An Invisible Danger Slammed This Plane Into The Ground | Iberia Flight 933
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 янв 2023
- Help Support The Channel!: / miniaci
Join My Discord: / discord
This is the story of iberia flight 933. On the 17th of december of 1972 a DC 10, a plaken anmed costa brava. Costa brava was going to fly all the way from madrids barajas airports to bostons logan international airport. The plane had 153 passengers and 14 crew members on board . at about 3:54 pm the plane was getting close to to boston and the controllers cleared the plane to get the down to 3000 feet. The controller gave fight 933 vectors to intercept the localizer to runway 33L. At this point they were 9 miles from the outer marker and and minutes later flight 933 was handed over to the tower controllers. As soon as flight 933 was in contact with the tower they got some bad news, the runway visual range system was out of range but the visibility was three quarters of a mile with low winds. So not too bad in the grand scheme of things this plane should be able to land pretty soon. Soon the plane plane was lined up with the runway and the autopilot was engaged with the autopilot , the autopilot was managing speed and the heading of the plane but the plane was prepped for the landing, As the plane got closer the controllers cleared the plane to land, the braking action was fair to poor. That could have been better but since the runway was more than 10000 feet long so stopping should be no problem.
As the plane broke through 300 feet the captain disconnected the autopilot, then the approach light came on and they were to the left a bit, the approach lights were to the planes 1 or 2 oclock. The first officer said “lights to the right” to which the captain responds with “lights in sight”, as the plane was put into a slight right turn, The flight engineer called minimum decision height, the captain decided to continue with the landing. The captain thought that the runway was a bit too low but he thought that he could still make the approach and decided to continue. He pushed the throttles a bit forward to compensate for the planes low altitude. But despite that the first officer and the flight engineer were telling the captain that the plane was too low. As flight 933 was landing an air canada plane was waiting to takeoff and the captain of the air canada plane said that the DC 10 was too low to recover. The plane was quote desperately low. But what the captain was doing was not working. Within a few second the flight engineer was rapidly said 50 40 30 20 10 as fast as he could and then the plane struck the the approach lights. In the tower the approach lighting system audio alarm was activated. On the radio frequency someone said “Iberia 933 we have an accident” From the controller saw a trail of fire behind the plane, along with an explosion he then reached for the crash alarm as soon as soon. The DC 10 lifted off again after losing its right gear, the captain could no longer see the runway and he pushed the control column forward and then settled back down on the runway hard . And another, the left side of the plane burst into flames. The plane then came to a stop. Thankfully no one onboard the aircraft was hurt and everyone walked away from the crash, but flight 933 had left a trail of destruction in its wake, the approach lights to the runway were destroyed. And the runway had taken a beating. But nothing that couldnt be fixed. Right after the crash the localizer and the glideslope were tested, this seemed like a good idea because the plane was low on approach after all but the thing is the tests found out that the beacons were within tolerances. So that wasn't a cause of the crash of flight 933. But that being said the charts that they had stated clearly that the glideslope wasnt usable below 200 feet that's something to keep in mind I guess.
So to figure out what happened they did the next best thing, they got a simulator and programmed in the conditions of that day and got five pilots to fly a few approaches to the airport. In each of the simulated landings they noticed that when the autopilot was disconnected at 200 feet the rate of descent of the giant jet would spike all the way to 1150 feet per minute, now thats very fast. They also realized that the pilots only had a short 6 second window to apply corrective measures, if they didnt then the plane would come crashing down well before the threshold of the runway. But what was very interesting is that in none of the simulator sessions did they get the plane to be not lined up with the runway. You remember how on the accident approach the plane wasnt really lined up with the runway? 
Наука
Adam Quentin Colley
Alex Haug
Simon Outhwaite
Alexander LKK Bernadotte
Of course we want a video of that other airplane, 96....
Can you please answer this question? Do pilots who survive serious air crashes ever continue flying afterwards? Even if fatalities occurred?
@@montecorbit8280 www
@@gregoryroberts9966
What??
@@JoeyC777 yes they do there has been multiple examples
I saw a newspaper headline once that said, "Plane was too close to ground when it crashed." Well, DUH. This reminded me of that. Too low.
If you think about it, ain’t that the reason most planes crash? One could even say all of them…
@@Chrischi4598 well there’s that airliner that crashed into a vertical cliff wall and left an imprint in it, but i forgot which one that was
Anybody remember the last time one got stuck in the air?😊😂
That's like all causes of death are lack of oxygen to brain lol.
Nice job!!
A point of clarification/correction is needed -- The lights you referred to are VASI/PAPI lights, not VSI. PAPI and VASI both are glide path indicators, not Vertical Speed Indicators (VSI is an instrument *inside* an aircraft, and is in no way associated with glide paths).
PAPI (Precision Approach Path Indicators) is the current standard that replaces VASI, whereas VASI (Vertical Approach Slope Indicators) can be found at older airports. PAPI lights are installed in a column along the runway side(s), and VASI lights are mounted in a bar & placed perpendicular to the runway. Both systems are installed near the beginning of the landing zone. From the cockpit, VASI lights appear horizontal and PAPI lights appear vertical.
