts: 211
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:29:55 PM
I was watching the news this morning when the story broke.
I told the sammich maker to call her dad who lives about 3 blocks from the National Guard gate and see if he ws okay. It was a couple of tense moments until he finally answered the phone. He didin't even hear anyting (80 years old).
DrFeelgood
Oh, I see where this is going.
Offline
Posts: 2724
Feedback: 100% (3)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:32:11 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By xenophon21:
Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By AmericanPeople:
I glanced through the KBHM NOTAMs but did not see any reason why they would not have used runway 6 or even runway 24 if the cargo area is near taxiway A1. Did I miss something?

You're absolutely right man. There is a displaced threshold on approach end of 24 but even with that, there is 10k ft available! Heavies RARELY use 18/36 because its only 7099ft.


Well either way, they didn't even get close, so runway length is irrelevant. The LAX crash, at least they hit part of the runway (well, sorta of, threshold). This one was way off :/ Prayers to the families.

Runway length doesn't matter, but orientation does.
You roll the dice, you take what you get.
FivespeedF150
Brings Skittles to Gunfights
NRAMilitary
Offline
Posts: 10664
Feedback: 100% (3)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:34:00 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Me thinks CFIT. The approach to 18 is very visually misleading. Furthermore there is no ILS to that runway. PAPI's are there though.

A heavy pilot would be tempted to take a lower than normal glidepath to attempt to land on "brick-one" due to it being a shorter runway.

All of this is purely speculation on my part, however I am very familiar with KBHM...

Is there a particular reason why there is no ILS? Terrain screwing up the signal or something?
There will come a day of reckoning, Pasha told himself, a day of reckoning for all the crimes committed in the name of Socialist Progress.
Red Storm Rising
KR35RR
Member
Offline
Posts: 229
Feedback: 100% (55)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:40:32 PM
[Last Edit: 8/14/2013 4:48:55 PM by KR35RR]
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By FivespeedF150:
Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Me thinks CFIT. The approach to 18 is very visually misleading. Furthermore there is no ILS to that runway. PAPI's are there though.

A heavy pilot would be tempted to take a lower than normal glidepath to attempt to land on "brick-one" due to it being a shorter runway.

All of this is purely speculation on my part, however I am very familiar with KBHM...

Is there a particular reason why there is no ILS? Terrain screwing up the signal or something?


Possibly.

Ill try to explain...

The terrain sort of parallels the approach glidepath on the way down....think flying down into a bowl

AmericanPeople
Offline
Posts: 1363
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:44:57 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By FivespeedF150:
Is there a particular reason why there is no ILS? Terrain screwing up the signal or something?


More than likely cost versus benefit.
SmilingBandit
Damn these electric sex pants!
Military
Online
Posts: 29505
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:46:09 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By FivespeedF150:
Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Me thinks CFIT. The approach to 18 is very visually misleading. Furthermore there is no ILS to that runway. PAPI's are there though.

A heavy pilot would be tempted to take a lower than normal glidepath to attempt to land on "brick-one" due to it being a shorter runway.

All of this is purely speculation on my part, however I am very familiar with KBHM...

Is there a particular reason why there is no ILS? Terrain screwing up the signal or something?


Possibly.

Runway length most definitely is a factor in planning and executing an approach.


They are also in the seven figure range and since the main runway already has one for both ends it's probably not worth it at a field with less than 300 landings a day.
"Upon further review, we have determined that the string itself is not a machinegun" -BATFE
FivespeedF150
Brings Skittles to Gunfights
NRAMilitary
Offline
Posts: 10665
Feedback: 100% (3)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 4:57:18 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By KR35RR:

Possibly.

Ill try to explain...

The terrain sort of parallels the approach glidepath on the way down....think flying down into a bowl

Ah, yes I can see how that would complicate matters. Thank you.
There will come a day of reckoning, Pasha told himself, a day of reckoning for all the crimes committed in the name of Socialist Progress.
Red Storm Rising
redfish86
It's Not A Zombie Bite
Offline
Posts: 7641
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:04:15 PM
Looks like the terrain is slowly rising until that quick drop in the picture from the stb side of the cockpit. Too low and CFIT? (as mentioned previously)

Certainly looks like it impacted nose up, forward part of fuselage breaks off, slams down at slight nose up attitude, slamming cockpit down after initial impact (see pics of wrinkling of skin just aft of cockpit from port side), remainder of airframe comes apart as gear rips thru wings and tanks causing fire. Not sure why forward part of fuselage takes a slightly left bearing of centerline though.
Happiness is the greatest agent of purification

