Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al
@OnDisasters • 75,113 subscribers
Mostly aviation safety, with an appearance on Mayday - ACI: deviations include auto racing, true crime, and whatever I feel like.
Shorts
![On This Day: The fall of the Valkyrie June 9 1966: The 2nd prototype of the North American XB-70 Valkyrie [62-02070] collides with an F-104 Starfighter over California (US). Of the three aboard both planes, only the XB-70´s pilot survives, with his co-pilot and the fighter pilot perishing. Incident occurred during a photoshoot while in close formation. Enquiry stated the F-104´s pilot was in a position where he was unable to safely distance from XB-70 (more details from the ASN Entry below) The XB-70 was a Mach 3 bomber developed in the 50s. Developments in missile technology made the concept obsolete, leading to its cancellation in 1961. At the time of the crash, the two prototypes that had been built were being used for research. Video is from an excerpt by YouTuber Mike Bell – Video´s name is “Wake Vortex and the XB-70 crash” More info on the report here “ On 8 June 1966, XB-70A No. 2 was in close formation with four other aircraft (an F-4 Phantom, an F-5, a T-38 Talon, and an F-104 Starfighter) for a photoshoot at the behest of General Electric, manufacturer of the engines of all five aircraft. The USAF summary report of the accident investigation stated that, given the position of the F-104 relative to the XB-70, the F-104 pilot would not have been able to see the XB-70's wing, except by uncomfortably looking back over his left shoulder. The report said that Walker, piloting the F-104, likely maintained his position by looking at the fuselage of the XB-70, forward of his position. The F-104 was estimated to be 70 ft (21 m) to the side of, and 10 ft (3 m) below, the fuselage of the XB-70. The report concluded that from that position, without appropriate sight cues, Walker was unable to properly perceive his motion relative to the Valkyrie, leading to his aircraft drifting into contact with the XB-70's wing”](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2063954442332873058/ext_tw_video_thumb/2063954420950310912/pu/img/8YfgZVxuW6bXPXnT.jpg)
Videos
John Denver crash: a lesson in cockpit ergonomics October 12, 1997: Singer John Denver is killed when his single-seat Rutan Long-EZ crashes off Monterey Bay (California). Inquiry stated the Pilot was likely distracted while switching a fuel selector handle, causing loss of control. Factors: aircraft´s assembly (it had been “homebuilt”, as detailed below) and training. Denver’s plane had an unconventional fuel selector configuration: the designer intended the handle to be between the pilot’s legs, but the builder (not Denver) installed it behind the pilot’s left shoulder. The enquiry demonstrated that, due to the fuel selector valve's positioning, switching fuel tanks required the pilot to turn his body 90 degrees to reach the valve. This created a tendency to extend one's right foot against the right rudder pedal to support oneself while turning in the seat, which caused the aircraft to yaw nose right and pitch upwards, as described by eyewitnesses before impact. As such, investigators theorized that Denver - who had bought the plane recently and had been practicing takeoffs and landings in a nearby airport - exhausted one of the fuel tanks. As such, when he had to switch tanks in flight, the inadequate installation of the handle led to a loss of control. The enquiry also noted that the fuel gauges were also set behind the seat, out of the pilot’s direct view. (Denver used a mirror to check them), which, like all essential controls and displays, should have been easily accessible. The NTSB also listed the pilot´s “inadequate transition training on the aircraft”, as a factor in the occurrence. Denver was 53 years old at the time of the accident. His career began in the late 60s and his albums have sold over 30 million copies. One of his most popular songs, “Take Me Home, Country Road”, was released in 1971 and still receives regular airplay. 🎥 MyTalkShowHeroes (YTT)
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al263,771 views • 5 days ago
Unlike a commercial airplane, the Shuttle did not have its engines on during reentry. Once it left orbit, it became a colossal glider. The pilots had only one chance to land: if they misjudged the aim or the speed, they couldn't "give it gas" and go around for another try. That's why the engineers affectionately called it "the flying brick" (the flying brick). When it reentered the atmosphere, it traveled at about 28,000 km/h (about 25 times the speed of sound). To slow down without disintegrating, it had to hit the air belly-first, using friction as a brake. In the last kilometers before the runway: • It descended at an angle 7 times steeper than that of a commercial airplane. • While a commercial airplane descends gently, the Shuttle came down "in a dive" to maintain enough kinetic energy and avoid stalling. • It touched down at about 350 km/h, a speed so high that it required a rear parachute to stop before the end of the runway. Under that white-and-black "skin" were thousands of ceramic tiles that protected the astronauts from temperatures exceeding 1,500°C. Without them, the aluminum of the structure would have melted like butter in a matter of seconds.
