nasty 747 breakup

"Boeing 747 splits in two on take off"

"The plane is very seriously damaged"
biggrin.gif
 
"Runway 220"
biggrin.gif
will get you every time.

The center fuel tank must have been empty, or there should have been a large campfire at the end of the runway.

This particular airframe entered service in 1980 for Air China. I'm not saying it wasn't well maintained. I'm just sayin'.

This is what happens Larry when you run off the end of the runway.
 
Air China can't have maintained it any worse than Kalitta currently does (did). I've got a buddy that works there and he has some scary stories about the pieces of crap they fly.
 
I haven't seen any details as to what the cause could have been. It sounds as though the plane never made it very high off the ground, if at all. If that's the case, you would look immediately to the cargo weight and the flap settings as the first possible causes.

The plane was owned by Air China for 19 years before going to Kalitta. Both have [ahem] reputations. But still . . . a 747 has a relatively limited number of cycles (i.e., takeoffs and landings) compared to a narrow body because its flights are usually of much longer duration. And as Northwest has shown, a narrowbody DC-9 can safely fly for 30-40 years, if maintained properly.
 
isnt the tail technically the safest place to be in an airline crash....as if there really is a safe place....
 
There's no "safest place," per se. It all depends on who the plane comes down. The tail is going to be a pretty bad place to be if the plane comes in with its nose up. Over the wings is the most structurally secure place and you have the closest access to an emergency exit, but if you crash on take-off and the center fuel tanks are full, well . . . .
 
when I heard that name I immediately thought of the drag racers, Connie and Scott.

I had no idea that there was a connection.

Wow.
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Back
Top