Plane Crash
- Thread starter Caustic Burno
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
callmefence
Keyboard cowboy
Bluedawg is not Raven.
callmefence
Keyboard cowboy
jehosofat said:
Lol
Perhaps
Someday one of us will be proven wrong. If it's me, I will apologize to you hat in hand.
Nesikep
Well-known member
greybeard said:Nesikep said:
That descent rate is less than 2X what a normal rate of descent would be for that aircraft, but what is missing is at what altitude the abrupt uncontrolled part of descent began with the time factor versus the forward air speed..not the same as acceleration.
From the flight data stream at Flightradar.com, it looked like a normal descent from 40,000ft to 20,000 ft. It made the transition thru 14,000ft normally, and according to the graphic below, flew level at about 6000 ft for a short period of time.
You can follow the flight from Miami until it crashed here:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n1217a#1f98a1ae
(times are UTC which means you need to subtract 5 hours from the time in the graphics above to get Houston time)
Interesting...
I'm certainly an armchair expert here, I've watched all the Mayday episodes.. I just like the mental exercise...
I don't know what the stall speed of the aircraft is in the configuration it was, but that sharp dip coupled with a drop in altitude is concerning.. the resolution of the graph there is really bad, probably minute by minute, and a lot can happen in that minute.. last one only shows elevation without airspeed.. Interesting they didn't hear any distress calls though... When they find the black boxes I'm sure it won't be any mystery anymore... throttle inputs, flaps, and of course the CVR...
greybeard
Well-known member
I too am just an amateur armchair 'investigator'. I've worked on fixed wing aircraft and watched as others did while I ran the hydraulic test stands in the military so I know what the different control surfaces do and how they work...somewhat.Nesikep said:
If you follow the link I posted and click on the icon where I placed the arrow, it will become an interactive graph that you can follow with a cursor and show time in hrs/minutes/seconds as well as altitude and airspeed. The resolution is relatively poor here because of downsizing with the image poster. I can read it fine on my laptop but may not be readable on a cellphone.
The data box on the image below reads:
Sat Feb 23 18:32:24
Speed 316 kt
Altitude 15,950 ft
The altitude graph I posted in the other reply (last minute of data) also shows time in date-hrs-minutes-seconds.
Both are UTC time.
Nesikep
Well-known member
what I meant to say was within that last minute of data, it shows only altitude in high resolution
as it's on it's usual decent, you can see they're dropping altitude and slowly dropping speed, suddenly as they're at 10,000 ft, they manage to lose 4000 ft of elevation AND 60kts of airspeed in 90 seconds.. then suddenly the airspeed picks up just before the crash.
without knowing exact stall speeds, it kinda sounds to me like they forgot to set the flaps and stalled, then over at 90 seconds figured out what was wrong.. they only needed 10,000 ft of elevation to come out of it.. Of course if there was a mechanical failure (flaps didn't extend like they were supposed to, or whatever), that would look kinda similar
as it's on it's usual decent, you can see they're dropping altitude and slowly dropping speed, suddenly as they're at 10,000 ft, they manage to lose 4000 ft of elevation AND 60kts of airspeed in 90 seconds.. then suddenly the airspeed picks up just before the crash.
without knowing exact stall speeds, it kinda sounds to me like they forgot to set the flaps and stalled, then over at 90 seconds figured out what was wrong.. they only needed 10,000 ft of elevation to come out of it.. Of course if there was a mechanical failure (flaps didn't extend like they were supposed to, or whatever), that would look kinda similar
greybeard
Well-known member
The data shown is in ground speed, not air speed or knots true air speed.
It was when they were around 10,000'-14,000' that they were vectored around weather so were probably making a turn.
It was when they were around 10,000'-14,000' that they were vectored around weather so were probably making a turn.
greybeard
Well-known member
Look quick before it disappears. A 2 second video as the airplane came down.
https://www.click2houston.com/news/video-shows-cargo-plane-moments-before-crash-at-trinity-bay
And, the same flt and type the day before.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI3591/history/20190222/1608Z/KMIA/KIAH
https://www.click2houston.com/news/video-shows-cargo-plane-moments-before-crash-at-trinity-bay
And, the same flt and type the day before.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI3591/history/20190222/1608Z/KMIA/KIAH
Nesikep
Well-known member
Oh, OK.. didn't realize that was ground speed.. still kinda strange that the ground speed would drop so fast.. if they'd hit a heck of a head wind that would do it, but doesn't make sense they'd drop that altitude at the same time.
That vid at least shows an intact plane, though who knows what could be wrong with it.
Mmmm.. Speculation!
That vid at least shows an intact plane, though who knows what could be wrong with it.
Mmmm.. Speculation!
