jourdan747
Topic Author
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2001 5:53 pm

Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:59 pm

Anybody have any info on the Southern Air accident in anchorage? Runway 7L still closed as of 2pm local.
 
Wingtips56
Posts: 739
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:26 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:01 pm

From the Associated Press:

ANCHORAGE, Alaska— A jumbo cargo jet blew out most of its tires while making an emergency landing in Anchorage.

The Anchorage Daily News says the jet was operating only on backup power when it landed early Tuesday at Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport.

Airport officials say the Southern Air Boeing 747 was headed from the Lower 48 to Asia when the plane's four main power generators quit working. Airport business manager Trudy Wassel says two backup generators kicked on, but they do not power a mechanism that keeps the jet's tires from skidding.

The flight crew was forced to use manual brakes that had no anti-skid, and 14 of the jet's 18 tires blew out. The plane landed at about 2 a.m. Nobody was injured.
Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines
 
Yukon880
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:26 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:18 pm

An incident perhaps?
Though "accident" is far more sensational. Thankfully, that is not the case here today!
Pratt & Whitney, In thrust we trust!
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7474
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:39 pm

I'm guessing the power bus had a fault, not the 4 generators at the same time.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
GentFromAlaska
Posts: 2666
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:21 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:51 pm

Here's the Anchorage Daily News article. http://www.adn.com/2012/09/11/262045...anchorage-runway-closed-after.html

ANC runway 7L remained closed through noon Tuesday.
Man can be taken from Alaska. Alaska can never be taken from the man.
 
AF1624
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:57 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:11 pm

Does that mean that automatically, when the Anti-skid is INOP, the pilots can't control braking pressure correctly and therefore necessarily blow the tires ?
Cheers
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:35 pm

Quoting Yukon880 (Reply 2):
An incident perhaps?
Though "accident" is far more sensational. Thankfully, that is not the case here today!

I don't think the OP was intending on being exact on the FAA definitions, but you are correct. Damage to landing gear, wheels, tires, and brakes are specifically excluded from the definition of "substantial damage" needed to qualify as an "accident" in FAA and NTSB terms unless there was serious injury or death. As you said, thankfully, none of that occurred here.

How often have all four main generators failed?
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
my235
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:21 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:36 pm

Quoting AF1624 (Reply 5):
the pilots can't control braking pressure correctly and therefore necessarily blow the tires ?

Maybe they just wanted to STOP. I was on the ramp at PDX a few weeks ago and a 767 came in with the spoilers inop. The guys just hammered on the brakes and they were smoking like crazy.
 
Okie
Posts: 3528
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:44 pm

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 6):
How often have all four main generators failed?

I suspect that it will be an issue of something over looked in the QRH or its execution.

It was not too long ago an AA 57 or 67 landed at ORD on battery power from an oversight.

Okie
 
jourdan747
Topic Author
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2001 5:53 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 6:42 pm

Runway 7L was closed in ANC for about 15 hours due to the Southern Air aircraft being stuck. Does the airline have to pay a fine if they close a runway for that long?
 
tb727
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 6:50 pm

Quoting okie (Reply 8):
I suspect that it will be an issue of something over looked in the QRH or its execution.

That's kinda what I was thinking when I saw that. You never know though but that's what I would bet on.
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5546
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:16 pm

Quoting jourdan747 (Reply 9):
Does the airline have to pay a fine if they close a runway for that long?

Such a requirement by the airport would be very bad for business. Airlines would avoid the airport.

I'm sure Southern lost as much, likely more, money with an inop aircraft than ANC did with a minor runway closure - with two other open runways.
 
citationjet
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:27 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 3):
I'm guessing the power bus had a fault, not the 4 generators at the same time.
Incident: Southern Air B742 near Anchorage on Sep 11th 2012, failure of all generators on board

