Hundred Less | Emirates Flight 407

[@mvfc7637]

Well done for producing this video Alec, I mentioned it in a comment in one of your other video’s. This was front page news in Melbourne at the time and the aircraft just managed to clear a concrete blockhouse on the other side of the airport fence by a matter of feet, in fact the aircraft did overrun the end of the runway and it was only because the ground was rock hard due to that Summer’s intense heat that the aircraft landing gear didn’t sink into the ground, this was perilously close to being a major air disaster.

[@jjquinn2004]

Interesting that it was front-page news in Melbourne. I was living in Dubai at the time and I didn't hear about it til much later and only then as part of a casual conversation with an Emirates pilot I knew. Hmmm . . .

[@hswforme]

Indeed, that was the year of the Black Saturday bushfires, and late Jan and early Feb saw a run of temperatures into the low to mid 40's, baking any earth anywhere into something akin to rock hard roads, especially with water restrictions. There was barely a blade of even dried grass around this year in Victoria, so yeah this could have been tragic. That bought the plane a bit of extra lift with the TO/GA command from the dry runway surrounds. Probably the closest to a potential air disaster seen in Australian skies in the jet age.

[@mvfc7637]

@@hswforme exactly, it took place 6 weeks after the tragic Black Saturday bushfires and luckliy for the aircraft and passengers the clay soil which is prevalent in the North-Western suburbs of Melbourne was baked hard due to that Summer’s extreme heat.

[@errorsofmodernism9715]

I was working at MEL airport when this happened. I was told Airbus wanted to write the plane off but Emirates did not want a hull loss on the books so they repaired it

[@ugiswrong]

They used the pilot’s pension to fund the paint job

[@HS-PGX]

Then EK523 happened and I oop-

[@haiwatigere6202]

Qantas did same after Bangkok crash

[@marcusd4366]

One undred less passengers or fuel?

[@guegosilva19]

@@marcusd4366 tonnes.

[@geoffreyludkin8672]

I love telling my wife about these incidents, using terms like V1, tailstrike, setting the flaps and of course using a mechanical voice stating "low terrain, pull up". She tolerates me but I feel like a retired pilot just using this new vocabulary. Great work Allec! This one was particularly interesting.

[@ugiswrong]

Sweetie, pull up! Pull up! Yes, yes, overspeed, overspeed, ohhhhhh OVVERSPEEEEDDD YEEAHHH

[@qlucas5510]

@ugiswrong WINDSHEAR, WINDSHEAR, *cabin altitude alert*

[@EYESandHEART]

@@ugiswrong 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@EYESandHEART]

@@qlucas5510 Too low terrainus. Too low terrainus. Go around....Go around....!

[@jaimhaas5170]

Many women do not have a sense of humor so when you say "tolerates" you are operating on borrowed time.

[@nenblom]

“Everyone survived.” Best words ever!

[@StevePorter_au]

Everyone survived, except the pilots' careers.

[@nenblom]

@@StevePorter_au True.

[@ecnirp9197]

now, i can continue my normal saturday life lol

[@boogernights1]

Bro... Spoiler warning!! Lol

[@violetrose1918]

@@StevePorter_au Oh yeah, the pilots are done!

[@StevePorter_au]

I was an ATC trainee at Melbourne a couple of years after this. The ground at that end of Runway 16 drops away into a valley and I was told the tower controller on duty that night actually lost sight of the aircraft as it flew into the valley, before eventually climbing. He stood, holding his breath with one hand hovering over the crash button, ready to alert the ARFF crews. Because the aircraft couldn't be pressurised, it was flown back to France for repairs, no higher than 10,000 feet, a very slow and costly flight.

[@satos1]

The sheiks wouldn't of cared about the cost as long as they saved face.

[@Digitallycloned]

Every time I see “tail strike” and “repair” I think of JAL 123. I’m glad this plane was eventually scrapped in case that tail repair ended up causing a crash.

[@MrSupercar55]

Mythos yes, it was scrapped 5 years after it was repaired and returned to service.

[@deaf2819]

Lol in the air force most of the acft I worked had tail strikes at least a few times.

[@RK870XK]

Well, there is another air crash that was caused by a tailstrike, but unlike JAL 123 that crashed 7 years after the tailstrike, this air crash happened 22 years after it tailstriked. And that was China Airlines flight 611

[@comercole1940]

That is because 123 plane was not repaired properly blame the people at boeing japan for improperly putting repairs.

[@rosselcortez3448]

@@RK870XK JAL 115 Was JAL 123

[@hectorzambrano4092]

They may have made a mistake calculating weight values, but the captain sure did put the whole quad wingz at TO/GA, which was the best choice!

[@Nadsyw1]

When it’s not your day, it’s never good enough unfortunately

[@The-Rose-and-the-Cross]

I'm kind of surprised they did manage to take off.

[@SM_Fato]

LOL me too

[@peterlovett5841]

If the captain hadn't pressed TOGA/GA it wouldn't have flown and crashed off the end of the runway 16 at Melbourne.