Bikini Bottoms underneath, but the boys hearts still skip a beat, when them girls shimmy off, them old cut offs
986Flyer
Member
Online
Posts: 2266
Feedback: 100% (4)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:13:38 PM
Descent profile looks fairly normal until they departed 12000 then it appears they dropped the anchor. 346 knots groundspeed down to 9600 where it looks like they leveled off to get back to 250 indicated (possibly gear extension speed as well?). They were about four minutes from the airport at that point and you see the extreme descent rates after they leveled off. 5500 fpm descent rate at 250 knots, they must have had a hell of a lot of drag. Makes me wonder if they had full speed brakes and gear down.

Im not trying to speculate too much, but from that info the situation appears ripe for a CFIT. Being left high, becoming hurried, getting behind the plane so far that you have little to no situational awareness and bad things can easily happen. Throw in possible fatigue issues or other human factors and things can really get ugly fast. I don't know how those cargo guys handle the back side of the clock.

Alien
Needs friends.
Offline
Posts: 35071
Feedback: 100% (8)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:17:18 PM
I bet the FSA is drooling at the thought of scavenging some free shit while emergency crews work to rescue any possible survivors and to put out any fires.
Who wants to be my friend?
retgarr
Checkmate
Offline
Posts: 24742
Feedback: 100% (5)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:18:53 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By FivespeedF150:
Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Me thinks CFIT. The approach to 18 is very visually misleading. Furthermore there is no ILS to that runway. PAPI's are there though.

A heavy pilot would be tempted to take a lower than normal glidepath to attempt to land on "brick-one" due to it being a shorter runway.

All of this is purely speculation on my part, however I am very familiar with KBHM...

Is there a particular reason why there is no ILS? Terrain screwing up the signal or something?


Possibly.

Ill try to explain...

The terrain sort of parallels the approach glidepath on the way down....think flying down into a bowl



Tricky stuff. Is the runway level or is it an uphill landing?
samiam513
Me
Offline
Posts: 961
Feedback: 100% (9)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:19:14 PM
[Last Edit: 8/14/2013 5:19:31 PM by samiam513]
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By FivespeedF150:
Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Me thinks CFIT. The approach to 18 is very visually misleading. Furthermore there is no ILS to that runway. PAPI's are there though.

A heavy pilot would be tempted to take a lower than normal glidepath to attempt to land on "brick-one" due to it being a shorter runway.

All of this is purely speculation on my part, however I am very familiar with KBHM...

Is there a particular reason why there is no ILS? Terrain screwing up the signal or something?


Possibly.

Ill try to explain...

The terrain sort of parallels the approach glidepath on the way down....think flying down into a bowl



Two terrain pictures.



SmilingBandit
Damn these electric sex pants!
Military
Online
Posts: 29507
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:20:54 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By 986Flyer:
Descent profile looks fairly normal until they departed 12000 then it appears they dropped the anchor. 346 knots groundspeed down to 9600 where it looks like they leveled off to get back to 250 indicated (possibly gear extension speed as well?). They were about four minutes from the airport at that point and you see the extreme descent rates after they leveled off. 5500 fpm descent rate at 250 knots, they must have had a hell of a lot of drag. Makes me wonder if they had full speed brakes and gear down.

Im not trying to speculate too much, but from that info the situation appears ripe for a CFIT. Being left high, becoming hurried, getting behind the plane so far that you have little to no situational awareness and bad things can easily happen. Throw in possible fatigue issues or other human factors and things can really get ugly fast. I don't know how those cargo guys handle the back side of the clock.


Sec. 91.117 — Aircraft speed.
(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).
"Upon further review, we have determined that the string itself is not a machinegun" -BATFE
RarestRX
Likes District 9 more than you.
Offline
Posts: 19012
Feedback: 100% (9)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:21:59 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Alien:
I bet the FSA is drooling at the thought of scavenging some free shit while emergency crews work to rescue any possible survivors and to put out any fires.


I read about people looting suitcases at an airliner crash, my mind couldn't even conceive of such a thing.

Pretty sure there should be a law allowing the police to shoot on sight in a case like that.

The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
VACaver
I really do know my ass from a hole in the ground!
Military
Offline
Posts: 18443
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:23:40 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By DeltaElite777:
Just found out that one of the crew lived right around here, and my brother knows the family... sucks.