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al1,824,231 views • 2 months ago
Tragic reminder on the importance of pre-flight calculations (and crew rest) October 14 2004: MK Airlines Flight 1602, a cargo B-747, is set to depart from Halifax (Canada). The jet was loaded with 53 tons of lobster and fish and heading for Zaragoza (Spain) On take-off, the jet gains speed down R23, but as the captain attempted to rotate, the aircraft failed to climb, dragging its tail onto the tarmac. It briefly became airborne past the end of the runway, before smashing into an earthen berm supporting ILS antennas at over 155 knots, bursting into flames. None of the seven aboard survived. The investigation found that the crew used incorrect take-off speeds and thrust settings because they entered inaccurate performance data before departure. They mistakenly reused the take-off weight from their inbound flight to Halifax, where the cargo was significantly lighter. As such, the crew set their V-speed calculation for a weight of 530,000 pounds (240,000 kilograms) instead of the actual weight of 778,000 pounds (353,000 kilograms). This resulted in incorrect data for thrust and speed on take-off, which prevented the aircraft from lifting off. The accident report also noted the company´s “serious non-compliance with flight- and duty-time requirements”. At the time, neither regulations nor company policies established maximum duty periods for loadmasters and ground engineers, increasing the risk of fatigue-related errors. In addition, investigators noted that the crew was unfamiliar with the Boeing Laptop Tool, which calculates the required engine power based on cargo weight, runway length, and weather conditions. 🎥 Mentour Pilot "How was this even legal?" (video provides a very thorough analysis of the crew rest issues. It has 4 million views, which speaks a lot about how good it is)
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al59,756 views • 3 days ago
The accident was this one: Air France Flight 447, an A330, went down North East off Brazil. Aircraft disappeared on a transatlantic route, wreck was found 1300 miles northeast of Natal. Investigators pointed to a combination of frozen sensors and pilot actions/training resulting in loss of control. Seeing the accident reenactement, namely the scenes in the cockpit, was terrifying. Putting it very simply, the crew got confused by a simple issue and ended up entering into an irrecoverable scenario. (and as pointed by KC-10 Driver ✈️ 👨✈️ B-737 Wrangler its likely that this court case is to end on appeals. Its not the first lawsuit related to this occurrence)
Francisco Cunha3,438,747 views • 4 months ago
Emirates A380... let´s call it "viral" approach to Birmingham - 🎥 JSpiller (IG)
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al1,465,887 views • 2 months ago
![Vietnam B-787 incident in Munich Update - Video from clearly shows markings extending to the edge of the runway into the grass, more evidence of a runway excursion [I underline once again, this could have been much worse]](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2089086946597384249/amplify_video_thumb/2089085369761316864/img/Uxp5t0aw_nWymwGu.jpg)
One thing I learned with this account was that as time goes by, some accidents, no matter how tragic, simply fade from general memory. This is one of them, so surprised that a few days ago, someone uploaded this animation depicting the final moments of this avoidable crash
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al2,726,124 views • 8 months ago
![“Close to the greatest aviation disaster in history” July 7 2017 – Air Canada Flight 759 (an A320) is on approach to S. Francisco KSFO (US), when it lines up to land on a taxiway occupied by four other planes (combined, the five jets had over 1000 pax). The approaching jet went as low as 59 ft and missed one aircraft by only 14 ft before the crew aborted the maneuver. The four planes on the ground were three United Airlines jets (Flight 1118, B737 - and Flights 1 and 863 - both B-787) and Philippine Airlines 115 [A340]. The four jets were loaded with pax and fuel, and combined with Flight 759, the total was over 1000 passengers. Inquiry pointed to the main cause as confusion of the runway with the parallel taxiway, with contributing causes including the crew's failure to use the instrument landing system (ILS), as well as pilot fatigue. Other issues noted were related to SOP, CRM, training, and NOTAMs Animation is from Mercury News (also shown is the CCTV footage)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2074463921788870894/ext_tw_video_thumb/2074463874821095424/pu/img/Q1vLzrqBfW25Vwp5.jpg)
