Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Talk about flying in real life
KL-666
Posts: 1610
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:42 am

Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby KL-666 » Wed Dec 21, 2016 6:53 pm

On this page there is astonishing close video of that plane going through the airport fences. If it should teach you one thing, then it is: never ever stand inline of the runway watching planes take off.

http://avherald.com/h?article=4a25fb25&opt=0

It is a wonder that this plane became airborne at all. But hitting 2 fences and probably some trees, must have severed their control lines/hydraulics, unfortunately resulting in the crash.

There is also footage of their normal operation, which looks abnormal low passing the fence to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Syl3tCqKbSs&feature=youtu.be
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyEGj1rH1r0&app=desktop

This makes me think they have a habit of overloading the planes. The fact that there are many people filming these take offs, suggests that they know that they are spectacular, and this adds to the suspicion of regularly overloaded planes.

Kind regards, Vincent

User avatar
IAHM-COL
Posts: 6413
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:43 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Contact:

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby IAHM-COL » Wed Dec 21, 2016 8:04 pm

That's toooooo close! :S
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc

R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?

User avatar
jwocky
Site Admin
Posts: 1833
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby jwocky » Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:24 pm

I saw the two with "normal operation" first. Did you see? Flaps full out, full throttle and you barely get them to climb. And they seemed quite slow to me, barely above some minimum VR, not full V! as it looks?
The 722 didn't even make it to V1, she barely got the nose up, the main gear stuck glued on the runway. The runway is 5900feet long only, no extra space, the surface is not so good maintained asphalt, I guess, there is not even a load table for that. So, loaded by the valid tables, the runway is 300ft short and has a higher friction, I guess, the speed at the end of the runway is barely enough, in most cases), but not a feet to spare and then comes the fence and the trees and it looks to me as if the ground goes a bit up short after the fence, where the trees were before the 722 ran into them.
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!

User avatar
IAHM-COL
Posts: 6413
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:43 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Contact:

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

"Normal operation"

I can't but agree with using quotes on that definition.
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc

R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?

User avatar
jwocky
Site Admin
Posts: 1833
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby jwocky » Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:48 pm

Actually, I thin, if we ever really get around to design the Willy, the prize for outstanding craziness, we should send one to the guys running that airport.
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!

KL-666
Posts: 1610
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:42 am

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby KL-666 » Thu Dec 22, 2016 8:27 pm

In the "normal" operations films you can watch the aircraft on the back. There you see them not climbing initially. So i guess their standard procedure must be something like: Run as far as you can down the runway, then rotate early speed wise (maybe V1) and hop on the ground effect over the fence. Speed up further on the ground effect.

Normally you will never see an aircraft running till the end of the runway. From V1 it must still be able to stop. This means lift off is at maximum around 85% of the runway.

@jwocky
I think an airline is responsible for their operation, not the airport.

Kind regards, Vincent

User avatar
jwocky
Site Admin
Posts: 1833
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby jwocky » Thu Dec 22, 2016 11:41 pm

Vincent, they are so qualified for a Willy in the category "homicidal operations"!
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!

HJ1an
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 1:09 am
Contact:

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby HJ1an » Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:04 am

Ouch. Sad to say, but based on their track record, they got what's coming.

Something as simple as a burp in the wind direction is enough to prolong their take off by a difference between a fence..

KL-666
Posts: 1610
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:42 am

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby KL-666 » Sat Dec 24, 2016 10:48 am

The reason for the uncontrollable right turn, must be that their right inboard flap was ripped off. I suppose they turned back for a landing straight in, but when they configured flaps for landing the asymmetry became too big to control.

Image

Kind regards, Vincent

User avatar
jwocky
Site Admin
Posts: 1833
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Crash: Aerosucre B722 at Puerto Carreno

Postby jwocky » Sat Dec 24, 2016 3:25 pm

That, or one engine already spinning down or an aileron unusable. It doesn't matter too much, there are a lot of things that react iffy to being damaged or ripped off or bent or twisted and will refuse to work and if it hits only one side, you have such spin effects.

I was working on the Ruslan and she has two different engine sets (the original Ivchenkos with roughly 52k lbs thrust max and the discussed export version with GP7000s with roughly 80k lbs thrust). So, in my infinitively wisdom (not really), I decided to implement both engine sets chosable by menu in the same plane, but of course, I messed up and had for two hours suddenly, without knowing it, a configuration like
eng1: 52k
eng2: 52k
eng3: 80k
eng4: 52k
Guess, what, not even the parking brake could stop her from spinning around. Because while 28k more for a plane this size and weight doesn't feel actually that much when taking-off, it is, due to the long leverage on wings, totally able to spin her around.
For a 727, given the size and the weight in relation to wing length, there is really not so much force needed to spin her left or right out of whack.
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!


Return to “Real life flying”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests