Amazing that that mad dog flew for 22 more years after the accident. Those are some of the toughest birds in commercial aviation. Sad to see them go, as someone who lives around Detroit Metro Airport, I've seen a lot of Northwest and Delta mad dogs in the last 20 years. Such a beautiful aircraft and the engines make a great roar. RIP Delta mad dogs. Glad to see this one's life wasn't cut short.
@@gomphrena-beautifulflower-8043 I've never understood. I've probably ridden in the MD88 less than 200 times in the past decade and my impression is that the only good seats are in first class. The rest of the plane is a medieval torture device. I know there are people that love the plane, particularly pilots (I've never flown it personally), but I would gladly attend any charity event where I get to smash one with a sledgehammer.
@@aafjeyakubu5124 • I would have to agree with you about the torture chamber! I died laughing when I read your comment. I don’t fit in any coach seat too well anywhere. I’m 5’7” and have a little meat on my bones. If you do ever get the chance to swing away at the old girl, bring a second mallet and look me up. Hope you and yours had a nice Thanksgiving.
I think they missed one other element to this accident. For those that have never landed there NY’s LaGuardia is one of the worst airports to land on in the US. It was originally a Pan Am Seaplane Terminal, where they used to fly the Clippers. The Main Runways are massive piers out in the middle of Flushing Bay. With no margin for error. It’s like a Carrier Landing. In those wet conditions that pilot was undoubtably seeking to put the plane down at the earliest possible spot he could on that runway, just to be sure of stopping before the plane shoots off the end and nosedives into Flushing Bay. On a wet day they put the wheels down the moment the plane crosses the runway threshold and there is tarmac under them. You don’t want to be landing at LGA wet or heavy. Not without a tail hook.
@@The_Dudester It's a convenient airport. With the best ground transportation options. It's just the landings can be a little interesting. It's not often you look out the window of an airliner, and look up to see houses and streets above the plane.
@@Kevin_747 WELL if you VSI is telling you the sink rate is 700 fpm when it's actually over 1000 fpm, THAT is gonna make "screwing up" a hell of a lot easier! Wonder why the NTSB didn't comment on that "bad cue"?
Are you all that silly to understand what he is saying ?, some times we don’t know our device auto correct and it’s wrong , I like your comment Steve Nelson
@@B3Band not true. Or I’m confused with “The Flight Channel” but the first door blow out of a DC10 led to a safe landing with no casualties. However the names of McCormick were named. In very famous close calls names are named, even without death. Gimli Glider, same. And a few more where it’s nothing short of a miracle nobody died but in those instances their names are usually mentioned. And now my brain jumps to Bob Loft and Don Repo. Are their souls still wandering? Their purpose seemed to be benign: protect them and keeping the plane safe. Have they found peace now when the took out the re-usable parts of flight 401’s parts from the plane? People who don’t believe, even I believe the CEO but at least someone high up had been confirmed to mention the sighting of a ghost and that’s basically when they decided to remove the parts from the planes. In any case: may all people who passed away onboard 401 have found peace. 🕯
Bless you all who post about no casualties on these videos - it helps me keep from being too anxious. (What, stop watching crash videos to avoid anxiety? That’s crazy talk!)
I had to look up "monovision". That's where one contact lens in one eye is for reading and the other is for long distances. Sounds weird, but I guess people get accustomed to it.
I’ve done that for small precision work, as I am severely myopic. Left the left lens out to give that eye a focal distance of a foot, while the right was for normal distances. Worked fine, but I got a headache.
@@mred8002 I was thinking it was sort of like wearing a monacle. Not something you'd want to see on an airline pilot, but I think somehow a zeppelin pilot could get away with it.
@@Greasyspleen But, it’s still like having only one eye, and depth perception and distance are only from visual cues and interpretation. So, the uneven spacing of the landing lights, without other clues, would have thrown off the interpretation for him. No wonder they disallowed the practice
The image at 6:50 is a great illustration of how main landing gear struts are designed to shear off (at the hinge pin) in the event of a severe runway departure. The landing gear trunnion (the attach point to the wing) thus stays intact instead of ripping out and rupturing a fuel tank. It doesn't always work out (e.g. Continental 603) because the magnitude and direction of loads on the gear during an overrun are unpredictable, but when it does work in an incident such as this one the aircraft and possibly many lives are saved.
Fun fact about Allec's videos: If the actual names of the pilots are provided during the opening sequence, it is a fatal accident. If the names are not given, and he simply says "the pilot" and "the first officer," they survived. This is how you can know at the beginning how it will turn out.
This actually isn't true. Well, it IS true that there are no deaths if no names are given. But in certain situations, names are given but there are STILL no deaths. Allec made a video either last week or the week before where names were given, but no deaths. So basically, it's only true is NO names are given. If the names are given, sometimes nobody dies, but usually there are fatalities.
I am an Aviation Medical Examiner and the Monovision Contact contribution to this accident is still debated. Beyond 20 feet away stereo vision starts to degrade and at 200 feet away we are effectively Cyclops, relying solely on monovision cues. This pilot was looking at the runway at least that far away, so ALL of us would perceive it the same way, monovision contacts or not. (I’m also a pilot.) It did result in a question on the form 8500 for flight physicals, asking if the applicant uses monovision contacts. New Pilots answer this wrong on a regular basis, thinking they are just being asked if they wear contacts.
I am a long time contact lens wearer and was purely monovision for years. Fitting me was tricky because I needed clear vision at distance for driving but also needed to be able to read on the job. And I have one eye much weaker than the other. Multifocals helped a lot. However if I were a pilot I would be wearing glasses due to dry cabin air and eye strain.
GUYS! Allec uploaded a video! *_Pulls down tray table, orders sparking cider, leans back seat, dons headphones, and settles in for the in-flight movie._*
The ending to this one was really interesting to me, because I was literally overlooking San Bernardino International Airport while watching this video. Although it's been 2 years since then, I had to chuckle because the MD-88 that was involved in this incident was potentially right in front of me the whole time. Very cool, especially since this was definitely one of the happier endings!
Very thorough job of including the findings of the NTSB investigation. And it's amazing that a plane that impacted a concrete runway at a rate of 1500 Feet per minute, had it's landing gear ripped off, and slid along the runway was able to be repaired and flew many more (22?) years. Delta must have a very good body and fender shop in NYC!
