I was on this flight. This flight is the reason I have a phobia of flying. I was a small child that had no idea what was going on but could see the worry on so many faces of adults. So I knew something was wrong. It's now 2023 and I still need something to calm me down when flying.
Are you saying you were on this flight that blew apart and crashed into the ocean? How is that possible to survive unless you are talking about the previous flight.
I was a 13 year old school boy in Sydney at the time this happened. The day in question was cloudy, but not wet. Reading through the ATSB summary later on, I realised that crew mismanagement of the situation was the underlying cause of the accident. It exacerbated the material defects on the aircraft, a leased B747-300 from Singapore Airlines (I think). Ansett was trying to expand into international operations (they were a domestic carrier), to try and take on Qantas (which had been merged with Australian Airlines the year prior). In hindsight, this was the beginning of the end for Ansett. Rupert Murdoch, Air NZ, and TNT holdings asset stripped this airline in the years leading up to their collapse, causing fatigue related groundings of their B767 fleet and regulator intervention in 2000. The airline collapsed on Sep 12 2001, and administrators tried to get a functional service going with its A320 fleet, but it proved unsuccessful and operations ceased in 2002.
The FE not saying the nose gear light isn’t lit is like my accountant telling me I have so much $$$ in my account without mentioning there is a minus (-) sign in front of it.
@Snoopy Yes but in 2005. The 747 was rated in the flight manual, by Boeing and by the FAA to be clear to fly with one engine out. The Flight 285 incident was a questionable judgement call as they were simply circling LAX for an hour trying to decide what to do. They could have landed, but BA policy was to penalize flight crews for cancellations.
@Snoopy A LOT of things get 'signed off' and it's almost commonplace. Usually they are things which don't constitute a hazard to normal flight but not all flights are normal. 3 flights back for me we had to wait for something to get 'signed off' before we could depart- apparently someone had forgotten to do that after deficient equipment was noted. Knowing how things work I was somewhat worried, but I was probably the only passenger on the plane who knew what was happening.
obviously, the whole problem initiated by a mechanical problem but the engineer should have been more forceful saying 4 out of 5 green. Execute a fly by to have verification from the terminal. Regardless the captain landed it very well.
The issue was that the flight engineer didn't recognize the problem, that's why when the captain tried to re-confirm if all the landing lights were on the flight engineer only said "yes".
reminds me of the Gimli Glider. That 747 ran out of fuel and upon descent, couldn't extend it's nose wheel. It landed safely at an abandoned drag strip.
The FE had recently experienced a sprained thumb and was subsequently unable to count to 5 using his fingers. He was later promoted to CFO to ensure the company would not survive bankruptcy.
Damn, this captain needs post its on his window to remind him that if the landing gear alarm is sounding to do a fly by and allow the tower to confirm. Such madness.
The captain would have been wise to to do a low approach and have the controller visually inspect the gear, but at this point, confirmation bias has set in from the engineer’s miscommunication. He believes that everything is safe for landing.
Problem is most airlines are so stingy/ strict on fuel consumption and you will find pilots fear losing their job/ license. *Crazy bosses people have to deal with* 😭😢
The weight on the nose is totally incredible , but just to be on the safe side and be professional ? The whole aircraft should have been landed on grass to avoid sparks and heat and possibly flames!
@@miguelperaza6615 That would have been ideal, but it was stated they were not informed until they were actually touching down that the front gears weren't down.
@@miguelperaza6615 it wasn’t possible, and getting stuck on the grass, particularly at that airport, would’ve created an entirely different problem. In the end, they landed carefully (though refraining from recognising the obvious problem & acting upon it).
One would think that in this situation of a disagreement between indicators and a known hydraulic problem that the obvious course of action would be to fly by the tower and ask them to look and see if all the gear were down.
The flight engineer did not perceive that one of the five gear annunciator lights on his panel was not illuminated when he was asked to check their status.
This incident is a bit of a metaphor for Ansett itself- a great airline with a long history which was run into the ground by a combination of management incompetency, take-over bids by other airlines, lack of maintenance and union stubbornness which cost the airline employees their jobs in the end....a real shame as Ansett had been the only real competitor to Qantas' monopoly.
I think the 747 is one of the finest aircraft ever to fly, but like all complex machines it requires diligent maintenance. One thing that I noticed is that both the flight engineer and the copilot were not fully checked out for the 747 in this type of service operation, and perhaps this contributed in some way to the confusion.
Long live the 747, an aircraft that has repeatedly suffered incompetent crews and adverse conditions and still brought everyone home safely time and time again.
