Jury awards millions to pilots flying improperly packed airplane with USMC MRAPs

USMC Life ^ | July 13, 2017

[KeyLargo]

Jury awards millions to pilots flying improperly packed airplane with USMC MRAPs

By USMC Life| July 13th, 2017|Featured, News|11 Comments

A Cook County jury has returned a verdict in favor of the families of three of seven crew members who perished in the dramatic crash of a National Airlines 747 cargo airplane in Bagram, Afghanistan on April 29, 2013. The crash itself was captured on a dashcam video that went viral over the internet shortly after the accident occurred.

[KeyLargo]

Video at link.

[Tijeras_Slim]

Heck of a load shift.

[knarf]

looks like everything went aft ... then ....

[VTenigma]

looks like everything went aft ... then ....

It was a brick.

[editor-surveyor]

.
If the tail drops too far the plane simply stalls, and falls out of the sky.
.

[Strac6]

The Fatal 4 of Flying:

1, Stall
2, Spin
3, Crash
4, Burn

[KeyLargo]

AVIATION PING

[maggief]

Direct link to video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sUWC2jfjqI

[KeyLargo]

The lawsuits alleged the plane was overburdened, as the.” plane could, at most, safely transport just one 12-ton vehicle. Further, the lawsuits alleged the restraints used to keep the vehicles in place were “insufficient” and “in poor condition.”

Shortly after takeoff, restraints failed, sending an armored vehicle through the plane’s tail, damaging the plan badly enough to make it unflyable.

http://cookcountyrecord.com/stories/511141799-cook-co-jury-orders-115m-to-families-of-victims-of-2013-afghanistan-military-cargo-plane-crash

[KeyLargo]

The National Transportation Safety Board found that a National Airlines Boeing 747 freighter crashed on takeoff from Bagram Airbase, Afghanistan, because the five large military vehicles it was carrying were inadequately restrained. This led to at least one vehicle moving rearward, crippling key hydraulic systems and damaging the horizontal stabilizer components, which rendered the airplane uncontrollable. All seven crewmembers were killed in the April 29, 2013 crash. An MRAP vehicle being loaded on the accident flight 29 April 2013 (Image Credit: USAF)

-------------------------------------------------

There were five MRAPs loaded on the accident airplane: two 12-ton M-ATVs and three 18 ton Cougars.

The evidence showed there were an insufficient number of restraints or tie down points to restrain these vehicles, and the most that could be safely transported on the plane was one M-ATV and no Cougars.

Plaintiffs introduced evidence that the straps used to restrain the cargo were in poor condition, with some past their expiration dates, and that an insufficient number of straps were used to restrain the vehicles.

National Air Cargo Middle East provided for use of 24 straps with the M-ATVs and 26 straps for the Cougars. Boeing determined that a minimum of 60 straps were needed just for the smaller M-ATVs.

Upon takeoff from the intermediate stopover in Bagram, the restraining devices for one or more of the MRAPs failed, and the rear-most MRAP went through the aft bulkhead in the tail of the airplane, damaging flight control systems and hydraulics to the extent that the airplane became unrecoverable

https://americansecuritytoday.com/jury-awards-115-75m-families-flight-crew-killed-afghanistan/

[PAR35]

sending an armored vehicle through the plane’s tail,

Watch the video again. Nothing comes out through the tail, and the tail is intact on impact.

The plane stalled. Could be pilot error, mechanical malfunction, or load shift, but nothing popped out the back end.

[arthurus]

It didn’t say really that went through the tail as in out the back end of the airplane. I understood it to be saying that it went through an interior bulkhead and disabled the hydraulics. The wording was newspaperese and not very precise.

[shanover]

That video was pure horror!

It resembles my worst nightmare as a kid almost frame by frame.

[Gay State Conservative]

The plane stalled. Could be pilot error, mechanical malfunction, or load shift, but nothing popped out the back end.

IIRC the 747 is designed with some sort of barrier or "bulkhead" at the rear of the plane near,but not right at,the "tail".

It's my understanding that when that "bulkhead" is compromised in any way you've got a big problem.

[PAR35]

“sending an armored vehicle through the plane’s tail”

Sounds clear enough to me. And if that is what the jury fell for, the verdict needs to be reversed.

[Orbiter]

Load shift moved the aircraft’s center of gravity (CG) aft. Impossible at that point to lower the nose (more accurately, get more wind over the the wings). Stall. Spin. End. I once experienced a full aft track ratcheting of my (pilot) seat upon rotation. Had no forward control authority due to pitch angle/aft CG/gravity preventing moving the seat forward. Airspeed was bleeding off closer to stall. What did I do?

[TexasGator]

I don’t think the jury read that as it was written after the jury was dismissed.

[Moonman62]

Load shift moved the aircraft’s center of gravity (CG) aft. Impossible at that point to lower the nose (more accurately, get more wind over the the wings).

...

IIRC, the vehicles severed the control hydraulics at the rear of the plane, otherwise they could have flown out of it.

[Rebelbase]

I recall one of the threads about the accident when it happened a FReeper speculated load shift as the cause.

[rlmorel]

"...There were five MRAPs loaded on the accident airplane: two 12-ton M-ATVs and three 18 ton Cougars. The evidence showed there were an insufficient number of restraints or tie down points to restrain these vehicles, and the most that could be safely transported on the plane was one M-ATV and no Cougars..."

I feel bad for the crew and their loved ones, but something is wrong here. Am I reading this incorrectly?

If I read this, they are saying there were 54 tons of Cougars plus 12 tons of M-ATVs, and it was only safe to carry ONE 12 ton M-ATV???

That they overloaded it by 66 tons??????????

I have to be reading this incorrectly. If that is the case, this was so grossly overloaded it was dangerous, and the crew just diddly-bopped into the sky with that?

I have to be reading this incorrectly.