@@Capecodham Wouldn’t you express how glad you are that there weren’t anybody that perished on the plane in what could’ve been an awful tragic event that could’ve had killed many passengers on the plane? Or perhaps all of them if it had it not been for the pilots heroic efforts in making sure them and all the passengers and flight attendants were gonna get home alive to their family?
Good job Allec. I worked this airplane quite a few times over the years. I remember when it was new back in 88. Saw it come through ORD a bunch over the last few years before it was retired. I'm starting to enjoy the A220s, but I'll always have a soft spot for the T-tails..👍
Hi Allec, I'm from India and have been following you for a while now. You bring out the best possible videos in this segment. Hats off to you for that. Of all the music, this background music suits your videos the best, as it has a smooth start, soft rendering, subtle peak and great engrossing end. Friday Mornings are always in anticipation of your videos. As a matter of fact my entire family has now become your fan, though none from my family is an aviation enthusiast. Your content is really good, and keep doing what you do. All the very best Allec. BTW, All onboard Survived/Everyone on board survived, is a message i eagerly wait to see in your videos...
My two cents? Sub-standard airmanship. In 1996 I was a Captain on the MD-80 (Continental). Now, according to the subtitles, 2 to 3 seconds prior to impact the FDR recorded 1,800 fpm descent rate? The GPWS surely should have sounded "Sink Rate" given their low Radio (or Radar) Altimeter altitude above the terrain. Realize that they weren't equipped (apparently) with an IVSI, still a regular VSI shouldn't have *that* much lag time. AND? The GPWS would have alerted with "Glide Slope" if more than one dot below the G/S. Also, video mentions that the landing gear clipped the Approach Light stanchions? Only way that could happen is if the airplane is *well* below the Glide Slope. Even when transitioning to outside visual references, the Pilot Flying (and Pilot Monitoring) should frequently cross-reference the instruments. Furthermore, another comment? At the end --- the claim of the "monovision" contact lenses. I wore contacts for my entire aviation career and never experienced degraded depth perception as suggested here. ALPA is a great union!!!
Yep, I agree. These guys screwed it up. I have many trips through LGA (757-300) some on the same runway. I wore contacts for about 25 years. Never had any depth perception problems. I quit using them because I got tired of fooling with them.
@@Kevin_747 Tim, glad you like ALPA. Yet some of my pilot buddies back in the day would bitch and moan that for them ALPA was significantly less useful than ALPO! Maybe it depends on the carrier.
@@travist7777 Not mono vision. Thanks for explaining that to me though. Are we going to assume that this was the captain's first day flying with MV lenses?
This was an ATL-LGA flight on 10-19-96. Game 1 1996 World Series between Yankees and Braves was the following day in the Bronx. There definitely would have been some Braves fans on this flight.
I took a flight just like this in the 1990s from Florida to LaGuardia in New York. There were layers and layers of clouds on approach and sometime around our initial descent, probably at 15,000 or 20,000 feet or so, the plane suddenly shook and dropped like a rock at a 30 degree angle for several thousand feet. We really thought it was the end. The pilot threw the throttle forward on full and pulled us out of the free-fall, then he got on and assured us it was just heavy turbulence. This was not turbulence like I'd felt before. The final approach took forever and it got so dark from rain, clouds and fog that it looked like night outside. We popped out of the low-hanging ceiling very near the ground and just as the plane was going to touch down, the Pilot throttled up full and aborted the landing. We had to go around again, but exactly the same thing happened, so the landing was aborted a second time when we ended up too far down the runway. The third time's a charm, as they say and we finally landed on the third try. From that day on, every time I saw the weather maps looked as bad again, I'd cancel my flight and postpone it. NYC airports are scary in bad weather.
Accidents happen in those conditions especially at an antiquated seaport. Superman couldn't have done better. Kudos to the deck crew for putting her down with only three minor injuries.
Allec, I love your channel, you do a great job, keep up with it! I wish you could do someday the 737 max accidents: Lion Air 610 and Ethiopian 302. Greetings from Argentina.
I love all of Allec's videos but the ones that end like this with no loss of life are absolutely the best and the plane was actually repaired and used for several years afterwards. Makes for a good happy ending. Hopefully the pilots didn't lose their jobs.
I didn't get notification yesterday so when I was scrolling thru on you tube and so our man "alecc " Joshua "🌠 I couldn't believe my eyes and was muttering to myself "how did I miss this ?!!" I was outraged for a min then I smiled as I started watching his video I know it's gonna be 👍one hundred percent on point ....thanks Allec !🙋
I have been saying this for some videos now. Laser range finding Altimeters mounted on the nose and main landing gear trucks, with ether the info displayed in a windshield HUD ( Heads-Up-Display ) or a head mounted eye goggle display with FO ( First Officer ) or automated voice FMC ( Flight Management Computer, AKA " Bitching Betty " ) updating vertical speed and altitude callouts . Positive weight-on-wheel switch indication as well.
A Thought just popped up. Would fog rain snow affect the accuracy of a laser beam ( light reflecting off those stated ) measuring straight down 60-50 feet to the ground from the landing gear truck ???? Any laser guys can add in here. A laser sensor would have to be periodically wiped off from road grim build-up i think.
Most airliners and large military aircraft currently use radio altimeters to measure altitude down low close to the ground. The barometric altimeters are only used up high where small errors aren't critical. Radio altimeters work by transmitting a radio signal the frequency of which is constantly sweeping at a calibrated rate. The signal is transmitted downward so that it reflects off the ground and then it comes back up to the aircraft where it is received. The higher up the airplane is the more the transmitter frequency will sweep during the time it takes for the radio signal to go down to the ground and come back up. Therefore by measuring the frequency difference between the current transmitter frequency and the received signal the altitude of the aircraft can be determined. In my experience these types of altimeters are very accurate. The errors typically seen are just a foot or two below 50 feet. Note that the Apollo Lunar Module used a radio altimeter to determine the LM's altitude and it retained its accuracy even when the LM was just a few feet above the surface even though the descent engine's exhaust was kicking up a lot of dust under the vehicle.