Several of the pilots I flew with in the AF now fly for UPS.

I hope they are alright.

Prayers to the families of those who were killed.
"The trouble with quotes on the Internet is that you can never know if they
are genuine."

- Abraham Lincoln
Luchs
Member
Offline
Posts: 2314
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:28:49 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By RarestRX:
Originally Posted By Alien:
I bet the FSA is drooling at the thought of scavenging some free shit while emergency crews work to rescue any possible survivors and to put out any fires.


I read about people looting suitcases at an airliner crash, my mind couldn't even conceive of such a thing.

Pretty sure there should be a law allowing the police to shoot on sight in a case like that.



That was Nigeria. All the survivors died because the rescuers couldn't get to the wreckage, it was swarmed with thousands of Nigerians looting it (and the badly injured survivors) like ants, even while it was still smoking.
sta1treeman
Offline
Posts: 3217
Feedback: 100% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:30:28 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By RarestRX:
Originally Posted By Alien:
I bet the FSA is drooling at the thought of scavenging some free shit while emergency crews work to rescue any possible survivors and to put out any fires.


I read about people looting suitcases at an airliner crash, my mind couldn't even conceive of such a thing.

Pretty sure there should be a law allowing the police to shoot on sight in a case like that.




They came down on airport property. Inside the fence with a good LE perimeter
shortly after unless something fell in their yard before it hit I doubt there's any looting.
RarestRX
Likes District 9 more than you.
Offline
Posts: 19013
Feedback: 100% (9)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:31:23 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Luchs:
Originally Posted By RarestRX:
Originally Posted By Alien:
I bet the FSA is drooling at the thought of scavenging some free shit while emergency crews work to rescue any possible survivors and to put out any fires.


I read about people looting suitcases at an airliner crash, my mind couldn't even conceive of such a thing.

Pretty sure there should be a law allowing the police to shoot on sight in a case like that.



That was Nigeria. All the survivors died because the rescuers couldn't get to the wreckage, it was swarmed with thousands of Nigerians looting it (and the badly injured survivors) like ants, even while it was still smoking.


Nope, it was in the US.

Googling now to try and find it.
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
986Flyer
Member
Online
Posts: 2268
Feedback: 100% (4)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:34:11 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Originally Posted By 986Flyer:
Descent profile looks fairly normal until they departed 12000 then it appears they dropped the anchor. 346 knots groundspeed down to 9600 where it looks like they leveled off to get back to 250 indicated (possibly gear extension speed as well?). They were about four minutes from the airport at that point and you see the extreme descent rates after they leveled off. 5500 fpm descent rate at 250 knots, they must have had a hell of a lot of drag. Makes me wonder if they had full speed brakes and gear down.

Im not trying to speculate too much, but from that info the situation appears ripe for a CFIT. Being left high, becoming hurried, getting behind the plane so far that you have little to no situational awareness and bad things can easily happen. Throw in possible fatigue issues or other human factors and things can really get ugly fast. I don't know how those cargo guys handle the back side of the clock.


Sec. 91.117 — Aircraft speed.
(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).


Right. Which makes me think they were in control of a perfectly good aircraft. They left 12000 in a " we need to get the fuck down" mode, expedited out of 12, ended up leveling at 9500 to bleed off speed, then dropped like a rock for the next minute or two. In the last couple of minutes it looks like they started to get things under control.

FedEx flew a perfectly good 727 into the ground in Tallahassee back in 2002. They were lucky to survive.

KR35RR
Member
Offline
Posts: 230
Feedback: 100% (55)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:36:57 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By RarestRX:
Originally Posted By Alien:
I bet the FSA is drooling at the thought of scavenging some free shit while emergency crews work to rescue any possible survivors and to put out any fires.


I read about people looting suitcases at an airliner crash, my mind couldn't even conceive of such a thing.

Pretty sure there should be a law allowing the police to shoot on sight in a case like that.




Not inconceivable in that area. It's uhh...."ethnic".

sidenote: If one of our Pig (container) trains breaks in the downtown area for more than a couple hours, the FSA types break into them and loot the contents. Everything from clothes to tires!
KR35RR
Member
Offline
Posts: 231
Feedback: 100% (55)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:42:34 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By 986Flyer:
Descent profile looks fairly normal until they departed 12000 then it appears they dropped the anchor. 346 knots groundspeed down to 9600 where it looks like they leveled off to get back to 250 indicated (possibly gear extension speed as well?). They were about four minutes from the airport at that point and you see the extreme descent rates after they leveled off. 5500 fpm descent rate at 250 knots, they must have had a hell of a lot of drag. Makes me wonder if they had full speed brakes and gear down.

