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.
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.
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.
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)
@@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)
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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? 😛
"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.
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.
'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.
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)
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.
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)
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 ....
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.
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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!
Props to you for having an animation that fairly accurately depicted YHZ.
Never heard of this floght before. Very interesting!
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.
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 👏 👏👏
Why no go-around? It seems that they had ample speed.
@5:38 that was a horrible wreck lol
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.
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!
This is a great channel!
“That turned out to be ‘catastrophic’”?
Don’t think so.
Dang bro I have been here since 20k subs. Great job keep it up…unlike these planes 👀
The flight simulation looks really great. 👌🔥
Floght! 😉
This video is a floght of fancy! Hey - Aerofloght - I get it now! 👍🏻🙂
What game/ animation did you use to represent the aircraft in the incident?
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!
Maybe only send them important nomads ie water on runway weather empathising ehich runways were good and closed ones
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!
I like the angles you provide in flight.
Ope, I thought you said Angels! Im tired
What is a "Flouht"
is that the previous version of flight simulator that you use for your plane visuals?
sorry i mean 2020
They should have floght harder about those landing distance calculations and used the longer runway.
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
Great video as always thanks for your efforts to keep us entertained
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? 😛
Yikes. Looked like Tenerife for a second.
Excellent video!😸
Someone's not proofreading their video titles 😂
"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.
50s “quick hop across the Pacific…” lol
This happened at my local airport it was really cool to see a crashed 747 in person
'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, are we covering the collision with the yellow plane at 5:36 in a future Mini Air Crash Investigation? 🤣
When in doubt, GO AROUND! I'm not even a pilot and I know that.
runway lights. MSFS moment
Idk why planes bother flying anymore, the one about 5.30 in can teleport
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)
Did the 747 survive?
When you're tired and your awareness is down you're not aware- because your awareness is down.
A quick hop across the Pacific..... Hmmm, probably not methinks 😊
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.
That's it: I'm never flying again.
I flought this was interesting
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)
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 ....
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.
Correct the title, Floght -> Flight
I had a fleght that was very turbulent.
@mini_air_crash_investigation Can’t you fix the typo in the title?
5:36 WTF
Ghost plane
*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.
If you can't operate within the limits, don't do it.
So when are you gonna cover the crash that just happened in your b-roll? 😆
Hey, you put a typo in the title.
At 3:18 I thought the tower had started shooting tracer rounds at the 747
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
It always comes down to human factors
The pilot should have done a go around not call for max braking.
Keep your Planes Off our runway Microsoft.
Why floght
Nothing about this was fantastic.
The Swiss Cheese holes aligned.
I love u ❤
At least this one didn't hit a gas station, eh?
O hate ot when my floght os late
This floght had no chance
ah I'm going to get on a floght not a flight
another sad and unnecessary incident, but at least no human casualties
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.
I hate it when I have a bad Floght
"Floght"
"View ref"? *Vee* ref.
Subscrobed fir a ling tome.
Live The cintent all aling.
Thank yiu.
😂😂😂
He landed well past the touchdown point by more than 1000 feet. Bad piloting.
A shame that more has not been done with notams since they are so often a part of the problem
Very poor piloting decisions
Lazy pilots didn't study the Notams given to them
Should lise their licences
Hi
It's no good quoting Taylor Swift lyrics
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?
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.
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.