No One Told Them About The Danger | Sky Lease Cargo Floght 4854
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2023
- This is the story of sky lease cargo flight ___. Now ive covered a multitude of accidents on this channel. Ranging from small planes to huge ones like the 747, i love covering the 747 because its just so huge and such a great airplane and the stories involving the 747 are always fantastic and the story of flight __ is just that. On the 7th of november 2018 a 21 year old boeing 747 had to make the log flight from chicagos ohare international airport to changsha international airport in changsha china but it first had to make a quick stop in halifax to pick up some cargo, the plane would then leave for ted stevens international airport where it would be refuled and after that it was a quick hop across the pacific to get to china. So with that the plane left o'hare at 12:30 pm UTC and it climbed away from chicago when the plane was in the air the pilots were getting information about the state of the airport at halifax. They got to know that the ladning runway was runway 14 and the departing runway was runway 23 and that the runways were wet. On top of that the ILs for runway 23 and runway 5 were unserviceable. So yeah the crew were like runway 23 is not available for landing. So the pilots got together and conducted a ;landing briefing for runway 14. They talked about the landing distance that they would need to stop the plane the level of braking that would be required the landing weight all the things that you would need to stop the plane in time. When the plane was 153 nautical miles from halifax they started the descent into the airport. Since the airport was that busy the controller cleared the 747 in directly to the intermediate approach fix for runway 14. But at 4:54 am UTC the tower had a change of heart and then changed the active runway from runway 14 to runway 23 due to a change in the wind. Now the easiest approach would be the RNAV or area navigation approach to runway 23. But this change was not communicated to the crew. At 5:02 am the 747 was 8.6 nautical miles from the runway and the winds at 260 degrees at 16 knots gusting to 21 knots. This would give them a 7 knot tail wind and the controller was like are you guys okay with this? The crew had a quick discussion and then they were like yep were good runway 14 works for us. So the approach to runway 14 was continued, The plane was at 164 knots and it was just 4 nautical miles from the runway. Then just a minute and 21 seconds from the threshold of runway the pilots confirmed that they had a persistent tailwind. The pilots went over the go around procedure just in case talking about the headings and altitudes that they would fl at if they did have to go around. Then at 400 feet of altitude the pilot flying disengaged the autopilot and then hand flew the plane down to the runway. But things were now starting to go wrong the the plane was a bit higher than it was supposed to be at, the plane was supposed to be at 50 feet as it crossed the threshold of runway 14 but it was at 62 feet. The ginat plane also drifted to the left of the center line by 27 feet. But the 747 touched down firmly 1350 feet past the threshold of runway 14. But once on the ground the pilots were concerned the 747 was not slowing down as they expected the jet still had so much speed. The pilot flying knew that something was wrong the aitobrakes had not kicked in yet they were like a runway train on this runway he just says max braking and then slams on the brakes as he tries his best to keep the plane on the centerline. But the plane had eaten up too much runway and it was going way too fast for the plane to stop in time. The end of the runway was right there just 800 feet away and they were still at 100 knots. Just for some context thats like trying to stop a train thats going at a 115 miles an hour in 800 feet, yeah thats not happening. And this giant 747 went off the runway at 77 knots the gear dug into the soft mud but it wasnt enough to slow the plane down. Th jet went right into the ILS antenna for the runway but thankfully the giant jet came to a stop juts a few feet away from a public road. The plane was in one piece and one of the pilots had been lightly injured by the emergency escape devices in the cockpit that had come undone during the crash. But they all made it.
Наука
I thought this was going to be a collision story at 5:38 - good thing aliens abducted the other plane just in time
@1MamaYo it can’t be aliens - they’re too busy stealing Austin Allegros to copy the technology.
Lmaooo
😆😆😆
There's practically no I in that AI. :)
😂😂😂😂
I'm always amazed at how tight the flight margins are on these behemoths. 5 knots and 12 feet of height doesn't seem like that much, but it can be the difference in whether you take off again for the next leg of the flight.
When you are dealing with very high energies, even a small percentage of error makes a huge difference. And this toy has a lot of weight.
They were only given 37 notams? Must be nice.
Props to you for having an animation that fairly accurately depicted YHZ.
As a loadie on the 747, it remains a great aircraft, especially the converted cargo ones (BDSF/BCF). We have so much space on the upperdeck.
As a pilot on the 747, I hate the Boeing Crappy Freighter. Huge upper deck with near zero modifications to accommodate a cargo crew. Stacked bunk, tiny lav, galley buried in the aft of the upper deck. Which is where dedicated single bunks should be. Give me a factory freighter any day.
3:05 nice runway lighting lol!