A Southern Air Boeing 747-200 freighter, registration N783SA performing flight 9S-9783 (dep Sep 10th) from Miami,FL to Anchorage,AK (USA), had been enroute at FL400 and was in the initial descent towards Anchorage approximately 23 minutes prior to touch down when all four generators on board failed leaving the aircraft just with battery back up electric power. The loss of electricity also meant communication between aircraft and ATC was lost, other aircraft flying in the area however managed to relay transmissions from the aircraft to ATC and vice versa, ATC requested those relaying aircraft to inform the 742 crew they were cleared for a visual approach to runway 07L and cleared to land. About 10 minutes later, approximately 13 minutes prior to estimated touch down, direct communication was restored after the crew managed to get a APU running. The crew requested a long final to get the aircraft configured and opted for an ILS approach to runway 07L. The aircraft touched down safely, but blew all but two main and body gear tyres on the roll out due to the failure of the anti skid system and non-availability of thrust reversers and came to a stop disabled on the runway reporting blown tyres and hot brakes. Emergency services on stand by for the arrival immediately responded and cooled the brakes.
The runway was closed for about 12 hours as result until the 14 tyres were replaced, the aircraft was towed off the runway and the runway had been cleaned.
The NTSB opened an investigation into the occurrence reporting the aircraft suffered a complete electrical failure, the crew was flying on battery power only and nearly depleted the batteries. The NTSB is looking into what caused the failure of all four generators.
The airport reported the crew managed to get a backup generator online, but this did not power the anti-skid system.
The onward leg to Seoul (South Korea) was cancelled.


http://www.avherald.com/h?article=455c3629&opt=6400
Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
 
Okie
Posts: 3528
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 8:17 pm

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 1):
The flight crew was forced to use manual brakes that had no anti-skid, and 14 of the jet's 18 tires blew out

I know ANC is not without Mx but finding 14 wheel/tire assemblies in a short period of time would seem to be a major task along with having to change that many.
Makes you wonder if they had to fly some in or if they could replace a few at certain positions on the gear and tug the aircraft slowly off the runway until they got a full complement?

07L is 10,600ft x 150ft, sounds like in the excitement they were maybe a little over anxious on the brakes but I was not there. I would suspect with systems failing around you in the best solution is to get it on the ground and to a stop.

Okie
 
ssteve
Posts: 1124
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 8:43 pm

I wonder if a replacement plane picked up some tires on the way.
 
AA737-823
Posts: 4887
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 11:10 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:05 pm

Quoting okie (Reply 13):
I know ANC is not without Mx but finding 14 wheel/tire assemblies in a short period of time would seem to be a major task along with having to change that many.

More 747's pass through ANC each day than any other airport on this continent.
We have three major MX contract providers, and parts borrowing between international carriers is fairly common.
Finding tires should not be an issue.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 11):
I'm sure Southern lost as much, likely more, money with an inop aircraft than ANC did with a minor runway closure - with two other open runways.

You mean ONE other open runway; 7R/25L was already closed for work! At least, it was when I left work Saturday night.
 
QualityDr
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:57 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:55 pm

Simultaneous failure of four similar systems, designed to operate independently? Not statistically likely at all. Need to look at whatever is truly common to the four, be it something in the power system (bus? others?) or the operations and procedures.

What is the reasoning for four similar generators onboard? Do they normally power specific portions of the plane? Are some kept in idle readiness? And as point of clarification, are these the generators that are one-per-engine? I'm not involved in commercial aviation, so I'm not even sure where these generators are located...
All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure. -- Mark Twain
 
flightsimer
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Wed Sep 12, 2012 10:24 pm

Ok, here is a stupid question, but why would an electrical failure of the generators cause the plane to lose reverse thrust?

I sort of assumed those would be mechanical driven, not electrical.
Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
 
tb727
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:32 pm

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 17):
I sort of assumed those would be mechanical driven, not electrical.

Haha, no, they would never work if they were purely mechanical, also too heavy. Everything is at least electrically controlled, in times of reduced load, certain busses that are deemed non-essential(Check Essential!) are designed to be shed in order to keep the shiny side up until you get on the ground. Typically when you get down to batteries, on brand new batteries, you can maybe get 25 minutes out of them before you are in the dark.
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
AA737-823
Posts: 4887
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 11:10 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:00 pm

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 17):

Ok, here is a stupid question, but why would an electrical failure of the generators cause the plane to lose reverse thrust?

I sort of assumed those would be mechanical driven, not electrical.

The 747 classic reversers are actually pneumatic- driven. But there is an electric switch in the throttle quadrant that opens the air valve to the drive units upon selection of reverse thrust. Clearly, in this situation, the bus powering those switches wasn't live.

Quoting tb727 (Reply 18):
Typically when you get down to batteries, on brand new batteries, you can maybe get 25 minutes out of them before you are in the dark.

