"Too low. Gear."
- Thread starter WestIndian425
- Start date
The downsizing had started by 2006, and the Brit Club was the place to be. We went to the MM Club after fishing to cook our fish, and the O Club on Sundays for brunch. Other than that, they were ghost towns. Bottomless glasses of Mimosas made for many fun Sunday.
132 was a re-position flight from Guam, and only had the pilots on board, me thinks. 14 hour flight, hopped up on no-gos, had to hold for 30 or 45 mins....
Again, recollection may be poor.
Had the full crew of 4 onboard at the time, and was lead jet of a two-ship of B-1s coming in to replace the B-52 unit there that was rotating back to Barksdale. Was holding in the low-alt holding pattern for the approach to RW 31 due to a B-52 with a ground emergency (brake fire)being handled in the RW31 arming area after landing on RW13, but not fully clearing the runway.
I remember the brake fire, as the crash crew was already on the field. I remember it being RY31 as they moved from left to right (perspective to the tower). Did we land the 2nd B1 on the taxiway, or did he divert? Interesting how events change in one's mind after a period of time....
It was both the runway and the taxiway prior to the current runway being built, and was used for all ops until the B1 was removed from the runway. I do remember it shut down all of our contractor resupply/rotator flights.... fresh produce, Ben & Jerry's, and Captain Morgan became scarce.
Pilotforhire587
Lycra Man
MD10 and DC10- 10's have no center gear. MD-10 and Dc10-30's all do, as do the MD-11's
A Life Aloft
Well-Known Member
MikeD Never knew of the B-1 incident before. Bejebus! Couple of questions: Was the fire crew still on scene because of the previous incident with the B-52? Did the crew bail out the top during the fire? Yikes! (I am assuming some sort of fire followed this event) What was the official conclusion of why the landing gear was not lowered? Fatigue, task saturation, distraction from the other occurring incident on the ground, etc.,? Had they started their landing sequence and then had to go around and hold due to the other incident. I've heard of accidents because of a break of sequence before and someone simply forgets an action to be made. How seasoned were the pilots and on this type? How badly was the runway damaged? Were any of the crew injured? Who was landing...the pilot or co-pilot? Is there an audible warning that the gear is not lowered on this aircraft or just visual lights? Must have been just millions and millions worth of damage. It took a year to get her up again? That is marvelous though. Where is she flying now? I can't remember but are the only two bases for these birds at Edwards (where I have seen them many times) and Texas in the US? Sorry for the jumble of questions, just woke up. lol
Can't answer some of the detailed questions since they're still considered privileged information. But for the general ones, the plane is still flying, based at Dyess AFB, TX. The two bases with B-1s are there and Ellsworth AFB, SD. B-1s used to be at Grand Forks AFB, ND as well as Mountain Home AFB, ID. A few are at Edwards AFB for test purposes.
The B-1 has a warning horn like any other aircraft as well as a gear warning system, but nothing that's tied to the Radar Altimeter like some aircraft have. Additionally, all normal gear indications are only in the front cockpit for the two pilots. With the two Navigators in the back, their checklist ends at the brief of the instrument approach, they have no formal responsibility or normal method to check aircraft configuration.
Runway had some scrapes and gouges, but nothing that wasn't repairable. Co-pilot was doing the landing at the time. With regards to the B-52, the crash trucks were nearly out of foam/water at the time that the B-1 crashed, so two small airfield ramp fire trucks....essentially pickup trucks with a skid mounted very small dry chemical and foam tank, responded from the B-52 fire, over to the B-1 at the far other end of the runway (B-52 had landed opposite direction), and began firefighting with what little fire suppression equipment they had and also began rescue operations, and succeeded in putting the fire out (they responded to the B-52, but had not been used at it's incident luckily. all firefighting there had been done by the two large CFR trucks). This is a VERY big feat for one major reason: Nearly all airport fire departments train for operating together while fighting one major aircraft accident that has occurred. They don't train for split operations for battling two or more major aircraft accidents occuring in two geographically separate areas at the same time at the same airport. So this was a signifiant feat that these guys accomplished. The last major accident where I can remember off the top of my head, airport ARFF having to fight two separated major aircraft incidents was the ground collision of NW 299 and NW 1482 in 1990 at Detroit. But those were related....as they collided with one another even though they ended up far apart from one another on the ground. I can't remember any major accidents at an airport of aircraft this size, where they crashed or had a major emergency unrelated to one another occurring at the same time. So well done by the Diego Garcia CFR crews.
Tenerife was more or less the same accident scene, just covering a large amount of ground. IE- the same incident commander has the span of control to be able to oversee and cover both accidents...they're essentially in the same area. Plus, those two were related....one plane crashed into the other.
