Warbird Information Exchange

I saw somewhere that the Taliban had claimed responsibility for the incident, though it seems fairly laughable unless a lucky shot cut a cargo pallet loose. Pardon my ignorance on how the pallets are secured on board.

I haven't done a % of MAC calculation in years...theoretically how much would have to shift to give a 747 an aft CG like that?

Either way, it's chilling video.


-Brandon

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."

[quote="Punisher05"]I saw somewhere that the Taliban had claimed responsibility for the incident, though it seems fairly laughable unless a lucky shot cut a cargo pallet loose. Pardon my ignorance on how the pallets are secured on board.

I haven't done a % of MAC calculation in years...theoretically how much would have to shift to give a 747 an aft CG like that?

Either way, it's chilling video.




According the references on line, MAC is 327.8 inches long on the wing chord line and the leading edge of the MAC envelope is 1258 inches aft of Datum for a total theoretical envelope can go back to sta. 1558.8, and Datum is, like all modern swept wing aircraft a specified number of inches (set by the manufacturer) ahead of the first place a bug can hit the radome, so every airplane can 'grow' without redoing Datum and every measurement is a positive number (work an old airliner like a DC-4 with negative and positive Datums for weight and balance you will have no hair left on your head), the 727, 737, and all models of DC-9/MD-80 had Datum @ 7 inches ahead of the radome (and the length overall differences between a little DC-9-10 and an MD-80 are significant).

Old saying, 'if a man is hunched over a desk with a calculator, a pencil, and sheets of paper, depending upon how much cussing he's doing he's either doing his taxes or working a weight and balance calculation'

MAC calculations are one of the last computations done and is derived by an abstract division formula distinct for each type, in the C.G. calculations formula in the aircraft manuals, based on Total weight, corrected arm, and total moment.

It's just slightly less aggravating than sanding wildcats butts in a dark phone booth until you've done a few.

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

Ex-NTSB where he was a mangement type, not an investigator. I have no idea what quantifiable facts re: "other accidents with the same type of aircraft" he's referring to. Prior to this only 2 B747-400s were destroyed, both by cargo fires - UPS and Asiana. To find a cargo shift you have to go back to 2008 and that was a series -200.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/dbl ... de&var=104%&cat=%1&sorteer=datekey&page=1

I'll wait until the current NTSB comments.

If that's your standard, then just wait for the official NTSB report before making any comment at all then?

This entire thread is an exercise in speculation, and I'd trust the judgment of a Managing Director of the NTSB with first hand professional experience over such events versus amateur speculation on a bulletin board any day of the week - if that's the sport we're playing here. The fact that you marginalize his perspectives based on your own prejudices, having just made prior speculations of your own strikes me as just a bit ironic. Just sayin'

How about those other authoritative sources? Has MSNBC had anything to offer on the subject yet?

_________________
Rob Mears
'Surviving Corsairs' Historian
robcmears@yahoo.com
http://www.robmears.com

Fair comment. I do speculate of course recognizing that it is simply speculation.

As to TV experts, I don't put much faith in what they say unless they have access to information the rest of us don't. Which is not the case I think with the Fox news guy.
I'm puzzled why you would take a (perhaps flippant) dig at a TV network personally, but then a lot of posts here baffle me.

I've never understood this prejudice. The major media outlets typically get their info from the same or equivalent sources.

If anything, media outlets/paparazzi dealing with "celebrities" probably have more unique and original information.

Glen Freys 'Dirty Laundry'

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

Inspector...I gotta tell you, as a Cajun I've spent a goodly part of my life eating gumbo...this is the first time it's come out my nose.

All that mess is the reason I inspect runways instead of take off on them.

Cheers--

Brandon

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."

Bon Temps Cher'

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

Uhm...who says they had to shoot it? I have a friend who worked for this company and has flown out of that same field. He said he believed he actually had flown on that aircraft....and his point was that they employ local people to help load the aircraft. While the US crew secures the load properly, who is to say a local didn't walk by afterwards and yank the buckles on the straps holding the cargo in place? He said most of the crews actually wait until the planes are closed up with only a flight crew and then somebody runs back and does a quick check that no monkey business has happened...

He also told me about the crash a full 24 hours before I heard about it on the news, and included that the pilot was heard to say the load had shifted in his final moments. We are all just waiting on the official report.....

Now that's an interesting bit of intel. Naturally all of my airport experience is at US Part 139 airports, where part of my job is processing criminal history checks for badges...so I wouldn't imagine allowing some rather "questionable" indviduals having access to the aircraft. Then again, in that part of the world IFF is hard to accomplish even at close quarters. In that way I'd guess you're right, someone could have gone back and undone some of the securing mechanisms...though whether they would expend a hard to replace asset on the airfield by offing a cargo plane instead of a passenger one is up for debate.

Either way, a good point that we probably hadn't considered.

Cheers-

-Brandon

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."

Update: http://www.avherald.com/h?article=46183bb4&opt=0

Load shift as suspected

..................but, what do I know?.......................................page 1, post #3

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

Holy crap. Yeah I'd guess 80 tons shifting would be enough to throw the CG off. Interesting that they found some of the pieces from the shift on the runway, according to the highlighted section of that article.

-Brandon

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."

If anything, media outlets/paparazzi dealing with "celebrities" probably have more unique and original information.[/quote]
Glen Freys 'Dirty Laundry'[/quote]


Don Henley, O/T, but I can't help it.....

Kevin