And even further enhanced by the fact that the captain elected to let the FO keep flying during an emergency for "training purposes" instead of taking control. What poor decisions all around.
@@theycallmetundraboy I was going to comment on what must have been going through the captain's mind during this event and then let the FO keep flying. I can understand at first that he wanted the FO to get real world experience in an emergency but then came across your comment on how foolish that decision must have been.
Not really. The Flight Engineer was fully qualified, only lacking solo experience. He should have known his systems. The Co-Pilot was similar, only lacking requisite hours to be certified. Apparently he handled the plane very well. It's actually the pilot not flying who has the biggest workload when landing, and the Captain probably had confidence in his Co-Pilots abilities and so took on the hard job himself. The only fault I can find in this is that they should have requested a "fly-by" so the tower could visually inspect the landing gear as they passed. This is a normal procedure for many airlines when there's a question of the landing gear's proper deployment. And the Engineer should have been more vocal about the low pressure and what it meant, asking for both Pilots to confirm that they heard and understood him. Today's concept and implementation of good "Cockpit Resource Management" would have prevented these errors. Many lessons are learned the hard way but this one happily saw nobody harmed.
Flight Engineer: "We have 4 greens" Pilot: "But we have 5 sets of landing gear" Flight Engineer: "But we have 4 greens" He's lucky no one got hurt due to his incompetence
@@d716agq I think he instinuates on the situation that the pilot thought that the flaps 25 (or was it 50) setting had caused the landing gear issues, while it just coincided in reality.
12:43 - How in the world, when the Captain has repeatedly questioned whether the landing gear is down or not, how does the flight engineer not notice that the gear indicator was telling him it was NOT down?
Captain: "Huh, why is the landing gear malfunction alarm going off? It has to be a false positive." The positive: Being the exact opposite of false to a ludicrous degree.
The captain bore ultimate responsibility. He should have requested a low & slow pass over the airfield for a ground observation report before attempting a landing.
In any industry, warning alarms mean just that WARNING. It happens so many times when people hear alarms or alerts they disregard them. What is your first thought when you hear a car alarm down the block? There is some psychology behind the denial of alarms and alerts.
Honestly, 4 greens out of 5...I would be terrified by this, because it's clearly indicating it's not down...my gosh, it's a miracle nothing terrible happened and it went fairly well.
Hey TFC, could you start to add the date and year into the description as well? I feel like the year in particular can add a lot of context throughout and it can be easy to forget later on in the video (or if you miss it in the first few seconds)
I’ve watched 100’s of these videos, Aussie pilot crew resource management is the best there is, no egos, no chain of command, even when under intense pressure and mistakes are made, lets just get this broken bird landed and save as many lives as we can.
I sort of expected a statement saying the ac was offline for two weeks for repairs. Guess I’m spoiled. Great video as usual. I’m a retired a/p mechanic so oddly I find these disasters relaxing so I tend to watch them before going to bed. Probably the music
I'm sure that'll buff out lol. I think they need to install cameras in various places of the planes where they can make visual inspections of various systems while in flight. Just as they started putting them on spacecraft to monitor things during launch and separation sequences. Great video as usual buddy. 👍
I have thought this for a long while. You watch the Bathurst 1000 and you see everything from multiple angles on the car. The technology is available - just program a MFD with four or five extra buttons. Gear, empennage, flaps, doors. Easy.
@@johnmclean6498 Back in the 60's they didn't have the videos, that is why the 747 had dual landing gear warning systems. Independent of each other. Both independent systems showed the nose gear was not down and locked!
It may not have been mandatory to check and service the oil thing, but coupled with the fact that they had been using excessive oil, you would think that it would have raised alarm bells to have it checked!
I would suggest that all commercial plane manufacturers start installing cameras inside and outside so that the pilots can see their aircraft to alert them to incidents like these and many more that I've watched on this channel
Was watching patiently all the way to the end, hoping to read some texts saying that the Flight Engineer had been held responsible for calmly letting hundreds of lives go through such dangerous event.
correct, or at the very least have a very clear visual indicator of all landing gear in the cockpit? this is why aviation is so trash as its run by military people who simply dont have brains or common sense
I'll take the extra time and walk, roller skate or skate board, especially these days with all that's going on with air travel and air planes. I question the people maintaining the planes, the people who travel by plane, the people who fly the planes, the entire transportation system and the man in charge of it all.
That is correct, five greens. The design was criticized in that rather than have for example a red light indicating a problem one of the five lights simply did not appear. The engineer was apparently unaware of what a problem with the landing gear as happened here was supposed to look like.