[@madaviperera1731]

True.....

[@dx1450]

Yeah, I thought they'd crash at the end of the runway.

[@mikeboston421]

if they had been 10 feet lower they would have clipped the fence which would have brought it down and they would have all died, period.

[@B3Band]

If you don't see pilot names given, it's because there are no fatalities.

[@tomstravels520]

Or it’s there is no data on the names of the pilots

[@bradmccullough8240]

Or if the words fatal or deadly don't appear in the title

[@alexm566]

@Jim Marbaz why

[@puffy6975]

sum ting wong? wi to slo ho lee tailsstrike bang dang ovrrun

[@alexm566]

@Jim Marbaz Is that so? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Rediske_Air_DHC-3_Otter_crash kzbin.info/www/bejne/np6qZaGdebOBntE

[@emmettcunninghamjr.5207]

WELL...EVEN WITH ALL OF THOSE FLIGHT HOURS AND EXPERIENCE MISTAKES CAN BE MADE BUT ALL SOULS ON BOARD FLIGHT 407 WALKED AWAY. AND THAT'S WHAT MATTERS! GREAT VIDEO. THANKS.

[@drkatel]

I'm picturing the Captain walking in the door at home and his wife asking, "How was your day, honey?"

[@muscleandimports]

"Well honey, I'm thinking about exploring a new line of work"

[@mofleh177]

@@muscleandimports " You know what, my neighbor told me yesterday their school bus driver is retiring next month and they'll be looking for replacement!! I'm sure with your 8k hours flying experience you have a great chance!!"

[@michaelmccarthy4615]

He should have been on the other side of the world at the end of the day.

[@paulsz6194]

This incident would have significantly affected their careers as Pilots, undoubtedly, the Captain would have gone back to being a 1st officer & the 1st officer a 2nd officer for quite some time, with any airline that was prepared to give them another chance.

[@haiwatigere6202]

I faked up bigly

[@stitchergary]

I flew Emirates once round trip from JFK to Thailand..I thought their service was excellent.... Flew Syracuse, NY to JFK and was told at the Emirates counter my flight was delayed from morning to late afternoon and I'd miss my connecting flight in Dubai.... They put me up in a hotel, transportation, and food... Took an unplanned 3 hour tour of the city... Amazing city....thanks for the video...

[@myyoutubechannel5574]

My favorite part of the narration in these videos: "Everyone on board survives." Keep up the great work, Allec.

[@dx1450]

The pilots didn't, professionally.

[@myyoutubechannel5574]

@@dx1450 Good point.

[@tony.bickert]

I'm guessing the zillions of other pilots that had also been skipping the verbal check quietly began unskipping it after the cause of this expensive screwup was discovered.

[@arliesam217]

Definitely

[@Isaac-ho8gh]

Ones ever skipping shit like that shouldn't be pilots in the fucking first place.

[@austindarrenor]

@@Isaac-ho8gh Some pilots think that strict adherence to procedures is for rookies.

[@austindarrenor]

"quietly began unskipping it" 😆🤣😄

[@Isaac-ho8gh]

@@austindarrenor That's a big work culture problem then.

[@Mardasee]

Captain: First Officer, you're fired! First Officer: Captain, you're fired too!

[@MohammedAbdullah-vg2kx]

Negligence by both the pilots. However, the captain did a good job of taking off that heavy airplane by applying more power or else there would've certainly been fatalities.

[@DogKilledSnake]

I like how you can be seconds away from dying, but your just assesing the situation and staying calm.

[@nickhoughton8334]

Top quality as always, Allec. You’ve gone a long way to cure my fear of flying. I’m serious.

[@tomstravels520]

Nobody has died in an accident on an A340 so knew everyone would live

[@RaysDad]

I have always liked the A340 but it looks like they will all be going to the boneyard soon.

[@SpicyTexan64]

So no pilot error so far. A matter of time.

[@darkko1969]

To my knowledge, there have been no fatalities on an A340, A380, or a 787.

[@MrBurndonesinkchair]

Ray's Dad I have that the A340 has relatively high rate of fuel consumption.

[@derpyto3z]

@@MrBurndonesinkchair at the same time, it can fly very very very far

[@tristana.8304]

I don’t know why, but when i hear that the aircraft retired or was scrapped, it always makes me sad.

[@leonswan6733]

We get attached to our machines like our pet dog or cat. Its like how i feel that i got to drag my 1996 jeep Grand Cherokee Lerado to the dump. 😔

[@tommypetraglia4688]

@@leonswan6733 Just say 'Good Bye, thanks for the service', which is what machines are built for and any good emperor's hold the warmly

[@paulkolodner2445]

I was expecting hear that the pilots were stored and then scrapped.

[@patrickmollohan3082]

@@paulkolodner2445 Betcha Ryanair hired them!!

