Yqfca From Canada, joined Jun 2001, 156 posts, RR: 0 Posted (14 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7088 times:
I find that the American Airlines A300 crash is very similar to the crash of the BOAC 707 at Mt. Fuji in Japan on March 5, 1966. In this accident al four engines and the tailfin separated from the aircraft due to a sideways burst of turbulence. Eventually the forward fuselage separated from the main fuselage caused by the excessive airspeed of the aircraft falling from above 10.000 feet. The A300 was not high enough to reach such speeds but otherwise the circumstances are identical. The only difference is the turbulence of the 707 was caused by the huge volcano in Japan and the A300 was caused by wake turbulence from the Japan Airlines 747.
Does anyone know an extensive report on the Internet about the BOAC 707 incident.
I tried "Aviation Safety Web pages" and "AirDisaster.com" but they only talk about the 707 "coming apart". The NTSB website does not go back in time that far.
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6981 times:
NTSB would have only had a minor, advisory role in the investigation, since it was a British airline and the crash was in Japan.
Try the links below. The first two are crash accounts that may have more info, although not the "official" reports. The third link is to the British AAIB, and while I couldn't find any report on their site (they too would have been in an advisory role), emailing them might bring about a response/lead for you. The fourth link is for ICAO, who may have a report. The last link is for the AAIC, essentially, Japan's NTSB. Sorry, but the site's in Japanese, but perhaps you know someone who knows the language, or maybe a translation website can be used to see if they have a report online.
Yqfca From Canada, joined Jun 2001, 156 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (14 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6954 times:
Pacificflyer is correct, I did read it in Air Disaster Volume 1 and borrowed that book few years ago.
OPNLguy...., the "Airsafetyonline" website did have the report I was looking for. Thank you!
Isn't it similair to the A300 crash!
Smolt From Japan, joined Nov 1999, 286 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6887 times:
The crash of BOAC 707 over Mt Fuji is the more impressive to me because;
1)reportedly it was the result of captain's effort to please his passengers, who were
the first time and probably the last time visitor to my country by showing the representative landscape of Japanese highest symbolic mountain.
2)the captain could cancel IFR climb and maintain VMC to abeam Mt Fuji then back IFR route to Honkong, which is never imaginable Todays Japan's sky where enroute traffic
is some ten times more dense than at that time.; captain could fly freely at his prefered altitude and routes
3)accident contiuned; on takeoff roll at HANEDA the flight 911 saw the complete burn and broken fuselage of CP Air DC8 which had failed landing previous foggy night. Eventually a news reporter
taken photo on background of the CP air body.
The very long details over hundred pages is availbale here in Japan but sorry to say it is in Japanese and probably no translation available. Name of the book is
"MAHHA NO SINNJITSU" (or MACH's truth) the auhor is Kunio Yanagida.
Just a little more description to add from that book;
- another captain Dobson performed the same pleasing flight on the same flight 2 weeks prior to this misery; this was proven by one photo with close Mt fuji showing her volcano mouth taken by one
- Japaense Air force's pilots team flying F86 encountered the same kind of severe screwing turbulance at close spot some years prior. they hit their heads strongly to the wind sield and one of them had to evacuate due to engine failure.
...remedy to me from this misery are;
-there was no hollible intention but just crew's innocense
-passengers must have enjoyed the flight
and felt no fear (like that felt byb victims of misery these months) until short to the moment
-the souls of passenger can sleep in this
most graceful mountain.
Aerialpingpong From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 6856 times:
I thought the same thing for a little bit. For personal reasons I have studied the BOAC accident (Flt 911) quite extensively. I have a copy of the official CAA report at home. The sideways 'gust' that hit the airplane had an acceleration of over 7.5 Gs which was plenty of 'oompf' to remove the vertical stabilizer and all four engines.
I don't know what the ultimate loadfactor is on the vertical fin/engines of an A300 (or any passenger plane for that matter), my guess would be around 4.5 Gs or so. To produce a sideways gust of turbulence of such strength would take quite a bit of doing. What brought down BOAC911 was a severe gust of 'mountain wave'. Now a 747 is nowhere near the size of Mt Fuji, though I must admit, if you've ever seen a dust cloud reveal the 'wake' of one after takeoff I can assure you it's bloody impressive!!
If the tail and engine pylon structure were somehow weakened due to previous structural damage, bad maintenance or some other 'unknown' factor, I would imagine that in theory it's possible for a nasty wake to take it off, but it seems highly unlikely that a jet would take off with its tail structure weakened plus! both engine pylons????, unless that poor airbus was in similar condition to the old VW Rabbit I had when I graduated from college?? I know aircraft maintenance these days is somewhat of an issue, but that would almost be laughable.
What was the airspeed at impact?? What was the other damage to the empennage as a direct result of the fin breaking off?? Could this damage have propagated to the rear pressure bulkhead?? What was the cabin pressurization at the moment of the accident. Where do the flight control hydraulics / control cables come together in the A300?? Tail??? If these were damaged by the failure, and total control of the aircraft was lost, vibrations during overspeed could have taken off the engines???? Pure speculation I admit, but something to think about??
Hey Smolt!! I wasn't aware of the existance of a book on the subject of BOAC 911. Have you been to the crash site? Is there some kind of a memorial? I'd be particularly interested in finding out if there exists a complete passenger + crew list for the flight?? If you know anything more I'd appreciate it enormously if you could drop me an email (email@example.com)
Smolt From Japan, joined Nov 1999, 286 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6786 times:
please allow me to correct the last mo post;
the name of the book is "Mahha no Kyofu"
(or "the fear of Mach").
And broken vertical fin reminded me of the crash of JAL B747SR in 1985,when cabin pressurized air blew out the fin through the hole of defectively fixed backward wall in the cabin. But in AA A300 the case, cabin pressure is not likely to be a factor considering the altitude at which the accident occur.( soon after take off)...
Hi. aerialpingpong, this time I have found by yahoo Japan that there is a memorial of the BOAC 911 crash in Gotemba at the site of volunteer group
activate to clean up Mt Fuji once a year
(http://www.gotemba-rc.gr.jp/zigyou/fuji-clean/fuji-clean.html). and I will email you for further detail.
Fanofjets From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2136 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (14 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6759 times:
Thank you all for your interesting and insightful replies. Thank you, smolt, for the Web site. Mt. Fuji is very beautiful; may the crew and passengers of the doomed BOAC flight rest in peace.
The 707 fin has been the subject of investigation at least twice. The first was a control problem: in the 1960s, Boeing added a ventral fin to some 707s to enhance directional stability. (Was that a result of the Mt. Fuji crash?) The second was structural: the cause of a 707 crash in Africa during the 1970s was found to be cracks in the skeleton where the tail meets the fuselage; an immediate inspection and a retrofit was ordered. (Sorry, I do not recall the details of the crash.)
The aeroplane has unveiled for us the true face of the earth. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery