this was probley due to a weight imbalance but i dont see any cargo loading machines. could very strong winds have caused this? if there were 300 mph winds at an airport, would the lift off the ground and start flying?
DaveT From Canada, joined Dec 2011, 1 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (12 years 10 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1263 times:
The cargo loader for the AC 74E is on the other side of the plane. You can just make out the wheels and structure between the lower airframe and ground. The cargo door is situated on the port side of the aircraft and we are seeing the starboard side.
DaveT From Canada, joined Dec 2011, 1 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (12 years 10 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1239 times:
It would appear according to the QF shot from Craig that the front gear has become "twisted" and explains the fierce smoke and rubber emitting from the friction.
Slawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 10 Reply 3, posted (12 years 10 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1226 times:
With the Air Canada 747, the thing is that it is very tail heavy, due to the fact that when the government of Canada ordered these planes for AC they had asked for a hell of a lot of extra fire protection, on the walls and floors of the cargo comartment...this means that the plane requires what is known as a pogo-stick to support the back end of the plane. Pax and cargo can not be deplaned until this is in place. in this case the ground crews did not know this, and when they unloaded the cargo from the from of the plane before the back, they caused the plane to drop on it's A**....There a big pictures of this in the Air Canada Cargo Building at YYZ
"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
Slawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 10 Reply 6, posted (12 years 10 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1204 times:
Actually Air Canada's Combies are unique in the world, although i didn't know that all combies needed the pogo, AC's 744's are the heaviest 744's flying, and there fore have a greatly reduced range when combared to other 744 combies....Thanks for the info about other combies...I didn't know that
"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
Jt8djet From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 212 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (12 years 10 months 5 days ago) and read 1161 times:
Please correct me if I am wrong, but if you click the tail # link on the Air Canada photo and look at the other photos in the series. It would appear the someone retracted the landing gear handle with hydraulic power on. It looks like the body gear is stowed. all I can see is the wing gear. The body gear retracts fwd & up, the wing gear retracts inboard & up. With the weight of the acft on the gear, the wing gear won't move if someone inadvertenly raised the gear handle. On the other hand the body gear will retract. Since the body gear is located aft of the wing gear, this would change the center of gravity on the acft, hence the tail goes down to the ground. That just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Jumbofan From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 17 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (12 years 10 months 5 days ago) and read 1151 times:
The air canada is truley a loading problem. the aircraft should of had a tailstand connected before loading or Unloading. The aircraft must have been about empty on fuel accounting for the aft cg problem. If we load combi's you need to have a tailstand or have enough fuel on to bring the cg foward. The nose gear not centered is probably caused by a defective centering cam in side the nose strut. something broke inside the strut or defective maint.
Boeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2264 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (12 years 10 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1061 times:
Ual757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 803 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (12 years 10 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1060 times:
sorry, JMC757, but refer to the 727, and also i believe a few others that were built tail-heavy. that's why the 727 had the skystairs in the rear. As fuelers, it was a standard check to make sure they were down.
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8418 posts, RR: 13 Reply 14, posted (12 years 10 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1055 times:
The 747's landing gear can articulate sideways to a limited degree. Most airplanes are crabbed into the wind on landing, then straightened out just before the flare. But the 747 is so big, it's hard to aline it with the runway at the last second, so the landing gear can literally turn into the wind. Pretty neat. The old Cessna 195 taildragger had a similiar system, but being a not so easy to land plane, many have been refitted with normal tires.
My favorite picture is of a Delta MD-11 sitting on it's tail after being misloaded. I also saw a Tu-154 resting on it's tail, and the caption said that a mechanic would enter the airplane and sloooowly crawl towards the front until it returned to the earth. That'd be a pretty cool thing to do.
Jeb From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (12 years 10 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1021 times:
OK -- we have established (I think) why the plane is on its tail. The next question should be: How the heck do they get the thing back on its wheels?????
Twa747100 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 600 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (12 years 10 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 996 times:
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1088 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2011, 1 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7708 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