[@tristana.8304]

@Crazy Sven After so many years in service, it has to be retired. The structure is to old to be air worthy. If it’s an accident, sometimes it cost more to fix the aircraft than the aircraft is even worth. and that would be nice, however a damaged aircraft would still go for millions of dollars. which most people couldn’t afford.

[@lavernedofelmier6496]

This was a total nail biter, with the possibility of the aft fire 😱. Took another notch on my recliner seat belt!!!

[@pameladecicco6509]

Me too!!!!

[@FH99]

That could have turned out a lot worse. The first officer and captain both made mistakes but the captain choosing the TO/GA option to get the plain airborne probably saved a number of lives.

[@leewalton7721]

If any airline plots are watching this surely there is a protocol in place on what to do when the aircraft is rotated but does not take off? Is what the captain did in choosing the TO/GA option the procedural thing to do if there isn't room to abort the take off and stop?

[@josephjakubec3171]

Zero tolerance for people who have passenger lives at stake. Also, this was a careless irresponsible mistake. Fire them all.

[@Mikeyp1054]

Irwin Allen was the master of disaster, as they called him,making The poseidon adventure,The Towering Inferno and,Swarm etc to name but a few,but josh is the master at making these "disaster" videos.so much detail and crisp graphics he deserves an award!

[@peacebethejourney1]

I just love your work......... I'm a chef by trade, but always seem to watch your code for ages!!! Keep up the premium work....

[@josephhosty-locke9223]

Did they ever find out what was the cause of the rumble and smoke?

[@justbreakingballs]

Passenger with a bad stomach and someone smoking.

[@nitalakshgupta8935]

@@justbreakingballs lol

[@kh2b573]

@@justbreakingballs lol

[@Elias-xy9kc]

It’s nice to see a video about an incident that everyone survives in! Isn’t it?! I felt unconfident as if I was onboard! It’s exhausting 😅🥵😓😂😂 My hats of to all the four captains and first officers onboard! 🎩 Greetings from Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦♥️🇦🇪🤗😊

[@TheLesserWeevil]

I know a guy who would have been part of the ARFF crew at the time. From what he told me when I visited his station once at Melbourne Airport, this would have been the most exciting day of his entire career.

[@trent3872]

Damn, 18 crew members? What is it a flying massage parlor?

[@mvfc7637]

It’s a 15 hour flight from Melbourne to Dubai alone and the flight originated in Auckland, New Zealand which is a 2.5 hour flight in the first instance.

[@theMoerster]

Long haul flight requiring 2 full crews probably. With 257 passengers they'd need plenty of cabin crew on each shift.

[@trent3872]

@@theMoerster Makes sense now.

[@jakerson181]

The 18 crew members includes the 4 pilots so it's 14 FAs and yes when you divide into 2 crews, 7 serving 250 or so passengers is a reasonable amount.

[@jjquinn2004]

Further to the FA headcount of 14, as per a FA's KZbin page, by law a plane must have 1 FA per 50 seats (regardless of how many passengers are actually on a given flight). One configuration for this A340-500 has a capacity of 313 passengers, thereby requiring 7 FAs. The length of the flight dictates 2 full crews, hence 14 FAs in total. Plus of course the 4 pilots.

[@BallisticCoefficient]

Such quality productions. Thank you so much. I have no interest in flying other than as a commuter but these are fascinating.

[@JasonFlorida]

You never disappoint Alec! Thank you!

[@jasoncentore1830]

Thank You, I love when you have new videos, I binge watch all your content. Keep up the great work

[@wanderinghistorian]

So this was recommended to me after watching many videos on airplane crashes. I watched this fully expecting Flight 407 to crash and have loss of life. It was so refreshing to see the end and everyone survive. Thanks for the happy ending.

[@MTisOnly1]

Happy that everyone survived. Always sad when I read that an airplane is scrapped.

[@Bertrand146]

Liar !!!

[@mwissel]

I was pleasantly surprised to see the wider aspect ratio of this video. I believe this is actually the first one I see on KZbin without the black letterboxes on the side. Nice! :)

[@localcrew]

“Missed it by *that* much!”

[@annharriman2510]

Excellent channel. Thank you!

[@XxMrRoachxX]

Great video as always!!! Thank You Sir!!!

[@vondamaraland2697]

"Asked to resign" more like sacked.

[@adamw.8579]

Politely speaking.

[@vondamaraland2697]

@@adamw.8579 this company is very good at "Politely asking" people to resign. I was crew for this company and even worked a few times on this aircraft.

[@jdonovan74]

Well officially it will be a resignation; likely making it much easier for them to find jobs in the future.

[@SatsJava]

@@jdonovan74 yep

[@suekelley2109]

With a gun to their heads

[@xpose2914]

I always watch your channel,awesome job Allec,best aviation channel on U-tube!

[@Suddenly_Quinn]

Here’s one to look into! Fedex Express N375FE. Engine 2 caught fire after takeoff in 2001 😁 Keep the videos coming! Always great!