Man, always impressed with these. Frankly, I kinda hope to one day see you do the Guangzhou Baiyun runway collisions story. Such a strange, and unique story I always have a hard time wrapping my head around
Most of the time that decision is out of the airline's hands. Often times the FAA will revoke their licenses. Sometimes even if a crash doesn't happen such as the Delta incident in 2009 from SAN-MSP. It was still considered negligence by the flight crew.
I was wondering the same thing. The airplane was repaired and had a long career but what about the pilots? They came across as professional and competent in this video so I hope that extenuating circumstances were given consideration.
One also has to take into account how the incident affected the crew. Even in situations where everyone survives, sometimes the PTSD is too much. They either attempt to retrain on a different airline and/or plane with a vastly different cockpit arrangement that does not remind them of the accident or request to fly a different route. Still sometimes they have to give up their job as a pilot altogether. For several years after flying off the highway due to hydroplaning I would scream "slow down!" on the same section of roadway and cover my eyes, even if there was barely any precipitation and the driver was more than capable.
@@pickles3128 The landing was bad but not traumatic. The problem with this video is it didnt provide any sort of description of the cabin experience or even the cockpit event. The descriptions of the passengers and flight crew was there was a very loud explosion but then it was normal until the undercarriage contacted the runway which was a horrendous rumbling and created a skidding feel but actually came to a halt fairly quickly with all the friction. If you had never flown in a plane you would have thought it was a 3 point landing.
My actual wedding day in NYC and this is the first I am even hearing about this. Of course I was already on cruise ship en route to honeymoon when this happened and ya didn't get much in the way of news aboard one of those. Thanks for posting, now I can tell the wife that she's not the only one who crash landed that day :)
I’ve been using monovision contacts for 20 years. Not everyone can adjust to the difference (near vision in one eye, distance in the other), but if you can, it’s incredibly convenient. Your other choices are progressive lenses in glasses or bifocal contacts, neither of which is great. If you try to wear two contacts corrected for only distance, you can’t read anything up close, which means you can’t see the displays in your car. I’m not a pilot, of course. I was under the mistaken impression that they are supposed to have excellent uncorrected vision. But now, thinking about it, that would mean most of them would be forced out of their jobs by age 50.
I've been wondering if I would ever see this one! A friend of mine was covering the world series that year and was on this flight. He chose to drive the rest of the series after this, and I quote, "brown lumper of a flight". Use your imagination on the imagery.....or don't. Having 20/14 vision with corrective lenses but almost being blind without them, I could not imagine being able to fly a plane with monos. It would almost be the equivalent of my flying or driving with one lens in--which I would never even venture to do. Finally, yours truly was entrusted with driving from NY to ATL and back to NY. Because of this flight, I got free tickets to see games three through six of the WS. Being a Phillies fan, it was fun to see the Braves lose. So, at the end of the day, I saw 4 World Series games for nada (save gas and tolls) because of this flight. Life is a strange series of events!
I remember this day because I agreed to work an afternoon overtime shift due to multiple delays because of the weather. Amazingly, they rebuilt the airplane to full working condition.
The MD-80 was my favorite plane to fly on in the 90's with Alaska Airlines. I have dozens of memorable flights on this plane. I wish modern manufacturers would perfect a turbofan airframe with the engines mounted in the rear. It's a robust plane and this video proves it. I'm sad about their retirement.
I don't find the emphasis on monovision contact lenses as a cause of degraded depth perception to be all that compelling. It may matter at near distances but ranges beyond the interior of the cabin would use other visual cues for depth perception.
Allec, I’ve been a faithful viewer of all your videos, purely because of the professionalism and accuracy you incorporate into each. But sadly sometimes all good things come to an end. I will remain subscribed but not be a faithful viewer as I one was. Reason? I’m having troubles reading the white captions. Thank you for what you do!
Boy o boy, I know nothing about flying the plane, but do know that everything has to be spot on when landing at LGA.... The good news is that everyone survived. "By the grace of God go I" seems to apply in this situation....
I fly a fair amount and use to feel pretty safe doing so. Then I started watching Allec's videos and that secure feeling vanished. There's alot of crap that can go wrong I never knew about!
I wonder why aircraft design like the MD-88 is not used anymore. I remember how quiet the ride was. I am always impressed by the graphics used in your video presentation. Also the information provided is complete
Geez Louise! I am an ER doc. I was offered monovision contact lenses when I first started to need bifocals. I said, no thanks, I need to see wounds to stitch them close. I cannot understand why a commercial pilot would think losing his stereovision would be acceptable.
ALL survived which is the greatest news ever. Thank goodness this wasn't another Avianca flight 52 in which they didn't make the airport (JFK) due to not being able to see the airport and then running out of fuel.
So relieved the engines didn't burst into flame! Someone with technical knowledge - is the engine position on these planes inherently safer than the ones attached to the wings? I've learned that fuel is stored in the wings, and have watched enough of these videos to have seen engines on wings often go up in flames in accidents like this.
I don't know what the data was in 1986 but today if you google monovision it states that it is not approved for commercial driving or flying because depth perception is degraded. Wouldn't you hate to be the person that was responsible for that discovery. ☹️
Stupid question from a non pilot. Why let computers take over the pilot's abilities to actually fly the plane? shouldn't the Pilots know how to fly without computers? I'm not saying Pilots can't fly, I'm saying they don't get time grow experience or keep their skill as a Pilot sharp . Pilots should be allowed to fly the plane
Bill, the theory of having the computers (“autopilot”) take over is generally to free the pilots from the more menial tasks of holding altitudes and headings and following courses. This frees up mental bandwidth for pilots to focus on the “bigger picture” like “where are we in time and space?” and “is that where we should be?” and “in 5, 10, 15 minutes etc. will we still be where we should be?” Around the time that automation was proliferating in the 90s and 00s, cockpits were also losing the 3rd pilot, and as airspace got more and more congested, airplanes were expected to follow tighter and tighter paths, sometimes with deviations not allowed beyond a few feet either side. So autopilots, when used not as a crutch but as a way to allow the pilot to increase their situational awareness, vastly improve the safety and efficiency of flight. And yes, while some pilots do succumb to the temptation to over-rely on automation, in my experience the vast majority of airline pilots enjoy hand-flying their airplanes as much as they want. At my company there are very few instances when one absolutely must use automation, and maintaining basic stick and rudder skills is explicitly encouraged.