Both systems work the same, and if you are on the correct glide path/slope, you will see two red and two white lights. If you are too high, all lights will be white. Too low, all lights will be red. PAPI lights provide better precision than VASI, which is why they are now the standard.
I often look these up as I watch and spent a moment confused: Flight 933, DC-10, crashed 1973, Flight 933, DC-8, crashed 1969. Both were confusing crashes and both noteworthy for some tragic lessons.
I watched the Delta 191 crash documentary when i was young, wind shear is very dangerous. Lucky everyone here survived
Didn't Delta 191 also fly into a microburst?
@@davidalleyne934 that's right
I was on my way home on leave from Ft Sill flying out of DFW and was it eerie flying over that plane crash site
@@davidalleyne934 yep that's it
"everyone walked away from the crash"
That makes it an 8/10 landing. Minor injuries, no deaths. ;)
Any landing you can walk away from is a good one...
...If they can turn around and re-use the airplane, it's an excellent landing.
...I think I've talked myself into voting 9/10 on this one. ;o)
Plus they get to learn from the incident to prevent it happening again 👍🏾
I think you meant to say a VASI, Visual Approach Slope Indicator :-) Glad everyone was able to walk away and always love watching your vids. They provide a great tool for pilots in learning what not to do in some cases so thanks for sharing.
P A P I. Precision Approach Path Indicator. Two Red. Two White. Your ok. 4 red your dead. 4 white. Too much height.
White over red, you're all right,
Red over red, you're dead...
Oh! The PAPI!
@@brunoais PAPI is spelled puppy...
everyone walked away is my favorite ending
I do not know what has changed but today, your videos came up one after another in my feed. These are the best aircraft crash videos on youtube. Please keep them coming.
Thanks for showing the landing in your B-roll.
I was on an airplane when this video released and I decided to wait to watch it until I had both feet back on terra firma. 😆 That's now, and I've enjoyed this video just as much as your other content. Thanks!
Great video and super explanation!!
Fascinating and beautifully presented, as always.
I'm glad our knowledge has improved and the safety of planes has increased as a result.
Another factor here, not brought up in this accident report( not yours…the NTSB) which is crucial, is that overwater landings to a runway can give the illusion that you are higher than you really are in the daytime, night is worse. Ask me how I know. Lol! This almost nighttime arrival , mist and fog, turbulence, end stage excessive rate of descent , plus the almost instantaneous visual transition to an overwater landing , would have severely complicated the captain’s situational awareness combined with not listening to his crew. Five years after this , a National Airlines B727(company long gone) , flew into Escambia Bay, FL on a night approach under similar circumstances. That one had fatalities, needless drownings, of all things. You should do that one as a companion piece to this . Nice vid.
From my KSP experience, I know that you need to be careful about handoffs between you and the autopilot. When you give it control, you need to make sure it's not going to try and do something stupid. When you take control from it, you need to make sure you've got a good grasp of how it will behave. I feel like taking control from the autopilot when you're that close to landing should be a safety issue, but maybe that's just video games being unrealistic.
I love your enthusiasm.
Excellent video!
Love your work as always. I looked up pictures from this crash and could only find a couple but it was just a quick google search. Also, a note.. the link added to the vid is for Singapore Airlines, not Delta. No biggie, just something I noticed. Thumbs up for sure !!
This was a very strong video. You explained a very complex phenomenon very well... Very good...
A little of this and a little of that can create a real problem.
Would love to see a video on flight 96 or any video you find interesting. Love your work. Awesome videos; interesting, well researched, explained so even I can understand, and riveting. 👏👍❤
+1!
+2!
Great video...
Thanks!
Thank God nobody was hurt or killed!
Yes do a video on AA96
I love the videos when everyone lives. 🎉
It seems a shame for a runway that long to not have the landing area moved up a bit so that planes coming in a bit low don't have their landing gear removed.
Everytime I hear someone says DC-10. I automatically presume the story didn't end well.
Doing good job
at 8:57 the plane actually lands on a lined up for take off plane. Other than that, top notch content and explanation, as usual :)
And Ryan aired on that nose gear...
And at around 3:50 another plane takes off just in time to make space for the landing DC-10. Must be a busy airport.
4:33 "You remember how on the accident approach they couldn't really get the plane to line up with the runway?"
No! What I remember you saying was when they broke out at 300ft the runway was to the right 1 or 2 o'clock then they corrected and lined up. What you probably should have said was they drifted to the left of the localizer on final.
Any landing you walk away from is a good landing.
i mean i prefer not to crash
when the rubber thingees touch before the metal thingees it's good
According to sources connected to SEPLA, Airline Pilots of Spain Union, knowing that windshear was the reason for the accident in Iberia 933 flight at Logan, Boston, and adding thrust to turbines the only approach, when FAA inspector repeated the situation in a DC-10 simulator, on every simulation, the DC-10 came to a total crash, all on board would have died.
The feeling was Capt Chus Calderón had an intuitive perception of what was happening, Wind Shear was quite unknown these days, and took the right action, adding thrust to gain airspeed, saving the lifes of those on board.