[@EYESandHEART]

Kamusta! Kaibigan. Nice work Josh. Very good detailed orientation in this video. And again, Pilot Error almost kills 300 people. Thankfully TOGA was used, although that was only luck in my opinion. Otherwise a runway excursion at that speed would have resulted in...Josh's famous Crash and Burn sounds would have came on the video. Then followed by the usual sad song....😩

[@satos1]

I remember this incident quite well and how the Australian media kept hush about it. No doubt Emirates had some involvement to suppress the serious nature of what of could of become a fatal crash. The aircraft main gear clipped an ILS antenna and the airport's perimeter fence prior to getting airborne.

[@kishansn3145]

Amazing work again! Glad i got your channel Stay safe

[@workmates]

Amazing in like 2006 maybe, nowadays this guy's stuff is simply "dated"

[@kishansn3145]

@@workmates will you shut up man?

[@mikebronicki6978]

Multi-million dollar aircraft have all the wiz-bang techno-gadgets and yet your safety is determined by a pilot jotting down the correct numbers into a log. Priceless.

[@johnklar5131]

I am so picky that the use of an A340-300 in this bothers me.

[@jiggythibs]

I was looking for this comment.

[@bluedragon995]

glad it was not just me

[@ontheroadagainwithvinny931]

I remember reading about it when it happened. There was no mention of a tail strike just the plane catching the perimeter fence in the news. Great video.

[@tmp1111]

Awesome visuals ty

[@alberta1st]

With all that experience it should be automatic to cross check the responsibility to your passengers is on your shoulders pilots...

[@christosvoskresye]

Which makes me wonder if, for some reason, fatigue may have been a factor.

[@Shrike200]

@@christosvoskresye It's not just fatigue - it's the kind of 'routine' that comes from doing something that must be done reasonably quickly, over and over and over again. And it's correct 99.999% of the time. Eventually your brain can, if you're not careful, just gloss over it. You assume the other guy has done it properly, like he or she has for every single takeoff prior to the final one. You've got to consciously slow it down at certain spots. If you've been on holiday and haven't flown for a while, you see it easily - your first flight back on the line, you can remember individual things, you're consciously looking and checking and thinking about everything. 10 months later, at 90 hours a month, everything's a blur if you're not careful. You are trying to check and do it properly, make no mistake, but on day 5 or 6, leg 4, 01:30 local......it's a threat. You're not just tired, you've seen it done hundreds and hundreds of times properly.....until it isn't, and it catches you out. I feel FDP regs don't really account properly for these things, IMHO. You've got to really be on your guard, and know the danger spots (this is obviously one of them). Well designed procedures, and a 'just' culture that encourages good cross checking will allow better error trapping as well. Long story, but it's an important point - the biggest threat is the routine IMHO, and how it goes right 99.99% of the time. Humans suck at monitoring the same thing over and over. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir, but this is more for the non-airline pilots out there. Airline pilots deal with a large number of dice rolls, and thats a big deal. It's might be a 1000 sided dice, but.....there are a lot of throws.

[@atptestysetabandonedforeve9472]

Great Video Allec!

[@kpn574]

So tiny an error with so big consequences. Thankfully no loss of life. Great video, as usual.

[@bazonka1]

A hundred tonnes is a tiny error?

[@kpn574]

@@bazonka1 what I meant was not the tonnage but the mistake in entering the numbers. A small error leading to all of this...

[@arliesam217]

So happy no one died I know I know the pilots messed up but am so sorry they lost their jobs especially if it's your dream 😔 to fly I wish them all the best in life and thanks Alec your hard work is appreciated

[@JoshuasPHXAviation]

Nice work Allec👍👍

[@ikaikamaleko8370]

That was close, that miscalculation almost had death knocking on their doorstop.

[@marwinzingabotv1658]

Good work Mr allec joshua ibay

[@gregfolland8452]

Very good, Allec! ... 👍👍👍

[@pops2728]

Another great video Allec but the piano music drives me crazy!

[@Captain001]

10:47 my fav word man it’s like a magic word from Alec keep it up

[@ElmerCat]

Why don't landing gear incorporate some sort of sensor system to directly calculate an aircraft's weight?

[@tomstravels520]

www.quora.com/Why-can-t-planes-weigh-themselves-to-eliminate-error

[@peteconrad2077]

It was proposed for the 777 but it wasn’t reliable.

[@jjaus]

Unnecessary, people need to do their jobs.