Never heard of this floght before. Very interesting!
Thank you for telling us about the crash of this floght! I love how informative you are with these ❤
Automatically liking the video before you even watch it because we know it's gonna be another top quality video 👏 👏👏
Given that the NOTAMS are computer-generated, it should be a trivial affair to require topic headings (like the runway number) and sort the NOTAMS accordingly. It should also be a trivial matter to assign an importance index to each NOTAM and - again - sort accordingly.
Whether NOTAMS are generated automatically via sensors or input manually, any half decent programmer could set up a system of rules to assign importance, groupings and sort order.
Also, someone really needs to look at the formatting of those things. Their teletyper history is painfully apparent: we can do so much more these days to present information in ways that direct the attention to the right places in the right "read flow" and also to make the presentation of information look cleaner and more attractive.
Great points all. 👍
The whole NOTAMS system is proving itself more and more to be a folly of CHEAPING OUT by the cheap-ass government agencies insisting on them and the cheap-ass operators depending on them and all the cheap-ass investors who insist that ANY form of upgrade would be "too expensive when the tried and true has always worked so far"...
Everything is ONLY EVER "working okay" until it isn't. Then you get featured in one of these kinds of videos. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 Agree Standard operating procedure of the aviation industry.
@@angelachouinard4581 Standard operating procedure for INDUSTRY... pretty much. Until they kill a bunch of people and the government "negotiates" with the criminals instead of locking them up and taking their money and toys away like they should.
...far as I see, anyway... ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 LOL True enough! Toxic dumping, exploding facilities, reckless operations, it's not just aviation.
The NOTAMs perhaps need to be presented in condensed, searchable, item-specific (eg runway conditions) format followed by appendix of all individual NOTAMs for any pilot with lots of time.
This is a great channel!
Why no go-around? It seems that they had ample speed.
Is it possible for you to increase the audio level on your videos? This one turns out to be at -9.7dB. Try to aim for -2dB.
Yes please, I had to glue my idiotPhone to my ear to hear this one. The mice ate my ear pod cords!
Great video as always thanks for your efforts to keep us entertained
Dang bro I have been here since 20k subs. Great job keep it up…unlike these planes 👀
“That turned out to be ‘catastrophic’”?
Don’t think so.
@5:38 that was a horrible wreck lol
I like the angles you provide in flight.
Ope, I thought you said Angels! Im tired
The flight simulation looks really great. 👌🔥
Floght! 😉
Excellent video!😸
Someone's not proofreading their video titles 😂
They should have floght harder about those landing distance calculations and used the longer runway.
The very first second they had doubts about stopping in time they should have initiated a go-around. But yes, it is rather simple to say that sitting on the sofa... Glad everyone survived!
This video is a floght of fancy! Hey - Aerofloght - I get it now! 👍🏻🙂
runway lights. MSFS moment
is that the previous version of flight simulator that you use for your plane visuals?
sorry i mean 2020
Thanks for this floght report, but mistakes have been made. Reverse lever position is not going to affect the speedbrakes. Do you mean the forward thrust levers weren't all at idle (as per the Canadian Air Transport Safety Report)? Are you getting enough sleep? 😛
50s “quick hop across the Pacific…” lol
Well. NOTAMs are like reading Assembler code and also the fact that u need to put multiple NOTAMs together to get the whole picture it is a wonder NOTAM related accidents dont happen more often. There should be a more modern easier to read format today for this so important stuff. Sure the pilots are trained to read it but in my opinion it is like if all programmers of today should still write all their software in assembly instead of a more easy handled language like C++, Java, C#, JS or Python. NOTAMS need to go through a similar transition/evolution I say toward an easier to read format.
Yes. I can't believe that those NOTAMs still use this terribly unreadable UPPERCASE format without any structure like in 1950, while at the same time we have and use all the latest technology in the airplanes.
@@misch2 Indeed!
This happened at my local airport it was really cool to see a crashed 747 in person
I flought this was interesting
So, are we covering the collision with the yellow plane at 5:36 in a future Mini Air Crash Investigation? 🤣
It always comes down to human factors
I had a fleght that was very turbulent.
What game/ animation did you use to represent the aircraft in the incident?
Did the 747 survive?
That's it: I'm never flying again.
Idk why planes bother flying anymore, the one about 5.30 in can teleport
Contaminated runway and possible tailwind, at night, in a 47? I'm taking the other other runway. Also, middle of the night, the tower guys/gals have time on their hands. Just ask 'em, 'Hey what nav aids are up for 23? Or ask 'em anything you're not sure about. If you don't ask, they just assume you have all the needed info. Always better to ask a question that makes you look stupid than to do something stupid.