Allec, Your channel is wonderful thank you for all the hard work creating this content and for putting out as many videos as you do I hope there's many more to come. The music at the end is pretty good but it's not as good as the regular music you use at the end of all your other videos
As usual, several factors combined led to the accident. I find it hard to believe that a possible slight decrease in depth perception due to the mono-vision lenses alone is to blame. Dig hard enough and you can justify human error as a factor in any crash. But in this one it was by far the weather and the bad runway lighting, in that order. That said, I'm also wondering if a go-around could have been an option here...
11:07 I didn't know what monovision contact lenses were so I looked them up. Basically you have one contact for near focus and one for distant. I found this information: _//_ _2. Binocularity_ _While binocularity can be unexciting, it matters from a safety standpoint._ _For example, the Federal Aviation Administration does not allow airline pilots to wear monovision contact lenses for flying. The FAA’s position is scientifically sound: distance stereopsis decreased significantly with increasing contact lens powers (P < 0.01 with +2.50 D lens power)._ _//_
Multifocals help but if you have two eyes with one substantially weaker than the other (at least 1.5 power or more) you're back at least partly in monovision. Speak from first hand experience, wearing lenses since 15. And I thought my depth perception problems were because I am a woman ;-) Seriously, I don't understand why pilots wear contact lenses OTJ as cabin air is painfully dry which hurts your eyes and if you get dust or oil in them it's not exactly like you can dash to the lav and clean them with saline or put drops in your eyes and pray they'll clear.
In cases like this, I always wonder if it would have been better to leave the plane in autopilot while landing? Obviously, a captain with that much experience knows what he’s doing. From the many videos I’ve watched on this channel, it seems that flight crews nearly always land the aircraft manually.
What about flying the ILS which brings you in well past the threshold, especially in these conditions it should have been flown to flare. Monovision allows a user to not need reading glasses, but only 1 eye for distant vision, sacrificing binocular vision so you don't look old.
In the CVR the captain's briefing noted that the glideslope was unusable below 250' probably because of the metal piers so you have to acquire the runway visually by 250'.
I have been saying this for some videos now. Laser range finding Altimeters mounted on the nose and main landing gear trucks, with ether the info displayed in a windshield HUD ( Heads-Up-Display ) or a head mounted eye goggle display with FO ( First Officer ) or automated voice FMC ( Flight Management Computer, AKA " Bitching Betty " ) updating vertical speed and altitude callouts . Positive weight-on-wheel switch indication as well.
@@danepatterson8107 Trust me, I know about " Barometric Altimeters " measuring Atmospheric presser for ALT. I am talking more accuracy from 50-60 feet above wheel touchdown Sir or mam
@@wallacegrommet9343 GPS is so accurate and amazing that with 3-4 or more satellites they can calculate your Altitude above sea-level from there 12,500 miles above earth orbits. Purely Amazing
Amazing that that mad dog flew for 22 more years after the accident. Those are some of the toughest birds in commercial aviation. Sad to see them go, as someone who lives around Detroit Metro Airport, I've seen a lot of Northwest and Delta mad dogs in the last 20 years. Such a beautiful aircraft and the engines make a great roar. RIP Delta mad dogs. Glad to see this one's life wasn't cut short.
I made a comment regarding the MadDogs. I was thinking there was a bunch who really love those series jets.
RIP Mad Dogs
@@gomphrena-beautifulflower-8043 I've never understood. I've probably ridden in the MD88 less than 200 times in the past decade and my impression is that the only good seats are in first class. The rest of the plane is a medieval torture device. I know there are people that love the plane, particularly pilots (I've never flown it personally), but I would gladly attend any charity event where I get to smash one with a sledgehammer.
@@aviationchannel6204 Accident happened in 1996.
@@aafjeyakubu5124 • I would have to agree with you about the torture chamber! I died laughing when I read your comment. I don’t fit in any coach seat too well anywhere. I’m 5’7” and have a little meat on my bones. If you do ever get the chance to swing away at the old girl, bring a second mallet and look me up. Hope you and yours had a nice Thanksgiving.
I think they missed one other element to this accident. For those that have never landed there NY’s LaGuardia is one of the worst airports to land on in the US. It was originally a Pan Am Seaplane Terminal, where they used to fly the Clippers. The Main Runways are massive piers out in the middle of Flushing Bay. With no margin for error. It’s like a Carrier Landing. In those wet conditions that pilot was undoubtably seeking to put the plane down at the earliest possible spot he could on that runway, just to be sure of stopping before the plane shoots off the end and nosedives into Flushing
Bay. On a wet day they put the wheels down the moment the plane crosses the runway threshold and there is tarmac under them. You don’t want to be landing at LGA wet or heavy. Not without a tail hook.
Thank you for the information. I have never flown to NY and I will make a mental note:"Never LaGuardia."
Hundreds of daily flights a day at LGA in all weather conditions. These pilots screwed it up, plain and simple.
@@Kevin_747 It's an easy one to screw up. With no margin for error. And like the report said, some really weird visual cues if you can see them.
@@The_Dudester It's a convenient airport. With the best ground transportation options. It's just the landings can be a little interesting. It's not often you look out the window of an airliner, and look up to see houses and streets above the plane.
@@Kevin_747 WELL if you VSI is telling you the sink rate is 700 fpm when it's actually over 1000 fpm, THAT is gonna make "screwing up" a hell of a lot easier! Wonder why the NTSB didn't comment on that "bad cue"?
Always relieved to see those words, "Everyone on board survived." Especially during the holiday season. God bless and stay well, everyone!
relieved*
but yeah.
If no pilot names are given, then there were no fatalities. Names are only published in reports if there were deaths.
Same to you Steve Nelson!
Are you all that silly to understand what he is saying ?, some times we don’t know our device auto correct and it’s wrong ,
I like your comment Steve Nelson
@@B3Band not true. Or I’m confused with “The Flight Channel” but the first door blow out of a DC10 led to a safe landing with no casualties. However the names of McCormick were named. In very famous close calls names are named, even without death. Gimli Glider, same. And a few more where it’s nothing short of a miracle nobody died but in those instances their names are usually mentioned.
And now my brain jumps to Bob Loft and Don Repo. Are their souls still wandering? Their purpose seemed to be benign: protect them and keeping the plane safe. Have they found peace now when the took out the re-usable parts of flight 401’s parts from the plane?