“Close to the greatest aviation disaster in history” July 7 2017 – Air Canada Flight 759 (an A320) is on approach to S. Francisco KSFO (US), when it lines up to land on a taxiway occupied by four other planes (combined, the five jets had over 1000 pax). The approaching jet went as low as 59 ft and missed one aircraft by only 14 ft before the crew aborted the maneuver. The four planes on the ground were three United Airlines jets (Flight 1118, B737 - and Flights 1 and 863 - both B-787) and Philippine Airlines 115 [A340]. The four jets were loaded with pax and fuel, and combined with Flight 759, the total was over 1000 passengers. Inquiry pointed to the main cause as confusion of the runway with the parallel taxiway, with contributing causes including the crew's failure to use the instrument landing system (ILS), as well as pilot fatigue. Other issues noted were related to SOP, CRM, training, and NOTAMs Animation is from Mercury News (also shown is the CCTV footage)
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al1,019,166 views • 3 months ago
Trivia- While most 747s could easily fly NY-London, the 747 that transported the Shuttle had much " smaller wings" due to the extra weight and aerodynamics for the piggybacker. While carrying the orbiter, the Jumbo had its range cut to 1,000 miles, with speed and ceiling limited to just Mach .6 and 15,000 feet. The limited range meant returning a shuttle to Florida took as long as three days.
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al184,579 views • 20 days ago
Mid-air collision yesterday in Pennsylvania involving a Police Bell 407 and a Cessna 150. The aircraft´s sole pilot was killed, while the two on the helicopter were injured. Incident occured as "helicopter was conducting a routine training exercise and had landed on runway 28. The Cessna was landing after the helicopter and struck it from the rear" (ASN) The helicopter (Registration N873ST) was operated by the Pennsylvania State Police; the Cessna (N23330) was privately owned. 📹Aviation Facts (IG)
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al553,853 views • 1 month ago
“While rushing to the car, I noticed small splotches of a peculiar gray substance marking a trail on the asphalt leading up to the driver. When I reached the car, I was shocked to see that Smiley's helmet was gone, along with the top of his skull. He had essentially been scalped by the debris fence. The material on the race track was most of his brain. His helmet, due to massive centrifugal force, was literally pulled from his head on impact ... I rode to the care center with the body. On the way in I performed a cursory examination and realized that nearly every bone in his body was shattered. He had a gaping wound in his side that looked as if he had been attacked by a large shark. I had never seen such trauma.” Description of CART medical director Steve Olvey on the accident that killed Gordon Smiley, which happened on this day in 1982. During qualifying, on the second warm-up lap, his March 81C Cosworth began to oversteer on turn 3, causing the car to slightly slide. When Smiley steered right to correct this, the front wheels gained grip suddenly, sending his car directly across the track and into the wall nose-first at nearly 200 mph (320 km/h). He was killed instantly. According to team mate Desiree Wilson, (…) “the biggest piece was a little ball of engine. There was nothing else except shattered bits, a bit of gearbox, a bit of a wheel, not even a seat. It was very ugly.”(…) This was Smiley´s third run at Indy after competing mostly on the US domestic series, but the driver obtained a record overseas that remains to this day. In 1979, Smiley raced in the British Formula One Championship (sometimes called the "Aurora Formula One Championship") that used mostly obsolete F1 cars. Smiley won a race, and to this day, this is the last F1 win by an American driver in a FIA-sanctioned event.
Francisco Cunha - ✈️ Aviation et al876,799 views • 3 months ago