Im not trying to speculate too much, but from that info the situation appears ripe for a CFIT. Being left high, becoming hurried, getting behind the plane so far that you have little to no situational awareness and bad things can easily happen. Throw in possible fatigue issues or other human factors and things can really get ugly fast. I don't know how those cargo guys handle the back side of the clock.




I doubt fatigue was an issue. Cargo guys operate in the dark.

It is not common to get "Dunked" into BHM. The controllers are very good.
trav1921
Member
Offline
Posts: 837
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 5:43:46 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By MSC182:
Originally Posted By Luchs:
Originally Posted By MSC182:
Originally Posted By 94five0:
Fuel issue is what I heard. I don't know shit about aviation I do know there is no such thing as coasting on fumes in a 767.

No chance


Um...

The Gimli Glider is the nickname of an Air Canada aircraft that was involved in an unusual aviation incident. On 23 July 1983, Air Canada Flight 143, a Boeing 767-233 jet, ran out of fuel at an altitude of 41,000 feet (12,000 m) MSL, about halfway through its flight originating in Montreal from Ottawa to Edmonton. The crew was able to glide the aircraft safely to an emergency landing at Gimli Industrial Park Airport, a former Royal Canadian Air Force base in Gimli, Manitoba.[1]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

I'm aware of the Gimli Glider and I'm telling you there is no chance that that aircraft crashed due to fuel exhaustion. The amount of fire alone rules that out.


This, also on top of that such a short flight and depending on the load of cargo, the A-300 Im assuming would have needed at least 18,000- 20,000 lbs. of fuel to be in balance. Even the Concorde would not burn that much fuel in an hour.
broken_reticle
Member
Offline
Posts: 4283
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 6:30:36 PM
Hard to see that on the news, I worked for UPS for a long time many years ago.

I am going with CFIT. No distress calls. Ceilings were 7000, but if you look at the pictures it was still a bit foggy. Reduced viz plug approach over a dark field at that time of the morning is a tricky situation. Still, given the quality of most of their pilots its very surprising.

FWIW I spent a lot of time working on one of the ramps in Tulsa deploying some IT gear, I got to see the operations up close. In the evening a bunch of Cessna Caravans come from all the corners of Oklahoma to drop off air packages that are then loaded into a 757 that flies to Louisville a little later. That 757 is expected to depart within a couple of minutes of schedule due to the aircraft arrival spacing in Louisville, which is typically 1.5 minutes apart. However, the surprising part was all 6 Caravans landed together and taxied in together. In general UPS pilots are expected to fly to a much greater level of precision than many other air carriers.

daskal:
Welcome to GD, if you don't want to be gang raped, don't blow kisses at the inmates.
Ltlabner
Member
Offline
Posts: 4562
Feedback: 100% (29)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 6:36:33 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By djbradley:
Here are some aerial photos.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/DAL2750/-b6d10abfa6f64281_zps3924b434.jpg

ETA:

Weather at the time of the accident:

METAR text: KBHM 141053Z 01003KT 10SM OVC070 23/22 A2999 RMK AO2 SLP146 T02330222
Conditions at: KBHM (BIRMINGHAM , AL, US) observed 1053 UTC 14 August 2013
Temperature: 23.3°C (74°F)
Dewpoint: 22.2°C (72°F) [RH = 94%]
Pressure (altimeter): 29.99 inches Hg (1015.7 mb)
[Sea-level pressure: 1014.6 mb]
Winds: from the N (10 degrees) at 3 MPH (3 knots; 1.6 m/s)
Visibility: 10 or more miles (16+ km)
Ceiling: 7000 feet AGL
Clouds: overcast cloud deck at 7000 feet AGL
Weather: no significant weather observed at this time


The picture makes it appear that the ground slopes up from the runway back towards the flight path/where the picture was taken.

Is this accurate or an illusion ?
Vault Hunter
realwar
Offline
Posts: 15248
Feedback: 100% (19)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 6:38:06 PM
Wonder if these guys were flying in heavy fog in a complete white out condition and flew right into the ground?
Mass-Length-Time
D'oh boy
Offline
Posts: 1297
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 6:46:21 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By realwar:
Wonder if these guys were flying in heavy fog in a complete white out condition and flew right into the ground?