True of both sides. ATC could have, "23 might be an easier approach. Would you rather do 23?"
ATC are often reluctant to make the first call when you are approaching, because you may be half way through a checklist or configuring the aircraft, but they are always there if you need any help or advice.
Taking all the factors into account on their speed and altitude, thos pilots should certainly have gone around. It was certainly panic that resulted in them messing up the throttles, but should not have been missed by the pilot monitoring. During takeoff and landing, throttles and flaps should be his primary concern. The moment the wheels were on the ground, while the pilot flying is concentrating on the steering, he should have checked the engines for idle and deployed the reverse thrusters ready for use.
To me, that is an important part of CRM. At moments such as this, calls from ATC can wait, unless there is an extreme danger ahead.
@@wilsjaneif i was in that plane, it probably would have crashed at takeoff since I don't have a pilot's license and I can't fly a plane
When in doubt, GO AROUND! I'm not even a pilot and I know that.
Yikes. Looked like Tenerife for a second.
When you're tired and your awareness is down you're not aware- because your awareness is down.
Hey, you put a typo in the title.
You said, they hit the runway so hard that some of the engines hit the runway. Impossible without having the gear collapse. And those wings would not have flexed enough to allow this to happen. Wings would have snapped off, but gear collapsing before that. Now if they had not landing level, then yeah, eng 1 or 4 might have touch runway.
*Is it still called a go-around if you take off again after touching down?*
Yes. But the question is are pilots responsible for 'unnecessary' go-arounds and wasted fuel?
I've seen so much cases where a go-around could save the plane and many lives but they didn't even try.
There's a point of "commitment" to landing in Commercial Aviation called "Minimums" past which your plane is GOING to touch ground. You're still in the air significantly, but the way engines work and with the physics of 100,000+ pounds (around the scale of 50,000 kg) inertia is GOING to put wheels on the ground one way or the other, no matter what you do. It's still part of the "approach" from "minimums" to the ground, but you CAN still "destabilize" the approach... AND pilots can still be REQUIRED by all standards to call "Go Around" and hit TOGA... AND yes, that's STILL considered a Go Around...
This is also why pilots are trained and drill regularly (on check flights as well as in the simulators) to keep the plane as steady over the runway's centerline as possible through every Go Around... There are even conditions by which from an unstable approach to Go Around before minimums, the plane may be forced into a "Touch and Go", so you'll hear quite a bit of pilots "Practicing my touch-n-go's" if you're around pilots very much at all... Those are usually most practiced early in licensing hours, from flight school through early solo flights... AND that means just about everybody in aviation has a few "hairy touch-n-go stories" to share about their experiences.
In any case, there's a psychological aspect to just how well you can excuse or justify a Go Around from a touch-n-go situation, especially when you've got the time and training to be a Commercial Pilot. They preach quite a lot of "Every landing is a Go Around with an option to touch down" to emphasize doing the SAFER thing, but in the heat of those moments, it gets harder to make yourself take back off and circle around to try again when you've already felt the wheels hit, or after you're past "the point of no return" where you're GOING to touch, no matter how hard you try not to. When you can taste your own nuts, it gets VERY VERY DIFFICULT to not let yourself "JUST TRY TO STOP RIGHT NOW!!!" ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464no, you are not going to touch down if you do a go around from minimums. So says this 30+ years airline pilot typed in BE1900, SF340, DC9, 737, 757, 767, 777
@@eanayayo No. Pilots are given a huge amount of leeway to make decisions and airlines know that making them worried about administrative penalties will have grave consequences. Going after pilots for their decisions is very rare (and usually require egregious misconduct), even if mistakes were made the relevant agencies summarize lessons learned and move on. This has been ingrained in aviation for decades.
@@Dan-cm9ow I hope that's true. I've worked as underground train driver and I had to make quick decisions for which I was responsible. They could legaly cut a lot of my revenue for things much less dangerous and expesnsive than 'unecessary' aborted take-off or go-around.
VOR U/S, RWY23 ILS U/S, RWY23 RNAV LPV/VNAV not authorised, RWY23 RNAV Y not authorised, Displace threshold, LDA 877feet/2,400m !
You mention RWY23 had two other approaches, which would they be please? Was there a “T” RNAV (RNP.. Temporary displace threshold instrument approach)? Please ?
What is a "Flouht"
At 3:18 I thought the tower had started shooting tracer rounds at the 747
If you can't operate within the limits, don't do it.