[@marcmcreynolds2827]

[Note: This is the same reply that I've inserted everywhere in this Comments section (as of 11 Oct) where the self-weighing aircraft subject has come up.] * The Quora topic www.quora.com/Why-can-t-planes-weigh-themselves-to-eliminate-error cited by @Thomas Mortimore is a good starting point, especially in regard to operational issues. * I authored a report for an airframe maker titled "An Analysis of Error Sources Pertaining to Onboard Weight and Balance Systems", which looked at various ways in which accuracy can be compromised. It concluded that OWBS's can supplement the traditional method but not supplant it. So useful for reliably catching big mistakes, mainly. * In any event , airlines don't like carrying around the extra weight when it's an optional/add-on system. One of the airframe makers discussed with Lufthansa the possibility of evaluating a small vendor's under-development OWBS by installing a prototype in one of their revenue widebodies. The Germans balked at adding that extra 20 kg or so to their 300-ton widebody: "We'll quote you for the fuel". * To those who say an OWBS shouldn't even be considered because "Pilots should just do their job", that's both callous towards the passengers who would unnecessarily die because pilots didn't do their job, and ignorant of operational reality. Sometimes the problem does result from a mistake by the pilots (or whomever). But there have also been plenty of instances when a ground crew erroneously or willfully added extra cargo. A DC-10 pilot I know only found out through excess fuel burn on a flight to Hawaii that he was carrying many more tons than what the manifest said. Upon return to the USA, he chewed out his airline's cargo people for not having told the pilots what they were up to.

[@peteconrad2077]

Marc McReynolds no, the best way is for the weight data to be transferred automatically and then cross checked. This is done with radio frequency changes and clearances, where it significantly reduces error.

[@WendyKS93]

There was a big mistake made on the part of the Captain and First Officer and it could have ended badly. I also see all the steps that the Captain took when he discovered the error and his decision to return the the airport and not take risks with the airplane and his passengers lives and there is a part of me that really feels bad for the Captain and his First Officer in losing their jobs. Let us not forget that he got all his passengers safely back to the airport. Hopefully this has made the two of them far more conscientious and careful in their lives sense then.

[@Isaac-ho8gh]

Why feel bad for them? They were so stupid to the point of forgetting such a serious thing!

[@1biosphere88]

There have been a number of incidents with incorrect weight entries. Is there a reason (apart from cost) why the undercarriage is not fitted with weight sensors? That way the plane's system would have an accurate weight, plus center of gravity. Still double check, but surely that would eliminate most of the takeoff weight issues.

[@geoh7777]

"Is there a reason (apart from cost) why the undercarriage is not fitted with weight sensors?" If every possible safety issue were backed up by sensors, the likelihood that there would be no takeoffs would go through the roof due to false sensor alarms requiring malfunctioning sensors to be replaced. Pitot tubes might be a good example. A test mechanism and sensor arrangement on its pitot tubes to check for blockage could have prevented Air France Flight 447 from crashing into the Atlantic Ocean. Instead, ground crews and pilots are expected to do their jobs correctly. Increase these "new" sensors by a few thousand and then the sensors themselves become a problem. Like in your car with it yellow check engine light always coming on.

[@karlwelin7932]

@@geoh7777 - B I N G O. Must there be sensors that constantly fail in place of people doing their jobs responsibly?

[@marcmcreynolds2827]

[Note: This is the same reply that I've inserted everywhere in this Comments section (as of 11 Oct) where the self-weighing aircraft subject has come up.] * The Quora topic www.quora.com/Why-can-t-planes-weigh-themselves-to-eliminate-error cited by @Thomas Mortimore is a good starting point, especially in regard to operational issues. * I authored a report for an airframe maker titled "An Analysis of Error Sources Pertaining to Onboard Weight and Balance Systems", which looked at various ways in which accuracy can be compromised. It concluded that OWBS's can supplement the traditional method but not supplant it. So useful for reliably catching big mistakes, mainly. * In any event , airlines don't like carrying around the extra weight when it's an optional/add-on system. One of the airframe makers discussed with Lufthansa the possibility of evaluating a small vendor's under-development OWBS by installing a prototype in one of their revenue widebodies. The Germans balked at adding that extra 20 kg or so to their 300-ton widebody: "We'll quote you for the fuel". * To those who say an OWBS shouldn't even be considered because "Pilots should just do their job", that's both callous towards the passengers who would unnecessarily die because pilots didn't do their job, and ignorant of operational reality. Sometimes the problem does result from a mistake by the pilots (or whomever). But there have also been plenty of instances when a ground crew erroneously or willfully added extra cargo. A DC-10 pilot I know only found out through excess fuel burn on a flight to Hawaii that he was carrying many more tons than what the manifest said. Upon return to the USA, he chewed out his airline's cargo people for not having told the pilots what they were up to.

[@ianmoseley9910]

those sensors would take a lot of punishment and could drift out of spec. You then have the nuisance of recalibrating them. I suppose in theory you could have some form of weigh-bridge but one to suit all sizes of aircraft ...?

[@marcmcreynolds2827]

@@ianmoseley9910 Calibration was definitely an issue back when the measurement technique involved strain gauges on the axles. In a modern version, I would envision a solid-state laser -- far more robust -- mounted on the strut to accomplish axle deflection measurement. Calibration (zeroing) would be done automatically during each landing, following gear deployment. As you surmised, a weigh-bridge approach gets tricky in terms of the variety of aircraft footprints to accommodate, plus exact positioning of the aircraft relative to the center of the weighing scales (which can matter). A dense grid of sensors underneath a relatively thin stretch of asphalt (which is much more flexible than concrete) would allow weight + CG calculation for any aircraft configuration without even needing to slow its taxi. An electric sign by the side of the taxiway could display the measured values to crew as they passed (and/or Bluetooth them into the cockpit). But I imagine something like that would be very expensive both to install at many places throughout a large airport and to maintain. So just an interesting thought experiment.