People who don’t believe, even I believe the CEO but at least someone high up had been confirmed to mention the sighting of a ghost and that’s basically when they decided to remove the parts from the planes.
In any case: may all people who passed away onboard 401 have found peace. 🕯
HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYBODY!
not everyone celebrates it
I'm too full to watch. No, wait... I can.
@@Lee247Jamaica ya I don't
'Everyone on board survives'.
That makes for a blessed Thanksgiving!
Thank you Allec!
If no pilot names are given, then there were no fatalities. Names are only published in reports if there were deaths.
@@B3Band Is that right?
Bless you all who post about no casualties on these videos - it helps me keep from being too anxious.
(What, stop watching crash videos to avoid anxiety? That’s crazy talk!)
I had to look up "monovision". That's where one contact lens in one eye is for reading and the other is for long distances. Sounds weird, but I guess people get accustomed to it.
Thanks, I was going to look it up myself - now I don't need to!
I do that
I’ve done that for small precision work, as I am severely myopic. Left the left lens out to give that eye a focal distance of a foot, while the right was for normal distances. Worked fine, but I got a headache.
@@mred8002 I was thinking it was sort of like wearing a monacle. Not something you'd want to see on an airline pilot, but I think somehow a zeppelin pilot could get away with it.
@@Greasyspleen But, it’s still like having only one eye, and depth perception and distance are only from visual cues and interpretation. So, the uneven spacing of the landing lights, without other clues, would have thrown off the interpretation for him. No wonder they disallowed the practice
The best accidents are the ones where no one is harmed badly and you learn a lot from...
The image at 6:50 is a great illustration of how main landing gear struts are designed to shear off (at the hinge pin) in the event of a severe runway departure. The landing gear trunnion (the attach point to the wing) thus stays intact instead of ripping out and rupturing a fuel tank. It doesn't always work out (e.g. Continental 603) because the magnitude and direction of loads on the gear during an overrun are unpredictable, but when it does work in an incident such as this one the aircraft and possibly many lives are saved.
Fun fact about Allec's videos: If the actual names of the pilots are provided during the opening sequence, it is a fatal accident. If the names are not given, and he simply says "the pilot" and "the first officer," they survived. This is how you can know at the beginning how it will turn out.
Anything else Elexa ?
@@blrenx "Elexa's" name is spelled "Alexa".
This actually isn't true. Well, it IS true that there are no deaths if no names are given. But in certain situations, names are given but there are STILL no deaths. Allec made a video either last week or the week before where names were given, but no deaths.
So basically, it's only true is NO names are given. If the names are given, sometimes nobody dies, but usually there are fatalities.
@@BillGreenAZ LMAO ... good one
Awesome! except now it's like I can't see unsee it... I'm doomed to know forever.
I am an Aviation Medical Examiner and the Monovision Contact contribution to this accident is still debated. Beyond 20 feet away stereo vision starts to degrade and at 200 feet away we are effectively Cyclops, relying solely on monovision cues. This pilot was looking at the runway at least that far away, so ALL of us would perceive it the same way, monovision contacts or not. (I’m also a pilot.)
It did result in a question on the form 8500 for flight physicals, asking if the applicant uses monovision contacts. New Pilots answer this wrong on a regular basis, thinking they are just being asked if they wear contacts.
And you probably have a few one eyed pilots in your practice
I am a long time contact lens wearer and was purely monovision for years. Fitting me was tricky because I needed clear vision at distance for driving but also needed to be able to read on the job. And I have one eye much weaker than the other. Multifocals helped a lot. However if I were a pilot I would be wearing glasses due to dry cabin air and eye strain.
You deserve far more credit for your channel in this area than you get, great as always and thank you!
As someone who is stereoblind and can’t see 3D i’m not sure why the pilot would want to induce it when flying...
Thanks a lot for the video Allec!
GUYS! Allec uploaded a video!
*_Pulls down tray table, orders sparking cider, leans back seat, dons headphones, and settles in for the in-flight movie._*
The ending to this one was really interesting to me, because I was literally overlooking San Bernardino International Airport while watching this video. Although it's been 2 years since then, I had to chuckle because the MD-88 that was involved in this incident was potentially right in front of me the whole time. Very cool, especially since this was definitely one of the happier endings!
“Everyone onboard survives.” Best words ever! I’ve flown into LaGuardia and it does seem like you’re going to land right in the water.
Very thorough job of including the findings of the NTSB investigation. And it's amazing that a plane that impacted a concrete runway at a rate of 1500 Feet per minute, had it's landing gear ripped off, and slid along the runway was able to be repaired and flew many more (22?) years. Delta must have a very good body and fender shop in NYC!
Thanks Allec. Enjoyed your video. Only ones I watch. Super informative
I’m so glad everybody was okay. “Everyone on board survives” are the most beautiful words ever to hear
Someone cares what you think?
Tks for spoiler.
@@arun120977 But there were only minor physical injuries.
@@arun120977 Ok, but they suffered minor injuries and they’re alive. Isn’t that what really matters?
@@Capecodham Wouldn’t you express how glad you are that there weren’t anybody that perished on the plane in what could’ve been an awful tragic event that could’ve had killed many passengers on the plane? Or perhaps all of them if it had it not been for the pilots heroic efforts in making sure them and all the passengers and flight attendants were gonna get home alive to their family?
Always enjoy watching these...very informative and you learn something with each one !!
Good job Allec. I worked this airplane quite a few times over the years. I remember when it was new back in 88. Saw it come through ORD a bunch over the last few years before it was retired. I'm starting to enjoy the A220s, but I'll always have a soft spot for the T-tails..👍
i second the last line albeit as a pax
Hi Allec,
I'm from India and have been following you for a while now. You bring out the best possible videos in this segment. Hats off to you for that. Of all the music, this background music suits your videos the best, as it has a smooth start, soft rendering, subtle peak and great engrossing end. Friday Mornings are always in anticipation of your videos. As a matter of fact my entire family has now become your fan, though none from my family is an aviation enthusiast. Your content is really good, and keep doing what you do. All the very best Allec. BTW, All onboard Survived/Everyone on board survived, is a message i eagerly wait to see in your videos...
