Aerosucre Colombia Boeing 727 Crashing on Take Off (Video)

[ScudRunner-d95]

[url=aerosucre-columbia-boeing-727-crashing-take-off-video/]aerosucre-columbia-boeing-727-crashing-take-off-video/[/url]


Jesus H Christ

[Liquid Charlie]

Damn -- looks like someone fucked up with their gazintas - and likely ended up with a tail strike because of over rotation which would not add to performance -- that thing wasn't even close to flying -- maybe #2 fucked off into the wind and the crew had no knowledge, shit I watched Stirling take out the lights in Frob bay but they were at 217 thousand and mysteriously the 9000' (as advertised) runway turned into 8500' - they got away with it and continued on but it was damn close -- these guys were not so lucky and either they were way over loaded(ya think) or they didn't recognize a failure. They also got into an attitude that the aircraft was not going to accelerate as well. Total fuck up

[Colonel]

[quote]They also got into an attitude that the aircraft was not going to accelerate as well[/quote]

The important thing is that absolutely no one
should learn from the lessons of history:

Anyone here old enough to remember the Sacramento
Ice Cream Parlor in 1972?  The assholes at the CBC
were all over it:

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Sacr ... e_accident]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Sacr ... e_accident[/url]

[quote]eyewitnesses suggesting the nose was over-rotated[/quote]

History has nothing to teach you, if you're on Facebook.

Four bars want to go up, they just pull back.  Worked
well for AF447 and Colgan 3407.

Keep doing what works, guys - just don't try that on
a BD-5.

[Eric Janson]

Here's a successful take-off - not much difference!  :o :o

[vanNostrum]

Same airplane same airport few months ago,love the reverse before take off every inch of the 5900' runway counts





On the day of the accident it looks like some tail wind taking off 25

Metars:
SKPC 202300Z 01008KT 9999 FEW020 SCT200 30722 A////
SKPC 202200Z 01008KT 9999 FEW020 SCT200 31/22 A////
SKPC 202100Z 01012KT 9999 FEW023 32/21 A////
SKPC 202000Z 07008KT 9999 FEW023 32/22 A2963

And now repeat after me........it is Colombia not Columbia O:-)

[ScudRunner-d95]

my bad, was late and all jacked up on flu meds

[pdw]

[quote] looks like some tailwind runway 25[/quote]


Rwy is 240T and with a component 010 at 8kts is 130degrees right tailquartering; the temp is 32Celsius and humid. When taxiing into position there past the post, a "north" windsock appears perpendicular and indicates less there lee of the town when that wind-direction. What's the take-off restriction for reciprocal departure (into wind) over the populated area NE of 25 threshold?


(Reverse used to line up as turning radius of the loaded aircraft gets too wide for the turnaround pad .... when taking another look at the video). 

[Eric Janson]

Looks like a textbook case of the Normalization of Deviance.

The [b]normalization of deviance[/b] is defined as: “The gradual process through which unacceptable practice or standards become acceptable. As the deviant behavior is repeated without catastrophic results, it becomes the social norm for the organization.”

Tailwind or Engine issues finally caught up with them. The report should make for interesting reading.

[pdw]

That "organization" thing (ie [i]pressure ?)[/i] could be right on. What chance for that showing up in a report  ?

2nd Q: Is continuous engine monitoring by a crew not a standard thing ?

As for the other thing:
The elev is 236', not sure of the slope. 5900' rwy ? Noticed the base of some kind of trough passing through there at that hour .. bottomed out at 1005hPa (takeoff looks parallel to this trough-line and also towards the lowest pressure). It appears possible here that a DA-number that was slightly greater that expected (see koch chart) for various reasons helped exceed TODA .. ie in addition to any "engine" issue or ' "angle" at rotation' ...

[Eric Janson]

[quote author=pdw link=topic=5176.msg13270#msg13270 date=1482405390]

That "organization" thing (ie [i]pressure ?)[/i] could be on. What chance for that in a report coming from there ?

Is continuous engine monitoring by a crew not a standard thing ?


The elev is 236', not sure of the slope. 5900' rwy ? Noticed the base of some kind of trough passing through there at that hour .. bottomed out at 1005hPa (takeoff looks parallel to this trough-line and also towards the lowest pressure). It appears possible here that a DA-number that was slightly greater that expected (see koch chart) for various reasons helped exceed TODA .. ie in addition to any "engine" issue or ' "angle" at rotation' ...
[/quote]

The successful take-off video I posted shows a take-off that doesn't meet any Performance (ie: [b]legal[/b]) requirements. They only just got airborne.

As for Engine monitoring - that's increasingly a thing of the past. Most people I fly with assume that if the engine parameters are "in the green" everything is OK.

I've had a situation where everything was "in the green" but the engine was not developing the correct thrust. The really scary thing was that I was the only one reporting it out of 20+ crews.

To their credit the Airline grounded the aircraft (based solely on my reports) found the problem and fixed it.