JMJ Farms
Well-known member
greybeard said:
I wouldn't say it was headed straight down but it was pretty darn close to it. And like Nesikep said, it appeared to be intact. Former NTSB official kept talking repeatedly about fatigue. Wonder if he knows something? Reckon why the don't wire the black box and CVR I'm the back of the plane instead of the front? At the very least they could have one in both ends wires together. They may not find this one if it's 10-15 feet in the mud. But then again they might. Be simpler to put it in the back of plane. Or have one at both ends.
greybeard
Well-known member
Cockpit voice recorder has been found and it's on it's way to NTSB Washington DC
greybeard
Well-known member
Flight Data Recorder has also been recovered and it left today for Washington DC as well. It looked pretty beat up, but maybe just a lot of that gray Trinity Bay mud on it..
greybeard
Well-known member
new video surfaces.
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/New-video-shows-Atlas-Air-plane-crash-into-13668603.php#next
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=15&v=uHc6dtS-X1I
If you slow the youtube video down to 1/2 speed, it does appear an attempt was made at the last 1/2-1 second to pull up out of the dive.
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/New-video-shows-Atlas-Air-plane-crash-into-13668603.php#next
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=15&v=uHc6dtS-X1I
If you slow the youtube video down to 1/2 speed, it does appear an attempt was made at the last 1/2-1 second to pull up out of the dive.
greybeard
Well-known member
Last I read, said the plane impacted with yoke full forward and throttles at near 100% full..........
A 767 doesn't have the same software and electronics the 737Max has. The crashed 767 was much older, tho had fairly recently (within 5 years) been converted from a passenger plane to a freighter.
Air traffic control communications and radar data indicated the flight was normal from Miami to the Houston terminal area. About 12:30 pm the pilots contacted the Houston terminal radar approach control (TRACON) arrival controller and reported descending for runway 26L; the airplane was at 17,800 ft with a ground speed 320 knots.
At 12:34, the airplane was descending through 13,800 ft, and the controller advised of an area of light to heavy precipitation along the flight route and that they could expect vectors around the weather.
About 12:35, the flight was transferred to the Houston TRACON final controller, and the pilot reported they had received the Houston Automatic Terminal Information System weather broadcast. The controller told the pilots to expect vectors to runway 26L and asked if they wanted to go to the west or north of the weather.
Radar data indicated the airplane continued the descent through 12,000 ft with a ground speed of 290 knots, consistent with the arrival procedure. The pilots responded that they wanted to go to the west of the area of precipitation. The controller advised that to do so, they would need to descend to 3,000 ft expeditiously.
About 12:37, the controller instructed the pilots to turn to a heading of 270°. Radar data indicated the airplane turned, and the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) data indicated a selected heading of 270°. The airplane was descending through 8,500 ft at this time.
About 12:38, the controller informed the pilots that they would be past the area of weather in about 18 miles, that they could expect a turn to the north for a base leg to the approach to runway 26L, and that weather was clear west of the precipitation area. The pilots responded, "sounds good" and "ok." At this time, radar and ADS-B returns indicated the airplane levelled briefly at 6,200 ft and then began a slight climb to 6,300 ft.
Also, about this time, the FDR data indicated that some small vertical accelerations consistent with the airplane entering turbulence. Shortly after, when the airplane's indicated airspeed was steady about 230 knots, the engines increased to maximum thrust, and the airplane pitch increased to about 4° nose up and then rapidly pitched nose down to about 49° in response to column input. The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.
FDR, radar, and ADS-B data indicated that the airplane entered a rapid descent on a heading of 270°, reaching an airspeed of about 430 knots. A security camera video captured the airplane in a steep, generally wings-level attitude until impact with the swamp. FDR data indicated that the airplane gradually pitched up to about 20 degrees nose down during the descent.
(NTSB has changed the wording in that news release...probably because of complaints by company and family. It now reads:
The airplane then pitched nose down over the next 18 seconds to about 49° in response to nose-down elevator deflection. The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.
That info came from Flight Data Recorder and radar.
NTSB's Voice Data Recorder group has not released what they found on the recorders yet.
From everything I read, autopilot was still engaged, but can be over ridden by manual column and throttle lever inputs.
Max throttle input would have resulted in an unknown degree of nose up attitude due to increased lift, and it's possible the pilot pushed the yoke control column forward to compensate for the altitude climb, but why did the the throttle go to max?
A bird strike maybe, incapacitating the pilot. 6000' is right on the edge of what geese fly on our coast but it's not out of the question either. The flyway IS busy this time of year..
The plane would have had to flown over one or all of 3 wildlife refuges. Anahuac NWR is just a very few air miles East of crash site, McFaddin NWR about 50 air miles East of crash. Texas Point and Sabin NWR even farther East.
Texas Point and McFaddin refuges supply important feeding and resting habitat for migrating and wintering populations of waterfowl using the Central Flyway. Feeding flocks of snow geese have exceeded 70,000 birds at McFaddin.