To be fair to AN, I am not certain they maintained their 747s - I have a vague memory that SQ maintained them, since AN leased them from SQ and SQ owned them anyway.
as an experienced captain he shouldn't have overlooked the most obvious reason for the front landing gear warning inspite of one engine being shut down resulting in a sloppy response of the hydraulic system . . . but the B747-300 had a triple redundant hydraulic system . . .
Inexperience is the name of the game here. The FE was on his first waged flight on a B747 after recently being certified. I would've expected them to know that the landing gear consisted of five units but even the captain failed to ask the question correctly. He basically had two rookies as his flight crew for this plane and I doubt they'd even flown together before so no understanding of how each person communicates. Just fortunate it turned out okay, even if Ansett had to get a specialist team of cleaners in to get the stench out of the seating after almost everyone on board crapped themselves. Not the flight attendants. Nothing phases them. Especially those Ansett women back in the day.
Ok I'm being honest, I highly doubt that with "giving more time" the landing gear would've eventually come out. How long were they waiting on the nose gear to come out? Because if all of the others ones had no problem coming out, then it had to be a mechanical problem with the nose that would've required much more than just "a few extra moments". Theres definitely something more to that
When I flew 743s and 744s on AN as pax threy never used a remote gate. I did see the plane starnded on runway 16R at 5pm or so from General Holmes Drive.
Jesus...no nosewheel and no comment. I don't understand this one at all. How the flight engineer didn't recognize the incorrect landing configuration and why the Captain and FO didn't identify it in the landing checklist tells me the flight crew and not the plane were on autopilot. They were damn lucky.
moments before landing, the FE was still busy counting to 5 using his fingers.......by the time he got to his 5th finger, it was too late...... management retrained the FE to have his finger tips numbered with permanent tattoos going forward
Here’s the thing! The flight engineer didn’t see the landing lights also the pilot lost situational awareness due to the lack of probability management of the airlines!
I don’t fly this old version of the 747, but don’t they have an indication on the panel showing a green light for each landing gear? In which case also the flight crew should have seen that the nose wasn’t “green”… (May be the old 74’s had the landing gear indication on the FE’s panel only…)
The one sad truth about regulations regarding all types of transportation is that frequently they are written in blood. It really shouldn't take a tragedy to change hazardous operational procedures, but it seems to almost always be the case. We need to do better. We MUST do better
The situation with the nose landing gear means that the airplane should be equipped with a video camara watching the position of landing gears so that the captain be informed without fail.
Thank God, due to the advancement in aviation technology, aircrafts have better cockpit instrumentation that assist the cockpit crew in avoiding these types of incidents. I know this, because I grew up an airline brat, having a father who worked for United Airlines for almost 40 years. I've flown on so many different airplane models in my 64 years then I can tell you how much safer it is to fly now. I once worked for a non-commercial airline myself. Today, FAA regulations are much more stringent, thank God! Back in the day when I was a kid, I could tell you stories told by my dad that would make you wonder, if you are as old as I am, how we survived any plane flight back then. I won't go there. 😉
I didn't even know about this one. I would of been 13 at the time. I think it's very demanding to be a captain training a new pilot as well as having a new engineer. My feel is if 3 people are working in the cockpit only one should be training or brand new. It puts too much on the plate of the captain. However the co-pilot did an excellent job landing. They were lucky to be able to slow it down and not cause a fire. The captain knows the plane. If you are getting a warning sound and it's telling you a problem with the gear and you have a brand new engineer my view is that they should of tried to go by the airport and have ground atc check to see if the gear was down. I do get that he was probably concerned with the hydrolics too because if your having slow moving flaps and gear you kind of want to be out of the sky as fast as you can. You want your passengers to be safe. I don’t understand how the FE stated all greens and then later stated they were all set. If you don’t know what you are looking at speak up. If you aren’t sure say something. Don’t assume. I don’t like the fact that there are planes out there that have a flight engineer. I say this because you have the captain and the co-pilot who are flying the plane based on the instruments in front of them. If they can’t see other instruments and you have a guy that is relaying info that you can’t see, you are putting a heck of a lot of trust in them. Whereas if it’s just a captain and co-pilot they can look at the other persons instrumentations.
The pilots had the indication in front of them and they disregarded it. They had a continuous Aural warning horn and disregarded it. They should have done a go round , cleaned up and looked again. They may have even found the #1 ADP switch in the wrong position.