[@wahyupermana9134]

I like this channel because all airplane accidents in the world are on this channel 😁😁😁

[@TrentJordan3198]

Allec, what do you think of Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020? And have you tried it? Maybe you can do your plane crash reenactments using MSFS2020, that will be awesome!

[@workmates]

EXACTLY. No excuse not to, this chump is being lazy with his old ways, doubt he'd do anything innovative until say 2030

[@javaguru7141]

@@workmates Use your brain and consider that there may be a good reason for it, you dingbat. FS2020 is very new and thus there are very few detailed aircraft models and other content that is required to make these videos. It takes thousands of hours of work to build all of the needed stuff and it is going to take a while for FS2020 to be useful for this type of video.

[@Xenotypic]

@@workmates there are barely any planes for it, do you want him recreating crashes without the same aircraft that was in the crash?

[@CaptainJadenAR]

Jason who the heck are you? A gangstar? Stop calling him lazy. He is working more than you making these things. You are too lazy, and fully rude to say he is lazy.

[@tomstravels520]

Jason you want an excuse? Try the fact there are only 3 decent commercial aircraft available for MSFS2020 and none of them have crashed PMDG, Aerosoft and all the others are yet to release their aircraft for 2020

[@aflacduckquack]

Is that your determining factor on giving pilot names, Allec, if there were fatalities? Just wondering, as I'm not sure how you could acquire flight hours for the crew without knowing their names. It's a good way of doing it... if the pilot error wasn't bad enough to cost lives, they should be able to remain anonymous. If their error (for which there is never a good excuse) cost lives, they should be outed. Interestingly, in America, you know if someone is accused of murder or other culpable homicide when the press gives you their middle name as info... Very nice video, Allec. Detailed and interesting. And everyone lived! I like when your productions end that way... :)

[@781David]

I'd imagine that the flight hours for the crew were noted in the ATSB (Australian Transportation Safety Board) report. Here's a link for the report. www.atsb.gov.au/media/3531728/ao2009012_full%20report.pdf

[@rizkykesuma]

is it a procedure to engage toga in that situation or it's just the captain's intuition?

[@mcnultyssobercompanion6372]

Really glad everyone survived. But man, what incompetence on the part of the pilots....

[@amirevaniandstudents9277]

The aircraft used in this simulated video is Airbus a340-300, while in the main incident, it was a340-500.

[@tomsamuelson8512]

Well..at least it is a A340..and the right airline. It is just to give you an idea what happened. Maybe a A340-500 was not available for the simulation..

[@holobolo1661]

great videos, i look forward to seeing what you create in the future when you have a bigger budget and msfs 2020

[@davidwheatcroft2797]

The A.340 is a bit under powered. I have stood at the end of 26L at YVR, watching as an Asian A.340 lumbered towards me. Eventually it lifted off, but passed so low over me that I could feel the HOT jet blast. It continued at 200ft over the sea, sttainging away. Escort 528, with a 'D' on my RAIC, so I could go anywhere on the field. (Under ATC control.) One night stopped a madman trying to drive onto the active as a 777 was landing. Very close run thing!

[@marcmcreynolds2827]

Four-engine airliners always have relatively less acceleration than twins. The engine-out takeoff climb requirement designed to for certification leads to twins being the most "overpowered" in normal all-engine operation, followed by trijets, followed by four-engine jets. ("quadjet" sounds too much like a 1960's carburetor ; )

[@MikeBrown-ex9nh]

I learned something new. I had no idea that they ever took off at reduced power and had assumed takeoff was always at full power. I still don't understand why.

[@SMaamri78]

It probably saves on fuel costs.

[@warrenscarlett9302]

And less noise

[@ianmoseley9910]

Could full power at a low weight also risk stalling?

[@tomstravels520]

@@ianmoseley9910 it’s not about power it’s about AOA. If you can maintain the same speed at various power settings by pitching up and down your AOA will be the same

[@madaviperera1731]

Thanks Allec.

[@kimberlymiller1396]

Another amazing video. Very, very, very well done Sir! Seriously well done.

[@tonycarver2745]

"WTAISLIA" (Wow , The Aircraft Industry Sure Loves It's Acronyms)

[@marcmcreynolds2827]

Douglas Aircraft's "Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Initialisms" handbook was a relatively thick mid-size paperback. Maybe a few hundred pages simply listing (on one line each) a series of letters followed by what is spelled out from them.

[@aaronnieradzik2303]

Thank you for such a great video Allec! Do you think that you could do the 2011 Reno Air Races crash? It’s kind of special for me because it’s my hometown.

[@jacobwong2230]

When I see Allec video I click. And least everyone survived unharmed. Everyone survived 2 words.