Read a few posts back: visibility 10 mi, ceilings 7000.

I think what Screechjet1 said makes the most sense, at this point, but we'll have to see what the investigation yields.
KR35RR
Member
Offline
Posts: 232
Feedback: 100% (55)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 6:57:33 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Ltlabner:
Originally Posted By djbradley:
Here are some aerial photos.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/DAL2750/-b6d10abfa6f64281_zps3924b434.jpg

ETA:

Weather at the time of the accident:

METAR text: KBHM 141053Z 01003KT 10SM OVC070 23/22 A2999 RMK AO2 SLP146 T02330222
Conditions at: KBHM (BIRMINGHAM , AL, US) observed 1053 UTC 14 August 2013
Temperature: 23.3°C (74°F)
Dewpoint: 22.2°C (72°F) [RH = 94%]
Pressure (altimeter): 29.99 inches Hg (1015.7 mb)
[Sea-level pressure: 1014.6 mb]
Winds: from the N (10 degrees) at 3 MPH (3 knots; 1.6 m/s)
Visibility: 10 or more miles (16+ km)
Ceiling: 7000 feet AGL
Clouds: overcast cloud deck at 7000 feet AGL
Weather: no significant weather observed at this time


The picture makes it appear that the ground slopes up from the runway back towards the flight path/where the picture was taken.

Is this accurate or an illusion ?



I answered this at the top of the page
Ltlabner
Member
Offline
Posts: 4563
Feedback: 100% (29)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 7:05:17 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By Ltlabner:
Originally Posted By djbradley:
Here are some aerial photos.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/DAL2750/-b6d10abfa6f64281_zps3924b434.jpg

ETA:

Weather at the time of the accident:

METAR text: KBHM 141053Z 01003KT 10SM OVC070 23/22 A2999 RMK AO2 SLP146 T02330222
Conditions at: KBHM (BIRMINGHAM , AL, US) observed 1053 UTC 14 August 2013
Temperature: 23.3°C (74°F)
Dewpoint: 22.2°C (72°F) [RH = 94%]
Pressure (altimeter): 29.99 inches Hg (1015.7 mb)
[Sea-level pressure: 1014.6 mb]
Winds: from the N (10 degrees) at 3 MPH (3 knots; 1.6 m/s)
Visibility: 10 or more miles (16+ km)
Ceiling: 7000 feet AGL
Clouds: overcast cloud deck at 7000 feet AGL
Weather: no significant weather observed at this time


The picture makes it appear that the ground slopes up from the runway back towards the flight path/where the picture was taken.

Is this accurate or an illusion ?



I answered this at the top of the page


Yea...got to get back to the rest of the thread and saw that.

Ground rising towards flighpath, rapid decent towards a realitivley short runway, vis/GPS approach at night...............CFIT wouldn't be totally shocking.

Amature speculation aside RIP to the flight crew
Vault Hunter
KR35RR
Member
Offline
Posts: 233
Feedback: 100% (55)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/14/2013 7:08:08 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Ltlabner:
Originally Posted By KR35RR:
Originally Posted By Ltlabner:
Originally Posted By djbradley:
Here are some aerial photos.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q139/DAL2750/-b6d10abfa6f64281_zps3924b434.jpg

ETA:

Weather at the time of the accident:

METAR text: KBHM 141053Z 01003KT 10SM OVC070 23/22 A2999 RMK AO2 SLP146 T02330222
Conditions at: KBHM (BIRMINGHAM , AL, US) observed 1053 UTC 14 August 2013
Temperature: 23.3°C (74°F)
Dewpoint: 22.2°C (72°F) [RH = 94%]
Pressure (altimeter): 29.99 inches Hg (1015.7 mb)
[Sea-level pressure: 1014.6 mb]
Winds: from the N (10 degrees) at 3 MPH (3 knots; 1.6 m/s)
Visibility: 10 or more miles (16+ km)
Ceiling: 7000 feet AGL
Clouds: overcast cloud deck at 7000 feet AGL
Weather: no significant weather observed at this time


The picture makes it appear that the ground slopes up from the runway back towards the flight path/where the picture was taken.

Is this accurate or an illusion ?



I answered this at the top of the page


Yea...got to get back to the rest of the thread and saw that.

Ground rising towards flighpath, rapid decent towards a realitivley short runway, vis/GPS approach at night...............CFIT wouldn't be totally shocking.

Amature speculation aside RIP to the flight crew


Spot on
Page:  / 6