A 767 doesn't have the same software and electronics the 737Max has. The crashed 767 was much older, tho had fairly recently (within 5 years) been converted from a passenger plane to a freighter.
Air traffic control communications and radar data indicated the flight was normal from Miami to the Houston terminal area. About 12:30 pm the pilots contacted the Houston terminal radar approach control (TRACON) arrival controller and reported descending for runway 26L; the airplane was at 17,800 ft with a ground speed 320 knots.
At 12:34, the airplane was descending through 13,800 ft, and the controller advised of an area of light to heavy precipitation along the flight route and that they could expect vectors around the weather.
About 12:35, the flight was transferred to the Houston TRACON final controller, and the pilot reported they had received the Houston Automatic Terminal Information System weather broadcast. The controller told the pilots to expect vectors to runway 26L and asked if they wanted to go to the west or north of the weather.
Radar data indicated the airplane continued the descent through 12,000 ft with a ground speed of 290 knots, consistent with the arrival procedure. The pilots responded that they wanted to go to the west of the area of precipitation. The controller advised that to do so, they would need to descend to 3,000 ft expeditiously.
About 12:37, the controller instructed the pilots to turn to a heading of 270°. Radar data indicated the airplane turned, and the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) data indicated a selected heading of 270°. The airplane was descending through 8,500 ft at this time.
About 12:38, the controller informed the pilots that they would be past the area of weather in about 18 miles, that they could expect a turn to the north for a base leg to the approach to runway 26L, and that weather was clear west of the precipitation area. The pilots responded, "sounds good" and "ok." At this time, radar and ADS-B returns indicated the airplane levelled briefly at 6,200 ft and then began a slight climb to 6,300 ft.
Also, about this time, the FDR data indicated that some small vertical accelerations consistent with the airplane entering turbulence. Shortly after, when the airplane's indicated airspeed was steady about 230 knots, the engines increased to maximum thrust, and the airplane pitch increased to about 4° nose up and then rapidly pitched nose down to about 49° in response to column input. The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.
FDR, radar, and ADS-B data indicated that the airplane entered a rapid descent on a heading of 270°, reaching an airspeed of about 430 knots. A security camera video captured the airplane in a steep, generally wings-level attitude until impact with the swamp. FDR data indicated that the airplane gradually pitched up to about 20 degrees nose down during the descent.
(NTSB has changed the wording in that news release...probably because of complaints by company and family. It now reads:
The airplane then pitched nose down over the next 18 seconds to about 49° in response to nose-down elevator deflection. The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.
That info came from Flight Data Recorder and radar.
NTSB's Voice Data Recorder group has not released what they found on the recorders yet.
From everything I read, autopilot was still engaged, but can be over ridden by manual column and throttle lever inputs.
Max throttle input would have resulted in an unknown degree of nose up attitude due to increased lift, and it's possible the pilot pushed the yoke control column forward to compensate for the altitude climb, but why did the the throttle go to max?
A bird strike maybe, incapacitating the pilot. 6000' is right on the edge of what geese fly on our coast but it's not out of the question either. The flyway IS busy this time of year..
The plane would have had to flown over one or all of 3 wildlife refuges. Anahuac NWR is just a very few air miles East of crash site, McFaddin NWR about 50 air miles East of crash. Texas Point and Sabin NWR even farther East.
Texas Point and McFaddin refuges supply important feeding and resting habitat for migrating and wintering populations of waterfowl using the Central Flyway. Feeding flocks of snow geese have exceeded 70,000 birds at McFaddin.
Nesikep
Well-known member
yeah, at this point it does sound like pilot error.. who knows if it's deliberate.. but it sounds like the plane did what was asked of it.
greybeard
Well-known member
Over on one of the aircraft boards, there is speculation that one of the pilots got out of his seat for some reason, and was thrown forward by turbulence and pushed the yoke forward, tho that still doesn't account for the throttles being full. I'm a member on that board, but haven't posted in several years as almost all of the discussions are about fixed wing and I only have experience in how helicopters work.
I know basically what makes fixed wing aircraft act and react but I'm not knowledgeable enough to add really anything to the FW discussions so I just lurk and learn. There are some really really sharp folks there...most are commercial pilots..some in that type. Lots of it is 'beyond my schoolin' / outside my paygrade.
If you want to follow along..this begins at page 25 but it loads all the pages..you just have to scroll up to the beginning:
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/618723-atlas-air-767-down-texas-25.html
I know basically what makes fixed wing aircraft act and react but I'm not knowledgeable enough to add really anything to the FW discussions so I just lurk and learn. There are some really really sharp folks there...most are commercial pilots..some in that type. Lots of it is 'beyond my schoolin' / outside my paygrade.
If you want to follow along..this begins at page 25 but it loads all the pages..you just have to scroll up to the beginning:
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/618723-atlas-air-767-down-texas-25.html