*'Just how tough is a 'Boeing-747?'* *500,000 pound airplane lands ON IT'S NOSE and survives intact* ( *'Grandfather' is a 'B-17' so I guess those genes are still there...although plane probably wonders 'Where are my GUNS and and where is 'bomb-doors open' switch?* )
Great comment re the Ansett metaphor. My original flying instructor was an AN 320 Captain and one day at the gate his plane went U/S and he was directed by Air NZ employee in AUK (current owners ) to disemabrk along with pax and go to another gate which was a 767 and told them he was not allowed to fly that. I will not comment on the reply as cannot be verified but it was a rediciulous comment if true.
If the pilot had been a Cardassian, he would've made sure the FE saw five lights (obscure ST:TNG reference). In an unrelated note, it's coming up on the 50th anniversary of the crash of United flight 553 near Midway Airport in Chicago (December 8, 1972). I was wondering if TFC will ever do a video on that crash. I've seen other YT videos on the disaster, but since TFC's quality is head and shoulders above the rest I was hoping it'll be covered here.
A generic ‘warning sound’ is not much use. What is it warning about? Yes, having 155 different warning noises is not going to help either. Oh a bell and a whistle, with a drum sound, what is that? Not heard that since the simulator 8 months ago! I drove a customers car and it went ‘ding, ding, ding’ for miles, but there were no warning lights on anywhere. What was it unhappy about? To this day I have not got a clue.
No native animals in Australia kill you if you leave them alone. The biggest cause of animal related deaths and injury down here is cows. Agree with rest of your statement. 😀🇦🇺
I was on this flight. This flight is the reason I have a phobia of flying. I was a small child that had no idea what was going on but could see the worry on so many faces of adults. So I knew something was wrong.
It's now 2023 and I still need something to calm me down when flying.
I was on this flight too! Only 19 flying by myself. Still remember every minute.
@@KateMcAuley It was not fun. Hugs!
Are you saying you were on this flight that blew apart and crashed into the ocean? How is that possible to survive unless you are talking about the previous flight.
@@geraldlynn1827 they`re attention seekers, ignore.
I was a 13 year old school boy in Sydney at the time this happened. The day in question was cloudy, but not wet. Reading through the ATSB summary later on, I realised that crew mismanagement of the situation was the underlying cause of the accident. It exacerbated the material defects on the aircraft, a leased B747-300 from Singapore Airlines (I think). Ansett was trying to expand into international operations (they were a domestic carrier), to try and take on Qantas (which had been merged with Australian Airlines the year prior). In hindsight, this was the beginning of the end for Ansett. Rupert Murdoch, Air NZ, and TNT holdings asset stripped this airline in the years leading up to their collapse, causing fatigue related groundings of their B767 fleet and regulator intervention in 2000. The airline collapsed on Sep 12 2001, and administrators tried to get a functional service going with its A320 fleet, but it proved unsuccessful and operations ceased in 2002.
The FE not saying the nose gear light isn’t lit is like my accountant telling me I have so much $$$ in my account without mentioning there is a minus (-) sign in front of it.
LOL! Great analogy 😫😂
3
@@MontanaDior 1
@@MontanaDior 1
@@MontanaDior 1
They let the plane go with an engine that has a “recent history of high oil consumption”
Brilliant.
What could possibly go wrong?
Bad management
@@backedupwithtruth7525 Criminal Managlement
@Snoopy Yes but in 2005. The 747 was rated in the flight manual, by Boeing and by the FAA to be clear to fly with one engine out. The Flight 285 incident was a questionable judgement call as they were simply circling LAX for an hour trying to decide what to do. They could have landed, but BA policy was to penalize flight crews for cancellations.
@Snoopy A LOT of things get 'signed off' and it's almost commonplace. Usually they are things which don't constitute a hazard to normal flight but not all flights are normal. 3 flights back for me we had to wait for something to get 'signed off' before we could depart- apparently someone had forgotten to do that after deficient equipment was noted. Knowing how things work I was somewhat worried, but I was probably the only passenger on the plane who knew what was happening.
Is this mess for real, I'll never fly again
Everybody lives! Just this once, everybody lives! An exciting and educational video, TFC. I always look forward to Thursdays!
That’s a spoiler alert that I appreciated!!
I see what you did there...
@@acb747 hee hee hee I wondered if anyone was gonna catch that!
Some flight engineer was known, since then, as "4- greens".
no, he never worked again and was executed by putin
obviously, the whole problem initiated by a mechanical problem but the engineer should have been more forceful saying 4 out of 5 green. Execute a fly by to have verification from the terminal. Regardless the captain landed it very well.
The issue was that the flight engineer didn't recognize the problem, that's why when the captain tried to re-confirm if all the landing lights were on the flight engineer only said "yes".