Capt Calderón went upset when he was banned from flying until the events in this accident were fully ascertained.
Blessings+
Hmm. Somehow I have never heard of this one. Thanks!
It is shear luck that everyone survived this crash
8:56
Landing was so smooth that your plane gave birth to another plane
Oh and a runway incursion happens right after
Flight Sim has never heard of your so called 'safety guidelines'
The DC-10. I remember one of uncles saying "they need to give those plane's to the Russians". Such were the 70's.
This, however, looks like a Conspiracy Of Circumstances.
Yes AA96 please. Thanks!
Can't believe the DC-10 was made with knowledge of the problems, but nothing to stop it.
m8 it was the fucking 70s most things (cars, houses, planes) were not built great compared to 50+ years later today. standards were not high because the past was the worse.
What problems? Wind shear?
Yes please do AA 96 and thumbs up
Super great as always. But DC10 did not have winglets. MD11 did much later. Thanks!
8:58 Very uncomfortable sight.
Why doesn’t every single runway have a net at the very end that could be raised at will from the control tower? Not about this here case, but generally. Nobody should run out of runway. Furthermore you can set it so if the net is hit by a plane, that plane would be immediately sprayed with anti-fire foam from fixed nozzles at the end of the runway.
Wasn't the late, great, Ted Fujita invovled in this or am I thinking of the 1975 or 1976 crash that led to his breakthrough in microbursts? I may be off by a few years. On that note. I've not seen much about that crash at all and it's odd given how important it was to both the weather and aviation worlds, however
The same Fujita behind the hurricane F-scale? What a legend he was, I highly recommend American Innovations's episodes on his story.
Please do a video on American Airlines flight 96.
Mini Air Crash Investigation: "You can find the link to Delta Airlines 723 on your screen right about...now."
ATC: Roger, you have clearance on runway 3 Right.
0:32 why does he sound like he's telling us some gossip ?
Not sure what the huge winglets are doing on your model airplane lol
Thank goodness nobody died.
Winglets were not used when the Iberia 933 flight in Logan, Boston accident, took place.
Image does not match reality
Bruh... at 8:55 you totally smashed on top another jet and almost hit some cross traffic man?!?!
dc10 had glass cockpit in 1973 ?
Pilot error was a big part of that one, but still - DC-10 strikes again!
this was actually the first hull loss of a dc 10
The really bad joke was ,"How do you catch a DC10? Buy 5 acres and wait."
👍
I play these videos for the passengers on the plane when I'm in charge of the in flight movie.
Thanks man doing the lords work
Copyright does not prevent you from using material when it comes to educational content such as yours. Happy Teachings!
great work as usual! tell us more clearly: did he have six seconds to REQUEST more power from the machine or did he have six seconds to HAVE more power applied?
Do you think you could please include more original footage of the accident?
footage?
You mean CCTV footage etc? There surely isn't a camera on board in case things go south that's recording everything for some potential documentary xD
@@K1OIK you know, from journalists, cctv cameras, investigation
@@kai990 No one use film, as in footage.
He dictate that the photos of the crash ste all copyrighted, meaning they cannot be used without express permission of the copywriter,( who is not him).
9:20 well. Duh. Lol I feel any time you bring up a crash you haven’t done a video about, that’s the answer.
I see winglets, so you're using an MD-11
Yep I am
There isn't a DC-10 for MS Flight Sim yet, but one is due soon :)
@@KaitlynnUK I'm sure they will dig one up from somewhere
FAA says ..never break the approach lights when landing. There is a rule!!!
It’s great how you have become more comfortable narrating…also appreciate the short running times of your pieces. Nice job, thank you
Video on the American flight please
Another DC-10?
Winglets... eh??,,,,
Did anyone else notice the runway incursion at 8:59 ?
a quirk in the ai traffic in MS Flight Sim 2020 (used for the video)
@@KaitlynnUK - Yup. I know. I have X-Plane and sometimes the "AI" does some daft things.
One of the things which really used to annoy me was that "ATC" would vector you into the side of a mountain, or give you vectors and then forget about you.
At 8 minutes I think he meant papi lights not vasi lights. A vasi is a vertical speed indicator that is inside the plane. Papi light are the 4 red/ white lights on the runway.
do american airlines 96
bro i feel so bad for you dawg you had so many inferfearences in the siumlator lol XD
Praise God for this amazing miracle, everyone survived! This Captain's gonna need all the help he can get to troubleshoot his performance. Through it all, he saved all those people. 👏
I wonder what'll happen when air crash analysis channels like yours run out of incidents to breakdown. Will you move to trains, boats or even road accidents?
Check out Big Old Boats for similiar stories on ships.
@@kellyalvarado6533 Brick Immortar also has a few good ones on maritime accidents.
@@deus_ex_machina_
Thanks! I'll check it out.
That’s an MD11 in your sim.
It was pilot error plain and simple! Why the stupid title
first
Yeah, but you cheated. You didn't watch the video first.
You need to work on your narration
And writing. Badly.