Detroit was related, but separate scenes due to fog, as well as the fact that the 727 had aborted and rolled out, after slicing the DC-9 in half when it took its top off.
In this case, it was two completely unrelated major incidents/accidents happening at the same time, as opposite ends of the airfield. Odds of that are hard to predict.
Detroit was related, but separate scenes due to fog, as well as the fact that the 727 had aborted and rolled out, after slicing the DC-9 in half when it took its top off.
In this case, it was two completely unrelated major incidents/accidents happening at the same time, as opposite ends of the airfield. Odds of that are hard to predict.
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
I remember watching an American 763 do this back in 2010. At first in the hard rain we thought the nosewheel light was just out, but then we watched the gear swing out and lock into place right right over our heads, and we were inside the airport fence haha. They landed anyway.
HVYMETALDRVR
Well-Known Member
Fill out that ASAP...
N519AT
Ahh! This is how I change this!
I'm almost certain that they'll get their carpet dance in the CP's office. I mean, the guy on youtube linked the flightaware flight with the flight number, date, time, etc. The fact that this is going around like Paris Hilton's latest sex tape doesn't help things either. It's only a matter of time before FedEx management sees this. I sure hope those guys filled out their ASAPs.
The annoying reality is that everyone has a camera nowadays and with the internet these things spread like wildfire. A little while back I was really into these things, airplane youtube videos, airliners.net pictures, liveatc clips, aviation photography, I loved it all. I was a legit internet aviation enthusiast. Now that I'm doing this for a living, those same things that I enjoyed so much could also very qucikly take away my livelihood and the ability for me to make a living.
What these people with cameras don't understand is that their latest "awesome" video showing something out of the ordinary could very well lead to someone losing their job. I wish people would think about that before posting stuff like this.
I just feel bad for these guys that they got caught at the wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong thing. Now, was what they did wrong? Yeah, probably. But what the video doesn't explain is there's a whole lot more to the story and there are probably other circumstances.
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
I know what you mean, but everyone has to accept that this is the way things are now. I post a lot of shots online, and when you spend enough time over the years taking pictures/videos of airplanes at major airports, you're bound to get stuff like the video that started this thread. Fortunately for the crews involved, I refrain uploading said photos to databases since I personally have had my share of moments I wouldn't want on film, and we're all on the same team. But the majority of spotters aren't pilots. Don't think for one second that 99% of the big name photographers on the web would think twice about upload a video/photo of something that is going to flush your flying career down the toilet if it means hundreds of thousands of hits on the web. The audience used to be much smaller, but now masses of people stumble upon and share photos from Jetphotos and Airliners or videos from YouTube that they find interesting. Us GA guys have to really screw up to get this kind of attention, but the big jet drivers need to know that if you're flying an airliner, people are watching and/or recording all the time. If you fly accordingly, or fill out an ASAP if you really screw the pooch, the odds will probably work in your favor.
Planespotting has been huge in Japan for decades, most airports there still have observation decks. Yet the crews manage to stay under the viral video radar for the most part, minus the ANA 767 that landed so hard it was written off.
N519AT
Ahh! This is how I change this!
Oh no, I absolutely agree. I mean, I own an iphone with a camera.
I guess my post was just a general venting about the internet and how quickly stuff like this gets around. The problem is that it's the internet and for the most part everyone has something to prove and everyone wants there 2.5 milliseconds of fame.I wouldn't be as torqued off about this video had the guy not posted the flightaware track from that exact flight. He could have very easily just said "I was at O'hare a few weeks back and saw this happen...weird and kind of cool, huh?" But since he did post the flightaware track, someone else posts the liveatc audio and it just keeps on going. I'm surprised the crew's pictures (facebook) along with their name, addresses, type ratings, and medical info (FAA website) hasn't been posted yet.
Seeing these go down has taught me never to underestimate curious people with spare time and internet access.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
MikeD was a board member on the Safety Investigation Board, which is a guarded process that releases internal-use-only, privileged information for the USAF. I have to believe that he is being extremely careful about what he says and how he says it. He is susceptible to prosecution if he intentionally or inadvertently releases information that is privileged.
The link to the executive summary of the AIB, which is the releasable report:
http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ExecSum2006/B-1_8May06.pdf
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
Would a curious party be able to get the full report under FOIA?
seagull
Well-Known Member
Getting recorded is a fact of life. The truth is that, if you are doing everything you are supposed to, recording is much more likely to SAVE you than the opposite, as you have proof you did not do something. Considering how poor people are at making witnesses, and all of the cognitive biases, I am much more worried about being accused (and if a crime, even convicted) of something I did not do than being caught doing something I shouldn't be doing.