My two cents? Sub-standard airmanship. In 1996 I was a Captain on the MD-80 (Continental). Now, according to the subtitles, 2 to 3 seconds prior to impact the FDR recorded 1,800 fpm descent rate? The GPWS surely should have sounded "Sink Rate" given their low Radio (or Radar) Altimeter altitude above the terrain. Realize that they weren't equipped (apparently) with an IVSI, still a regular VSI shouldn't have *that* much lag time. AND? The GPWS would have alerted with "Glide Slope" if more than one dot below the G/S. Also, video mentions that the landing gear clipped the Approach Light stanchions? Only way that could happen is if the airplane is *well* below the Glide Slope. Even when transitioning to outside visual references, the Pilot Flying (and Pilot Monitoring) should frequently cross-reference the instruments.
Furthermore, another comment? At the end --- the claim of the "monovision" contact lenses. I wore contacts for my entire aviation career and never experienced degraded depth perception as suggested here. ALPA is a great union!!!
Yep, I agree. These guys screwed it up. I have many trips through LGA (757-300) some on the same runway. I wore contacts for about 25 years. Never had any depth perception problems. I quit using them because I got tired of fooling with them.
@@Kevin_747 Tim, glad you like ALPA. Yet some of my pilot buddies back in the day would bitch and moan that for them ALPA was significantly less useful than ALPO! Maybe it depends on the carrier.
@@Kevin_747
...but were you wearing mono-vision contacts for those 25 yeats (one eye for reading and the other eye for distance?) Thanks.
@@travist7777 Not mono vision. Thanks for explaining that to me though. Are we going to assume that this was the captain's first day flying with MV lenses?
Everyone survived. Best of all possible outcomes. Planes can be replaced, people cannot.
If no pilot names are given, then there were no fatalities. Names are only published in reports if there were deaths.
@@B3Band How many times do you feel it is necessary to post this?
I just flew commercial airline last week and your videos were on my mind the entire flight to and from
Yes, so good to hear all survived! And there was no fire, no icy water to climb out of, just a plain old skidding on the runway! Good video, Allec! 👏🏻
They all lived. All that matters. Get that pilot a new pair of contacts, too. Nice vid, Allec... :)
Why are you using the word vid?
@@Capecodham Why are you spamming the comment section with inane comments?
This was an ATL-LGA flight on 10-19-96. Game 1 1996 World Series between Yankees and Braves was the following day in the Bronx. There definitely would have been some Braves fans on this flight.
Awesome dude keep them coming
I felt like I was sitting in the pilot jump.seat. Amazing Allec!
Its so heart warming to hear. "Everyone on board survives"
I took a flight just like this in the 1990s from Florida to LaGuardia in New York. There were layers and layers of clouds on approach and sometime around our initial descent, probably at 15,000 or 20,000 feet or so, the plane suddenly shook and dropped like a rock at a 30 degree angle for several thousand feet. We really thought it was the end. The pilot threw the throttle forward on full and pulled us out of the free-fall, then he got on and assured us it was just heavy turbulence. This was not turbulence like I'd felt before. The final approach took forever and it got so dark from rain, clouds and fog that it looked like night outside. We popped out of the low-hanging ceiling very near the ground and just as the plane was going to touch down, the Pilot throttled up full and aborted the landing. We had to go around again, but exactly the same thing happened, so the landing was aborted a second time when we ended up too far down the runway. The third time's a charm, as they say and we finally landed on the third try. From that day on, every time I saw the weather maps looked as bad again, I'd cancel my flight and postpone it. NYC airports are scary in bad weather.
Accidents happen in those conditions especially at an antiquated seaport. Superman couldn't have done better. Kudos to the deck crew for putting her down with only three minor injuries.
Allec, I love your channel, you do a great job, keep up with it!
I wish you could do someday the 737 max accidents: Lion Air 610 and Ethiopian 302.
Greetings from Argentina.
I love all of Allec's videos but the ones that end like this with no loss of life are absolutely the best and the plane was actually repaired and used for several years afterwards. Makes for a good happy ending. Hopefully the pilots didn't lose their jobs.
I don’t accept that lack of depth perception was a factor. There is no human depth perception at a hundred meters; other cues must suffice.
You obviously have never had monovision contact lenses
I didn't get notification yesterday so when I was scrolling thru on you tube and so our man "alecc " Joshua "🌠 I couldn't believe my eyes and was muttering to myself "how did I miss this ?!!" I was outraged for a min then I smiled as I started watching his video I know it's gonna be 👍one hundred percent on point ....thanks Allec !🙋
I have been saying this for some videos now. Laser range finding Altimeters mounted on the nose and main landing gear trucks, with ether the info displayed in a windshield HUD ( Heads-Up-Display ) or a head mounted eye goggle display with FO ( First Officer ) or automated voice FMC ( Flight Management Computer, AKA " Bitching Betty " ) updating vertical speed and altitude callouts . Positive weight-on-wheel switch indication as well.
A Thought just popped up. Would fog rain snow affect the accuracy of a laser beam ( light reflecting off those stated ) measuring straight down 60-50 feet to the ground from the landing gear truck ???? Any laser guys can add in here. A laser sensor would have to be periodically wiped off from road grim build-up i think.
Most airliners and large military aircraft currently use radio altimeters to measure altitude down low close to the ground. The barometric altimeters are only used up high where small errors aren't critical. Radio altimeters work by transmitting a radio signal the frequency of which is constantly sweeping at a calibrated rate. The signal is transmitted downward so that it reflects off the ground and then it comes back up to the aircraft where it is received. The higher up the airplane is the more the transmitter frequency will sweep during the time it takes for the radio signal to go down to the ground and come back up. Therefore by measuring the frequency difference between the current transmitter frequency and the received signal the altitude of the aircraft can be determined. In my experience these types of altimeters are very accurate. The errors typically seen are just a foot or two below 50 feet. Note that the Apollo Lunar Module used a radio altimeter to determine the LM's altitude and it retained its accuracy even when the LM was just a few feet above the surface even though the descent engine's exhaust was kicking up a lot of dust under the vehicle.
Awesome video Allec👍👍. Happy Thanksgiving!
Man, always impressed with these. Frankly, I kinda hope to one day see you do the Guangzhou Baiyun runway collisions story. Such a strange, and unique story I always have a hard time wrapping my head around
Again, great job, Allec. It would be interesting to know, in survivable crashes like this one, if the captain and co-pilot keep their jobs.