[@bicycle697]

Well done! I wonder what happened to those pilots?

[@errorsofmodernism9715]

Both working at United Airlines now

[@watershed44]

@Rob Heywood *INDEED! I'd like to know too! Allec and the others like TFC should do epilogues to tell us things like that.* I would bet that they are still flying at another airline today.

[@AnalogueInTheUK]

Instructors at PIA would be my guess.

[@sarahalbers5555]

Would you like fries with that? Thank you, drive through.

[@watershed44]

@@sarahalbers5555 I doubt it. Even if that's probably where they belong.

[@andrewthomas5348]

So what exactly was the damage to the plane from the tail strike?

[@tomstravels520]

Photos are in the report www.atsb.gov.au/media/3531728/ao2009012_full%20report.pdf

[@andrewthomas5348]

@@tomstravels520 Thanks.

[@pjkkerr]

Many years ago it was recommended that an acceleration check early in the take off run would catch these sorts of errors, allowing an timely abort. Why is this not done?

[@andrewsmall6568]

Because had the aircraft been the correct weight it would have taken off at the exact point that was intended. It didn't accelerate slowly, it accelerated in exactly the way that the computers intended. It met rotate speed at the exact point of the runway that pilots expected. The "check" was in the calculations. An acceleration check would not have helped unfortunately.

[@watershed44]

@Allec Joshua Ibay *I'd love for you to do short epilogues on some of these videos like in this situation where are these pilots today?* I bet they are still flying for another airline!

[@B3Band]

Their names were not published on the report because there were no fatalities. Unless you want to try doxxing them, there's no way to get their names.

[@moxievintage1390]

I would be curious if they flew for someone else..... #human

[@watershed44]

@@B3Band Bye bye little hat. O Y V E Y

[@workcell]

I wonder if the Captain and the FO will find work on another carrier? Passengers were lucky that it wasn't a much worse outcome.

[@patrickmollohan3082]

I'm sure that Ryanair scooped them up at about 1/3 their formal salary. I mean the UAE is one of, if not THE, richest countries in the world. I bet Emirates pilots are pulling down some mad money!!!

[@itsjosh3009]

In the video a A340-300 is shown but the actual aircraft was a A340-500

[@16MedicRN]

So, as a novice, I'm wondering, could the Captain have aborted the takeoff without pursuing it, considering that the situation was so peculiar (nose up, not lifting off), or not enough time/runway, etc?

[@herseem]

by the sound of it, deciding not to take off when they realised instead of upping the power would have been catastrophic as they had so little runway left anyway, and there were buildings they would have run into

[@AtulBhatia]

Once the V1 speed is crossed, rejecting the take off would mean that the aircraft runs off the end of the runway, perhaps at high speed. That could be catastrophic.

[@16MedicRN]

Yes, I see that now. Again, DON’T ask questions until you see it all, lol 😂

[@16MedicRN]

@@herseem yes, I see!! Ugh, just keep my trap shut until I'm done watching 🙄

[@16MedicRN]

@@AtulBhatia previous respomse to you 💕

[@allans7932]

Excellent, Allec! ;)

[@kohrenhund]

epic content my dude

[@muscleandimports]

This video made me think of two things so if someone could explain, that'd be great. How come they don't just select maximum thrust for every takeoff? Obviously still after doing all of the calculations, but at least that way the plane would be giving it's absolute best shot at getting airborne and using as little runway as possible, so even miscalculations like this aren't so devastating. Also, why don't airports utilize scales after the plane has been fueled and loaded for takeoff? Scales that get calibrated daily or weekly with a big digital readout in Kg to be used as a double check. Say at the final taxi stop before heading out onto the runway? Nothing like seeing big, bright red letters to confirm your calculated takeoff weight.. and then there's really no excuse for miscalculations, especially when general averages are used for takeoff weight calculations since those can potentially be significantly off. Just some thoughts that I got from this accident.

[@tomstravels520]

Because it uses more fuel and increases the wear on the engines so they would have to be inspected more often

[@muscleandimports]

@@tomstravels520 I see. I wouldn't think full throttle takeoffs would matter that much regarding wear or fuel consumption when used only in the takeoff situation but that makes sense.

[@leonswan6733]

I agree with you that we have the engineering to incorporate weight scales in the landing gears to get a ramp/ taxi weight reading to cross check with calculated weight figures to catch stuff like this.

[@B3Band]

@@muscleandimports Getting a 362 ton hunk of metal off the ground and floating in the air requires A LOT of fuel. And if you want your very expensive aircraft to last more than 20 years then you don't use max power for every takeoff, the same way you don't red-line your car's engine every time a traffic light turns green.

