Blasphemystic From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 213 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 24193 times:
Legacy135 From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 1052 posts, RR: 29 Reply 1, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 24076 times:
If I remember right, it's just about six month ago in Central America (Nicaragua or Guatemala???). I keep thinking, it may come back to my mind who it was and where exactly. But as far as I remember, it wasn't an aborted take off, it was a landing on an wet runway. Sorry, not having more yet,
Le 7 juin 2006, alors que ce Boeing 747-200F cargo est en train de décoller de l'aéroport de Rionegro/Medellín-José María Córdova (Colombie), un de ses 4 moteurs tombe en panne. Le Jumbo, appartenant à Tradewinds International Airlines, interrompt immédiatement son décollage et freine. Mais le sol est mouillé à cause d'une pluie battante, et le B747 n'arrive pas à s'arrêter avant le bout de la piste. Il parcourt 150 mètres dans l'herbe, subissant d'importants dommages. Les 5 membres d'équipage sont indemnes. La scène a été filmée par les caméras de l'aéroport
Falcon flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1292 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 24065 times:
Blasphemystic From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 213 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 24028 times:
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7702 posts, RR: 55 Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 23975 times:
I think everyone was OK. My favourite bit is whoever is operating the camera turns to the 747, sees it's not going to stop, and pans ahead to where it's going to crash! I can't help but find it comical. Shame about the aircraft (and probably the crew's careers).
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
SkyHarborsHome From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 273 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 23938 times:
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15868 posts, RR: 66 Reply 8, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 23938 times:
Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 6): Shame about the aircraft (and probably the crew's careers).
One can only assume that distance calculations were incorrect for the wet runway. Otherwise an engine out on take-off should not typically lead to this kind of thing. Either you have enough space to stop or you are at/beyond V1 and need to press on.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Cessna057 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 439 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 23734 times:
Le 7 juin 2006, alors que ce Boeing 747-200F cargo est en train de décoller de l'aéroport de Rionegro/Medellín-José María Córdova (Colombie), un de ses 4 moteurs tombe en panne. Le Jumbo, appartenant à Tradewinds International Airlines, interrompt immédiatement son décollage et freine. Mais le sol est mouillé à cause d'une pluie battante, et le B747 n'arrive pas à s'arrêter avant le bout de la piste. Il parcourt 150 mètres dans l'herbe, subissant d'importants dommages. Les 5 membres d'équipage sont indemnes. La scène a été filmée par les caméras de l'aéroport
Translated: On June 7, 2006, this Boeing 747-200F cargo liner is taking off from the airport of Rionegro/Medellín-Jose María Córdova (Colombia), when one of its 4 engines breaks down. The Jumbo, belonging to International Tradewinds Airlines, stops it's t.o immediately and slows down, but the ground is wet because of rain, and the B747 is not able to stop before the end of the runway. It traverses 150 meters in grass, suffering significant damage. The 5 members of crew are unscathed. The scene was filmed by the cameras of the airport.
Hold it . . . Hold it . . . HOLD THE FREAKIN NOSE UP!!
EasternSon From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 660 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 23365 times:
Cessna057 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 439 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 23317 times:
Airfoilsguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 14927 times:
Quoting Cessna057 (Reply 11): Its funny (not a "haha" type funny) how everything is demolished except the nose section.
That is the new Boeing option for cargo planes. During a crash the nose section is ejected and comes to the ground slowly by parachute, saving the pilots but ruining the plane for future use.
Access-Air From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1939 posts, RR: 15 Reply 14, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 14618 times:
I think they dismantled the plane people......Did we see it explode into a million pieces when it stopped...NO, I think not.......get a grip.....
EasternSon From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 660 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 13177 times:
Funny (yes, haha funny) responses.
The plane was dismantled after the costs were deemed too high.
I believe they save the nose section of the plane because it is rich with rotable equipment, like avionics, radar and the like.
I don't think the plane overran the runway, came to a stop, shuddered and then fell apart, ala a bad cartoon. I think Boeing builds the 747 a little stronger than that.
"The only people for me are the mad ones...." Jack Kerouac
SAS A340 From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 692 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10870 times:
Quoting Airfoilsguy (Reply 15): Are you sure? I think it exploded and the only thing to survive was the cockpit section and a perfectly intact pickup truck.
RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10300 times:
Quoting Cessna057 (Reply 11): Its funny (not a "haha" type funny) how everything is demolished except the nose section.
Quoting EasternSon (Reply 16): I believe they save the nose section of the plane because it is rich with rotable equipment, like avionics, radar and the like.
More often than not, the cockpit section goes to a training school - we have a couple of ex leased 747-200 or -300s at Kemble airfield just up the road from me that are undergoing scrapping, and they removed the cockpit section of one of them in exactly that manner prior to cutting up the rest of the aircraft. Upon asking, the cockpit was due to be shipped to a training school, tho I am unsure as to what type (fire, MX etc).
Blasphemystic From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 213 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 9503 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 18): More often than not, the cockpit section goes to a training school
In what form are they used in training school? For what purpose? study the crash effects?
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good. -- Samuel Johnson
Airfoilsguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6525 times:
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 21): It sure would make a badass MS Flight Sim cockpit!
Build a hut around it, bolt a flat screen against each windscreen, and a whole bunch of wiring, and you would be the envy of just about everyone on this site.
Climb1 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 128 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5808 times:
I tell you what is shocking about that vid. When the jumbo is approaching the very end of the runway it's obviously still going quite fast (hence not stopping in time!). However once it came off the runway it seems like there is some SERIOUS deceleration! It managed to go from that speed (at the end of the runway) to ZERO quite quickly.
To say the pilots seatbelts were merely "tested" in this accident is a bit of an understatement!
In my eyes the Boeing 747 will ALWAYS be the queen of the skies!
Continental123 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 147 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5092 times:
This video and report on it has already been discussed.
25 Starlionblue: Yes and no. Given the size of the jet we may be a bit fooled by perspective. But I would agree it seemed to go at quite a clip. Having said that, eve
26 Falstaff: I have crashed cars intentionally before and even when your ready for it it still is a jolt! If you wonder why I was doing that it was in a couple of
27 Airfoilsguy: Thank you for that bit of knowledge. We will all rest easy now.
28 LH423: You're right that given the perspective and the size of the plane I wouldn't even hazard a guess at how fast he was going but even still, to stop in
30 SANFan: Doncha think it possible that fire may have been a problem which resulted in the final condition of the plane (especially if there were dried flowers
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 213 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 1052 posts, 
From Germany, joined Sep 2006, 448 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7702 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15868 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8492 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 692 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
