Комментарий бывшей жены погибшего инженера:
My husbands death
By Linda Garrett on Tuesday, Apr 30th 2013 23:14Z
My ex husband was a mechanic on this plane. I appreciate the person(s) who filmed the last few seconds of my husbands life. I and it makes me feel the raw pain and fear he must've felt in those last few seconds of his life. It is something I can keep for remembrance of his dedication and love for he job he worked at for 23 years. It was truly his first love. My life is forever changed by this lost, and now his daughters must grow up without his love and support. God speed and fly high my love, i'll see you some day soon......
а вот и то упоминание про KAL:
In 2004 a Korean Airlines Cargo 747-400F in Oslo, Norway was loaded incorrectly and began its takeoff roll with a CG of 37.8% MAC. Thus being loaded 4.8% past the aft limit of 33% MAC.
The aircraft began to autorotate at 120 (KCAS) and thanks to the commander immediately suspecting a load error, the appropriate action was taken. However, nose attitude reached 19 degrees before sufficient downwards stab trim hab been applied.
Once in the air they contacted KAL operations through SATCOM and determined they could improve the situation by shifting a few pallets in the air. FO and relief FO proceded to shift a few pallets and the flight continued to Seoul.
Aircraft ended up landing with CG 7.2% aft of the limit.
When taking into consideration a possible rapid and extreme load shift far aft of the limit, it becomes evident that even with quick crew action the situation could become irrecoverable.
.. actually 58kts the nose wheel was off the ground. Aircraft was actually airborne at 120kts. On taxy to the runway the NLG WOG was intermittently air mode. The guys were the luckiest pilots on the planet.
FWIW, the Cm of the flaps is beneficial with an aft cg, MLG retraction is slightly beneficial. burning off the CWT may be wonderful for WBM structural considerations but guarantees the cg shifts aft. The arrival of that aircraft resulted in it departing the edge of the runway, however that is open to interpretation as the NLG was about 3' in the air, over the grass, but the MLG was on the concrete.
Had the AP disconnected in the cruise flight the aircraft probably would have been lost, as even with the AP engaged it exhibited longitudinal instability, and the elevator dP was rapidly cycling as was the elevator TE position in smooth air.
Not the first time, won't be the last time. Loading systems have many opportunities for variation from the expected process due to human ingenuity. A control problem close to the ground is a critical and generally untrained event. The opportunities for crosschecking are limited and need vigilance. I have bene caught out on the same type where 6.5T of cargo bound for the aft cargo comp went into the fwd comp, and we got to see the end of the runway up close and personal, took an extra 3000' of runway to get a rotate in, ended up with a part flap landing and full manual stab trip and still out of trim. Nowhere near as dangerous as the opposite case which appears to be a likely condition at Bagram.