The federal regulation is 30 minutes, and the FAA doesn't give a damn whether your battery is brand new. 30 minutes or bust.
 
na
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:14 pm

I would recommend to correct the thread title. This is not about an accident. This is an incident.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:21 pm

Agree change the Title to read "Incident".....I read the title & thought "Damn"........
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
CX Flyboy
Posts: 6007
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 6:10 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:03 pm

Quoting qualitydr (Reply 16):
Simultaneous failure of four similar systems, designed to operate independently? Not statistically likely at all. Need to look at whatever is truly common to the four, be it something in the power system (bus? others?) or the operations and procedures.

What is the reasoning for four similar generators onboard? Do they normally power specific portions of the plane? Are some kept in idle readiness? And as point of clarification, are these the generators that are one-per-engine? I'm not involved in commercial aviation, so I'm not even sure where these generators are located...

We had a flight quite a few years ago that lost all four generators. Apparently, (and I stand to be corrected), on a 747 when an engine failure occurs (or a generator failure), the system take a millisecond and takes all 3 remaining generators offline then back online as the system reconfigures to the 3 generators powering the aircraft. We had an aircraft where the generators failed to return online as the controller which reconfigures the power supply also failed at that moment, leaving the battery the only source of power.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7474
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:31 pm

And yes we're talking about the generators in each engine.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
strandedinbgm
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:58 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:59 am

Interesting - Nothing listed on Av Herald.
It's 737s, 747s and 380s. Not 737's, 747's and 380's. Learn to use the apostrophe for crying out loud.
 
ANCsupercub
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 1:03 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:07 am

Quoting strandedinbgm (Reply 24):

Interesting - Nothing listed on Av Herald.
http://avherald.com/h?article=455c3629&opt=0
 
Yukon880
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:26 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:19 am

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 19):
The 747 classic reversers are actually pneumatic- driven. But there is an electric switch in the throttle quadrant that opens the air valve to the drive units upon selection of reverse thrust.

On the Classics, is this the case regardless of the engine maker?
Just curious.
Pratt & Whitney, In thrust we trust!
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 1945
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:19 pm

I have some doubts about the starting of the APU and using one (or even 2) generators as stated in the Aviation Herald article.
In most 747 classic aircraft (and also on the 744) it's prohibited to operate or start the APU in flight. This because the original APU air-scoop is removed for fuel saving reasons. In the early years (seventies) it was allowed to operate the APU in flight. (but If nothing is working you may try to start the APU !!!)

In the following article another more logical description is given of this incident :

" The aircraft was about 80 miles southeast of its destination, when it suffered a complete electrical failure. All four power generators stopped working leaving the pilots on battery power only. The pilots were able to restore power from two generators and continued to proceed to Anchorage. With its anti-skid system without power, the pilots were forced to use manual braking on landing runway 07L(eft) in darkness, causing 14 (of 18) tires to blew out. The 747 came to a stop on the runway but was unable to vacate. Runway 07L/25R remained closed for over 12hours until all tires were replaced and the aircraft was towed away."

See : http://www.jacdec.de/news/news.htm

If you have a failed Bus Power Control unit (BPCU)* and/or a short in one of the two tie buses (LH or RH) you can get this kind of failure.

- Initially you will experience a " Loss of all generators " scenario.

- Left is only battery power and standby power. (depending of the fault location also essential power.)

- Performing the relevant ECL procedure will bring back at least 2 engine generators, but depending of the fault(s) you can loose one or even two electrical busses.

- If the lost electrical bus powers (part of the) anti-skid system several or all tyres may deflate after landing.

This a normal training scenario , performed during our regular type-recurrent and/or proficiency checks, when I was active as a flight engineer on the 747-200/300.

BPCU failures and/or Bus tie problems may be the result of lightning strikes, FOD or fluid leakage in the Main Equipment Center (MEC).
The MEC is located underneath the main-deck floor (just fwd of the main 1 entry doors).

* Two BPCU's are available, one for each half of the electrical system.

[Edited 2012-09-14 05:46:24]
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
tb727
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: Southern Air Accident In Anchorage

Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:19 pm

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 19):
The federal regulation is 30 minutes, and the FAA doesn't give a damn whether your battery is brand new. 30 minutes or bust.

Well that's true but the only way you are gonna find out is run it down on standby in a real situation. In the sim, in my experience, if you aren't on the ground within 25, you are pretty much out of juice. But it's a battery, who knows, it could last 40 minutes, it could crap out at 15.
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!