I love u ❤
It's okay if you tell 'em about MY plane be-bopping through the middle of your view while you were getting B-roll... I know we had some words and you DID say it was "only B-roll" but apparently folks might care, AND you didn't quite cut me all out at 5:30 or thereabouts... haha ;o)
A quick hop across the Pacific..... Hmmm, probably not methinks 😊
"they approached WAY faster than they should have : at 164kts instead of 159kts" - either you're exaggerating a bit or commercial aviation has essentially non existant safety margins 😕
The extra energy required to stop is massive even though you are judging it's "only" a few knots more. The difference in velocity is squared. This isn't a car going 35 instead of 30. You are going just under a football field per second. It also weighs about 450,000 lbs in this instance.
Also, you have to consider that in order to land the plane has to not have enough lift to fly. That means they land in a very tight margin of speed since the aircraft is at the lower or end limit of being able to fly during landing.
164 knots is 277 ft/sec. Just a couple of extra seconds is more than 500 feet of runway.
Every 1kt is an additional 100' of runway. So just being 5kts fast means an additional 500' of landing distance. Plus they landed past the touchdown zone by 300. Now they've handicapped themselves 800'. Things can go wrong in a hurry.
Correct the title, Floght -> Flight
The pilot should have done a go around not call for max braking.
Hmmm, sounds like pilots trading following procedures for skimming the NOTAMS and get it on the ground itis. Don't get me wrong, humans are humans, it's important there's some latitude in the system to factor that in.
But without intending to brand the flight crew, I am sure they were glad for the twelve hour delay - it gave a very tangible "fatigue" get-out clause to cover for a number of procedural deficiencies. Not reading the NOTAMS was far less about being tired and much more about it meaning avoiding a tedious task.
There were no training issues here, or lack of experience. No poor or unclear information. No equipment failure. And that's always a worry isn't it? There are literally no improvements that can be made. This accident happened with everything just as it should be ....
4:13 what genius decided to build a road/airport right in the path of an airport/road?!
The road is on the outside of the airport and was there prior to the airport being there. It's called the Old Guysborough Road, and it connects the Musquodoboit Valley to Highway 102 (which connects Halifax-Airport-Truro-onto Moncton)
I live in Halifax and drove by this when it happened, I grew up near the airport. Got pictures somewhere.
There was another incident here a few years before that you should cover. It was also a cargo jet but they weren't so lucky
'A quick hop across the Pacific to China'...LMFAO. It's a little more than a quick hop. And there were no 20 year old '8's in 2018. Sorry, couldn't resist 😂. But another enjoyable video. anyway.
So when are you gonna cover the crash that just happened in your b-roll? 😆
@mini_air_crash_investigation Can’t you fix the typo in the title?
At least this one didn't hit a gas station, eh?
The Swiss Cheese holes aligned.
"View ref"? *Vee* ref.
Keep your Planes Off our runway Microsoft.
"Floght"
Nothing about this was fantastic.
O hate ot when my floght os late
I hate it when I have a bad Floght
another sad and unnecessary incident, but at least no human casualties
5:36 WTF
Ghost plane
ah I'm going to get on a floght not a flight
sorry
but being 12 hours off your normal sleep schedule should have been a NoGo ones and for all...
not the state of body and mind a pilot should be flying... there are rules of how many hours rest are mandatory before alternate period shifts...
unless it's a first shift after a holiday, it is unlikely they had those numbers.
This floght had no chance
Let's all hope that ATC doesn't do things because of a 'change of heart'. They were offered runway 23 by ATC. What makes this confusing for them to think it was not available? They were also told there was a significant tailwind for runway 14. Why did you imply it was a surprise on final? Please be more precise. They chose their own fate. This was pilot error.
A shame that more has not been done with notams since they are so often a part of the problem
The Swiss cheese demonstrated once again. The holes lined up. The formatting of the NOTAMS was one of them. Perhaps there should be research into how the most important data can be presented first?
Subscrobed fir a ling tome.
Live The cintent all aling.
Thank yiu.
😂😂😂
Hi
It's no good quoting Taylor Swift lyrics
This crash has been covered by other channels. This was a very detailed breakdown. The pilots of this aircraft were assholes. They destroyed a perfectly good plane for no reason. There is no excuse for this horrible loss. I’m a fair arbiter of crashes. I love the 747, they are no more. Simple rule for the queen. No idiots allowed in the front. 7700’ runway Jesus.
He landed well past the touchdown point by more than 1000 feet. Bad piloting.
Very poor piloting decisions
Lazy pilots didn't study the Notams given to them
Should lise their licences
Instead of wearing those dumb virtue signaling uniforms i think pilots should wear their jammies so they can grab a snooze or two when needed and stop being so tired all the time and crashing and stuff.
We do. I wear track pants and a hoodie. We have crew rest areas.