Most of the time that decision is out of the airline's hands. Often times the FAA will revoke their licenses. Sometimes even if a crash doesn't happen such as the Delta incident in 2009 from SAN-MSP. It was still considered negligence by the flight crew.
I was wondering the same thing. The airplane was repaired and had a long career but what about the pilots? They came across as professional and competent in this video so I hope that extenuating circumstances were given consideration.
Is that information readily available? Seems like it would not necessarily be.
One also has to take into account how the incident affected the crew. Even in situations where everyone survives, sometimes the PTSD is too much. They either attempt to retrain on a different airline and/or plane with a vastly different cockpit arrangement that does not remind them of the accident or request to fly a different route. Still sometimes they have to give up their job as a pilot altogether. For several years after flying off the highway due to hydroplaning I would scream "slow down!" on the same section of roadway and cover my eyes, even if there was barely any precipitation and the driver was more than capable.
@@pickles3128 The landing was bad but not traumatic. The problem with this video is it didnt provide any sort of description of the cabin experience or even the cockpit event. The descriptions of the passengers and flight crew was there was a very loud explosion but then it was normal until the undercarriage contacted the runway which was a horrendous rumbling and created a skidding feel but actually came to a halt fairly quickly with all the friction. If you had never flown in a plane you would have thought it was a 3 point landing.
Glad everybody survived,and the MD88 too!Flew for another 22 years with Delta,and no blame apportioned to the pilots,which is good😎👍!
My actual wedding day in NYC and this is the first I am even hearing about this. Of course I was already on cruise ship en route to honeymoon when this happened and ya didn't get much in the way of news aboard one of those. Thanks for posting, now I can tell the wife that she's not the only one who crash landed that day :)
I’ve been using monovision contacts for 20 years. Not everyone can adjust to the difference (near vision in one eye, distance in the other), but if you can, it’s incredibly convenient. Your other choices are progressive lenses in glasses or bifocal contacts, neither of which is great. If you try to wear two contacts corrected for only distance, you can’t read anything up close, which means you can’t see the displays in your car. I’m not a pilot, of course. I was under the mistaken impression that they are supposed to have excellent uncorrected vision. But now, thinking about it, that would mean most of them would be forced out of their jobs by age 50.
Happy thanksgiving
And hello Christmas
I've been wondering if I would ever see this one! A friend of mine was covering the world series that year and was on this flight. He chose to drive the rest of the series after this, and I quote, "brown lumper of a flight". Use your imagination on the imagery.....or don't.
Having 20/14 vision with corrective lenses but almost being blind without them, I could not imagine being able to fly a plane with monos. It would almost be the equivalent of my flying or driving with one lens in--which I would never even venture to do.
Finally, yours truly was entrusted with driving from NY to ATL and back to NY. Because of this flight, I got free tickets to see games three through six of the WS. Being a Phillies fan, it was fun to see the Braves lose.
So, at the end of the day, I saw 4 World Series games for nada (save gas and tolls) because of this flight. Life is a strange series of events!
Happy Thanksgiving Y'all
Comments like yours are in essence saying, "look at me everybody, I'm here."
Be thankful.
Delta's old livery is so cool, idk if it's just me but their current one is pretty dull
true
gotta love the old livery
it went so well with their boeing 727s
no its not just you it is dull their old one as with the AA metal tricolor and UA saul bass looked good on any and everything
@@googaagoogaa12345678 hell it'd go well on a cessna
@@DrSeuss-nv9hw true
Captain: "Let's pick an alternate, I don't really care to land through pea soup."
F.O. : "I concur".
I'm too full to watch. No, wait... I can.
I remember this day because I agreed to work an afternoon overtime shift due to multiple delays because of the weather. Amazingly, they rebuilt the airplane to full working condition.
Happy Thanksgiving!!!
Comments like yours are in essence saying, "look at me everybody, I'm here."
burt2481 my apologies.
The MD-80 was my favorite plane to fly on in the 90's with Alaska Airlines. I have dozens of memorable flights on this plane. I wish modern manufacturers would perfect a turbofan airframe with the engines mounted in the rear. It's a robust plane and this video proves it. I'm sad about their retirement.
I don't find the emphasis on monovision contact lenses as a cause of degraded depth perception to be all that compelling.
It may matter at near distances but ranges beyond the interior of the cabin would use other visual cues for depth perception.
Correct. I’m glad somebody else picked that up.
Allec, I’ve been a faithful viewer of all your videos, purely because of the professionalism and accuracy you incorporate into each. But sadly sometimes all good things come to an end. I will remain subscribed but not be a faithful viewer as I one was. Reason? I’m having troubles reading the white captions. Thank you for what you do!
You know you can adjust the captioning. At least I can on my iPad. Or turn yours off.
Nice mate , I enjoyed that
Happy thanksgiving!
So Comments like yours are in essence saying, "look at me everybody, I'm here."
Not writing in all caps anymore - thank you so much!
Allec, I love your videos, but often the captions are readable. Maybe add a text background color for proper contrast.
Another Allec video YAY!
Alec ,thanks
I love happy endings!
Wow very good video i like yours videos
Love your videos
Glad all survived
Nowadays, thanks to the use of GPS and other improved landing aids, such accidents are very rare.
Boy o boy, I know nothing about flying the plane, but do know that everything has to be spot on when landing at LGA.... The good news is that everyone survived. "By the grace of God go I" seems to apply in this situation....
I fly a fair amount and use to feel pretty safe doing so. Then I started watching Allec's videos and that secure feeling vanished. There's alot of crap that can go wrong I never knew about!
Delta Air Lines just isn’t the same without the beloved MD-88.
Mad dog will be forever miss
I wonder why aircraft design like the MD-88 is not used anymore. I remember how quiet the ride was.
I am always impressed by the graphics used in your video presentation.
Also the information provided is complete
because at certain angles of attack, the wings block the airflow to the engines
Geez Louise! I am an ER doc. I was offered monovision contact lenses when I first started to need bifocals. I said, no thanks, I need to see wounds to stitch them close. I cannot understand why a commercial pilot would think losing his stereovision would be acceptable.
Can u do twa 800. There are two
ALL survived which is the greatest news ever. Thank goodness this wasn't another Avianca flight 52 in which they didn't make the airport (JFK) due to not being able to see the airport and then running out of fuel.
