Printable View
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNew ... 60204.htmlQuote:
A zimbabwe freight plane has gone down in Shanghai while departing Pudong. The Aircraft was an MD-11F registration Z-BAV which was operated by Avient which the aircraft was delivered to the airline back in Nov 22nd. 3 out of the 7 crew aboard the aircraft were reported dead,
Ex- Varig LOG bird, and Korean Air Cargo before that.
Here's a shot of her at MIA by our own Brian Stevenson.
http://images3.jetphotos.net/img/1/6...0405056_tb.jpg
Wow, another MD-11 crashed. In other news, I saved oodles of cash by switching to Geico.
Here's some pictures of the accident, a couple are somewhat graphic.
http://slide.news.sina.com.cn/c/slide_1_528_10331.html
http://www.longislandwallpapers.com/..._VJ7zT-L-1.jpg
very sad, I believe I saw her in Goodyear AZ a few years back in the backround in this shot. RIP
what's the deal with MD-11 crashes? something here doesn't make sense. i heard the carrier operating the airplane had just added them to the fleet, maybe the airplane got away from it's crew....
Had a little concern when I first heard the news shortly after waking up this morning. I had heard Cargo MD-11 crash on takeoff at Shanghi with 3 American crew fatalties but no carrier mentioned then. I have a good friend who is a Captain on the MD-11 for Fedex and flies mostly in Asia, and is currently flying a trip in Asia. My sympothies go out to the crew and their loved ones.
I have to wonder how you are to heavy for a 13,000 plus feet long runway. It will be interesting to see what actually happened and read the CVR.
If you share my love of multi shades of Blue schemes then you will have to agree she sure was pretty !
Ironically the Blue on top looks pretty close to the Blue in it's 1st livery at Korean.
Regards
LGA777
Godspeed and tailwinds to the crew that perished. This year has been a very rough one for the industry. the worst I think I have seen since 1994 to 1996 maybe.
Here the aircraft in better times at Amsterdam
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6089820
just one month ago acquired by Avanti, and allready crashed
http://images3.jetphotos.net/img/2/3...1192728553.jpg
Their 2nd MD-11 (ex. Varig Log as well) is already painted but after the accident the tail logo has been covered in masking paper, although it's not like many will recognize their logo, it's not PanAm or TWA. Although I can see why, possibly so a news photographer doesn't take the opportunity to see the tail sticking out of the hangar and make a story about maintenance issues or whatever.
This one was stored for over a year in Miami, finally towed to the hangar where it was quickly painted. Someone was informed it was going to Africa and we were wondering what airline that could be. About two weeks ago it did a few test flights and I put my alert on flightaware, the test flight maps are probably still there if one looks at the N tail number.
I received a call saturday morning about the crash, and I thought this person was joking. It was so weird, what are the chances?? It's still a newer type, newer than most freighters out there, sitting for so long, just fresh off maintenance, new paint and all, and crashes with its new operator a week after? Considering the size of the worldwide fleet of airliners, including so many old vintage cargo planes still flying, the statistical chances must be crazy small.
One day about 2 years ago PR-LGD was sitting pretty stored on a Miami ramp. Briefly thought if walking along the side of a cargo building to the fence on the back with camera in hand was worth it, and waste one of about 4 frames left on my film camera. Such a weird feeling knowing this thing just crashed.
From what I've heard the MD-11 has a shorter horizontal stab than the DC10 which makes it a lot more unstable. This I think may have played a factor in the FedEx crash a few months ago in Japan but I don't think this would have had any affect on takeoff though.Quote:
Originally Posted by cancidas
Could be a number of things in this case - it will be interesting to see the CVR/FDR to see if they experienced a malfunction on takeoff. With a 13,000 foot runway, it's hard to believe they couldn't get airborne on all engines (even 2 engines). They must have either been super heavy, had a CG miscalculation, not been configured correctly or experienced some sort of catastrophic engine(s) failure.
I don't know what practices these companies use when calculating their TOLD but for us (DC-10) our Critical Field Length has to be less than or equal to the total runway available to ensure that we can either takeoff if we lose an engine after V1 or abort and stop safely in the runway remaining with a malfunction at or prior to V1. Looking at our charted data, in order for our CFL to be greater than 13,000' at 2000' Pressure Altitude with an OAT of 15C we'd have to be greater than 580,000 lbs and have no increased performance benefits by having the worst flaps and CG settings.
Usually at weights this heavy our V1 is equal to Vmcg and we are capped at a max weight based on how much runway is available.
I'm very interested in finding out the results of the investigation. RIP to the crew...
The MD11's horizontal stab is indeed smaller than the DC-10, while the fuselage is longer.
one thing strikes me when I see a picture of the MD11 is the horizontal stab ( Ive read it's approx 30% smaller than the -10's) is the amount of nose up trim this appears to require.. just looks odd
Then compare to a DC-10
I have been wondering if incorrect weights and therefore incorrect vspeeds and power settings entered into the FMC could possibly put this crew, which has been written in other fourms as very experienced in the MD11 in a situation where they couldnt get the bird airborne, even with more than 13000ft of runway.
Thinking in particular of this accident..http://aviation-safety.net/database/rec ... 20041014-0
Quote:
FINDINGS AS TO CAUSES AND CONTRIBUTING FACTORS:
1. The Bradley take-off weight was likely used to generate the Halifax take-off performance data, which resulted in incorrect V speeds and thrust setting being transcribed to the take-off data card.
2. The incorrect V speeds and thrust setting were too low to enable the aircraft to take off safely for the actual weight of the aircraft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHG750R
Very Possible. What is different though is that the Bradley incident was a 9K' runway - in this incident the runway was 13K' long. The only eyewitness account I've read said that the plane didn't begin rotation until the end of the runway (where as the Bradley incident had several tail strikes prior to actually getting somewhat airborne).
Has there been any new info on the crash?
Just playing with scenarios here and being a armchair investigator if you may. I do not know what the loads were on this airplane or how the weight and balance was done for this flight but could it possible that if not heavily loaded and they experinced a number two engine failure it could lighten the control forces enough to induce a tail strike?
Interesting scenario but I doubt it. If the MD-11 is anything like the DC-10 it will not fly itself off the ground, you have to physically rotate it to a nose high attitude to start producing lift. I don't think losing the #2 engine prior to rotation would cause the #1 and #3 engines to cause the nose to lift up. Even if the #2 engine failed at rotation and the "downward" thrust the #2 produces was lost, if they were so light they were probably rotating to a pitch attitude of 16-19 degrees NH and it would have had to been a very abrupt rotation to the target pitch setting or higher to produce a violent tailstrike.Quote:
Originally Posted by hiss srq