[@herseem]

@@muscleandimports I'm pretty sure absolute max power uses the afterburners at max level, and that is horribly wasteful in relation to the relatively small extra amount of power you get. Aviation fuel is a very significant proportion of the cost of travel and profit margins can be very low, so utilising more of the runway and being able to accelerate with a lower power level can make the difference between a flight being profitable and not profitable. As well as reduced maintenance costs, which is another major expense, as Thomas Mortimer said. I agree with the thrust of your argument though about using measures to reduce both likely the incidence of mistakes (like weighing platforms on the way to the runway, for instance), and measures that will reduce the consequence of mistakes when they happen.

[@s.hawkins541]

Why are you using a -300 for the recreation?

[@IshaqKhan-ri7hi]

No matter how many types of hours you have 3000 hrs or even 8000hrs you still need to learn more out of it because you never know when things could get wrong...

[@hswforme]

This was probably one of the most fraught incidents in Australian aviation, particularly in the jet age. Plane landed safely after suffering this damage, but it could have been much worse.

[@Xenotypic]

wow these passengers were lucky they made it out alive.

[@CaptainJadenAR]

Anybody can survive if it is a tail strike. But after tail strike, it can be deadly.

[@MikeB0001]

With all the technology that goes into these aircraft..why isnt there load cells on the landing gear to give correct weights before takeoff I wonder?...

[@tomstravels520]

Wonder how often they’d have to be calibrated

[@leonswan6733]

@@tomstravels520 It is still worth the maintenance work.

[@tomstravels520]

Leon Swan you know what’s easier? Doing your job properly and actually cross checking the figures to make sure the other has done it correctly. If you do things correctly then it doesn’t go wrong. As in if they had properly cross checked the figures they’d have spotted the error. Newer airbus aircraft have a warning for this safetyfirst.airbus.com/takeoff-surveillance-and-monitoring-functions/

[@leonswan6733]

@@tomstravels520 It also is the job of that airlines flight dispatcher to get weight and balance correct.

[@tomstravels520]

Leon Swan weight is not a massive problem. Every aircraft has an OEW (Operational Empty Weight). You then add the passengers crew and cargo (payload) then that gives you your ZFW (Zero Fuel Weight) then chuck in the fuel (bare in mind some will already remain from last flight) and that gives you your GW (Gross Weight). However that is not the same as your TOGW which is how much you’ll weigh when lined up on the runway as you’ll have burnt fuel taxiing. However refuelling is often done before or as passengers board

[@mmv9155]

oh my god one more miracle or whatever but landed safely - Mr alex pls do more such videos

[@firesonic1010]

Hey Allec, question, now that there is a new Microsoft Flight Simulator in the horizon, will you continue to use FSX for your videos? Or will you make the move to the new Microsoft Flight Simulator?

[@tomstravels520]

He’s not even using FSX. I think it’s FS2004. And there’s only 3 commercial aircraft available for MSFS2020 (default ones) and none of them have crashed

[@firesonic1010]

@@tomstravels520 I wonder if we'll be able to mod MSFS2020 the same way we can mod FSX?

[@tomstravels520]

FireSonic101 you can buy add on aircraft yes but there are no good commercial aircraft until the big manufacturers like PMDG, or Aerosoft transfer their planes over

[@firesonic1010]

@@tomstravels520 how many are there currently?

[@tomstravels520]

FireSonic101 I’ve said already just the 3 default ones

[@iuvcalls8565]

Great video allec! I'm very happy that there were no losses of life during this accident!

[@twisterman4184]

I really like the plane videos where everyone survives and the plane does not crash or suffer catastrophic failure well done Allec. 😃

[@Jokalido]

only 9 years of use and they scrapped the aircraft, WTF!?

[@Kevci4]

That’s Emirates for ya

[@Jokalido]

@@Kevci4 they really just blow money like that? poor A380's, grimm future.

[@deepalperera4592]

@@Jokalido The Coronavirus sealed the A380's fate anyway

[@bradmccullough8240]

Read the caption at 13:16. It was repaired and returned to service

[@Jokalido]

@@bradmccullough8240 13:34 "stored, and eventually scrapped"

[@proofbox]

Glad for the good result of getting the passengers down safely , but my question becomes if you fly this thing every day why is it 200.000 lbs lighter than last time I flew it . Back in my truck driving days I often delivered steel rebar to construction sights and my max load would be around 44.000 lbs one third lighter would come out to 29.000 lbs this difference in weight would have felt quite a bit different operating the truck both in accerleration and braking , and nobody felt the plane was not performing normally?

[@tomstravels520]

They frequently flew the much lighter A340-300 as well

[@alainm.3378]

Is that A340-300 in the video?

[@josephconnor2310]

At least the pilot was able to recover the plane and land it safely after his and the first officer's incredibly dangerous lapse.

[@margaretmathis4775]

But what caused the cabin to fail to pressurize?

[@tomstravels520]

Because of the hole in the back of the plane

[@aaronoribello5907]

Good video as always! Can you do Garuda Indonesia Flight 152 and Northwest Airlink Flight 5719?

[@Electric__]

Wasn’t that an A340-300 not -500?

[@julosx]

The actual pictures showed a 500 but the video featured a 300, I noticed that too.