Can u do a video about the accident of Los Andes' Tragedy? Would be great. Keep it up!
So relieved the engines didn't burst into flame! Someone with technical knowledge - is the engine position on these planes inherently safer than the ones attached to the wings? I've learned that fuel is stored in the wings, and have watched enough of these videos to have seen engines on wings often go up in flames in accidents like this.
I don't know what the data was in 1986 but today if you google monovision it states that it is not approved for commercial driving or flying because depth perception is degraded. Wouldn't you hate to be the person that was responsible for that discovery. ☹️
Stupid question from a non pilot. Why let computers take over the pilot's abilities to actually fly the plane? shouldn't the Pilots know how to fly without computers? I'm not saying Pilots can't fly, I'm saying they don't get time grow experience or keep their skill as a Pilot sharp . Pilots should be allowed to fly the plane
Bill, the theory of having the computers (“autopilot”) take over is generally to free the pilots from the more menial tasks of holding altitudes and headings and following courses. This frees up mental bandwidth for pilots to focus on the “bigger picture” like “where are we in time and space?” and “is that where we should be?” and “in 5, 10, 15 minutes etc. will we still be where we should be?” Around the time that automation was proliferating in the 90s and 00s, cockpits were also losing the 3rd pilot, and as airspace got more and more congested, airplanes were expected to follow tighter and tighter paths, sometimes with deviations not allowed beyond a few feet either side. So autopilots, when used not as a crutch but as a way to allow the pilot to increase their situational awareness, vastly improve the safety and efficiency of flight.
And yes, while some pilots do succumb to the temptation to over-rely on automation, in my experience the vast majority of airline pilots enjoy hand-flying their airplanes as much as they want. At my company there are very few instances when one absolutely must use automation, and maintaining basic stick and rudder skills is explicitly encouraged.
@@hingle_mccringleberry Thanks Ben that answers a lot of questions
@@blrenx you’re welcome!
Allec,
Your channel is wonderful thank you for all the hard work creating this content and for putting out as many videos as you do I hope there's many more to come.
The music at the end is pretty good but it's not as good as the regular music you use at the end of all your other videos
64 knot wind? That's nearly 75 miles per hour! Jeez.
well done
As usual, several factors combined led to the accident. I find it hard to believe that a possible slight decrease in depth perception due to the mono-vision lenses alone is to blame. Dig hard enough and you can justify human error as a factor in any crash. But in this one it was by far the weather and the bad runway lighting, in that order. That said, I'm also wondering if a go-around could have been an option here...
Happy Thanksgiving allec
Pls do air France 072
Happy Thanksgiving 🦃
Comments like yours are in essence saying, "look at me everybody, I'm here."
@@Capecodham Merry Christmas 🎅 🎄
Clue: If Alec plays "Sad Piano" everyone survived.
Alec, please put a background on the text.
Allec not Alec, sorry
Great video! There was a level of suspense on the final approach.
I like that not all of your videos end in tragedy...)
Everyone Survives! :)
If no pilot names are given, then there were no fatalities. Names are only published in reports if there were deaths.
Someone cares what you think? Comments like yours are in essence saying, "look at me everybody, I'm here."
Good job as usual Allec
Also I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving 🙂
I Love yours videos
When in doubt go around
11:07 I didn't know what monovision contact lenses were so I looked them up. Basically you have one contact for near focus and one for distant. I found this information:
_//_
_2. Binocularity_
_While binocularity can be unexciting, it matters from a safety standpoint._
_For example, the Federal Aviation Administration does not allow airline pilots to wear monovision contact lenses for flying. The FAA’s position is scientifically sound: distance stereopsis decreased significantly with increasing contact lens powers (P < 0.01 with +2.50 D lens power)._
_//_
Multifocals help but if you have two eyes with one substantially weaker than the other (at least 1.5 power or more) you're back at least partly in monovision. Speak from first hand experience, wearing lenses since 15. And I thought my depth perception problems were because I am a woman ;-)
Seriously, I don't understand why pilots wear contact lenses OTJ as cabin air is painfully dry which hurts your eyes and if you get dust or oil in them it's not exactly like you can dash to the lav and clean them with saline or put drops in your eyes and pray they'll clear.
@@donnafromnyc
Great point.
In cases like this, I always wonder if it would have been better to leave the plane in autopilot while landing? Obviously, a captain with that much experience knows what he’s doing. From the many videos I’ve watched on this channel, it seems that flight crews nearly always land the aircraft manually.
Wow its great
Dimen S ional not dimen T ional, Just helping with the spelling, I know you work very hard on these videos.
@@JM-lw3nx some words (my sons/ daughters ) ; better be kept as not doing anyone any favor
I would have trouble driving a car with monovision contacts. Add another dimension (vertical) and it must be really tricky.
San Bernardino International Airport. Looks like they finally found a use for that place. An airplane graveyard.
What about flying the ILS which brings you in well past the threshold, especially in these conditions it should have been flown to flare. Monovision allows a user to not need reading glasses, but only 1 eye for distant vision, sacrificing binocular vision so you don't look old.
In the CVR the captain's briefing noted that the glideslope was unusable below 250' probably because of the metal piers so you have to acquire the runway visually by 250'.
Are you using microsoft flight simulator x for video ?
If only pilots had independent instruments that indicated what they're actual altitude was!
I have been saying this for some videos now. Laser range finding Altimeters mounted on the nose and main landing gear trucks, with ether the info displayed in a windshield HUD ( Heads-Up-Display ) or a head mounted eye goggle display with FO ( First Officer ) or automated voice FMC ( Flight Management Computer, AKA " Bitching Betty " ) updating vertical speed and altitude callouts . Positive weight-on-wheel switch indication as well.
@@leonswan6733 You've heard of an "altimeter?"
@@danepatterson8107 Trust me, I know about " Barometric Altimeters " measuring Atmospheric presser for ALT. I am talking more accuracy from 50-60 feet above wheel touchdown Sir or mam
Always puzzled me. My IPad marine navigation app gives me altitude when I’m flying!
@@wallacegrommet9343 GPS is so accurate and amazing that with 3-4 or more satellites they can calculate your Altitude above sea-level from there 12,500 miles above earth orbits. Purely Amazing