My issue is if the flight engineer didn't recognize what constituted a problem on his board, he had no business being on that flight. He was useless.
reminds me of the Gimli Glider. That 747 ran out of fuel and upon descent, couldn't extend it's nose wheel. It landed safely at an abandoned drag strip.
The FE had recently experienced a sprained thumb and was subsequently unable to count to 5 using his fingers. He was later promoted to CFO to ensure the company would not survive bankruptcy.
@@adotintheshark4848 That was a 767... But, yeah....
Damn, this captain needs post its on his window to remind him that if the landing gear alarm is sounding to do a fly by and allow the tower to confirm. Such madness.
The captain would have been wise to to do a low approach and have the controller visually inspect the gear, but at this point, confirmation bias has set in from the engineer’s miscommunication. He believes that everything is safe for landing.
I know, right ?
That would have been wise & prudent.
That damage couldn't have been cheap !
Problem is most airlines are so stingy/ strict on fuel consumption and you will find pilots fear losing their job/ license.
*Crazy bosses people have to deal with* 😭😢
@@pishyp in other words they might get in less trouble for _actually crashing the plane_
They didn't seem aware and when ATC told them...too late
@@pishyp NOT fuel stinginess, they just dumped most of it.
It's amazing how they could gently land it without the nose landing gear down. So glad they all survived! Thank you for another great presentation.
The weight on the nose is totally incredible , but just to be on the safe side and be professional ?
The whole aircraft should have been landed on grass to avoid sparks and heat and possibly flames!
@@miguelperaza6615 That would have been ideal, but it was stated they were not informed until they were actually touching down that the front gears weren't down.
Four green landing lights can't make the other green one work! No fkn way !
Yes, exactly; despite the issues subsequently noted, the landing was gentle.
@@miguelperaza6615 it wasn’t possible, and getting stuck on the grass, particularly at that airport, would’ve created an entirely different problem. In the end, they landed carefully (though refraining from recognising the obvious problem & acting upon it).
Well done, as usual. Thanks for this, nice to see no casualties.
One would think that in this situation of a disagreement between indicators and a known hydraulic problem that the obvious course of action would be to fly by the tower and ask them to look and see if all the gear were down.
The flight engineer did not perceive that one of the five gear annunciator lights on his panel was not illuminated when he was asked to check their status.
This incident is a bit of a metaphor for Ansett itself- a great airline with a long history which was run into the ground by a combination of management incompetency, take-over bids by other airlines, lack of maintenance and union stubbornness which cost the airline employees their jobs in the end....a real shame as Ansett had been the only real competitor to Qantas' monopoly.
'only real competitor to Qantas'...which charged astronomical prices nonetheless.
i paid AU$1100 for a Per-Syd return in 1989 !
If management was incompetent, why would you even set foot on this airline?
@@paulkoza8652
The same reason 8.3 million people bought GM vehicles the year before the company went bankrupt. Most people don't know very much.
@@jshepard152 You are mixing apples with oranges. Not the same thing.
@@paulkoza8652
It's exactly the same thing. They patronize the business because they don't know the management is crap.
I think the 747 is one of the finest aircraft ever to fly, but like all complex machines it requires diligent maintenance. One thing that I noticed is that both the flight engineer and the copilot were not fully checked out for the 747 in this type of service operation, and perhaps this contributed in some way to the confusion.
I flew in 2 747s in the 70s...beautiful plane
So happy that there was no casualties!
Great video! So glad to hear there were no injuries! I love your videos, always love the music too!
A flight engineer who cannot even read the display for the gear correctly? Appalling.
Was he fired or reprimanded
@@gm12551 Accident reports never recommend disciplinary action even if a crew member was an absolute moron.
He could read it fine. This is yet another attempted murder-suicide by a flight crew member, and the industry just won't admit it.
“Four green lights”… not a complete report. Hearing “Four green lights” and not processing what was said… is criminal.
.. as is your spelling of appalling 😉
Long live the 747, an aircraft that has repeatedly suffered incompetent crews and adverse conditions and still brought everyone home safely time and time again.
Unless it's the TWA-800. Unfortunately, that 747 tore apart, and everyone did not survive. 😢❤
JAL?
Tell that to the families of the Tenerife disaster....
@@jmwc79 That was due to the incompetence and negligence of the KLM crew, not the 747.
A captain who is monitoring a new FO and has a FE who has just qualified? Seems like very poor judgment from whoever put that crew together.
And even further enhanced by the fact that the captain elected to let the FO keep flying during an emergency for "training purposes" instead of taking control. What poor decisions all around.
@@theycallmetundraboy I was going to comment on what must have been going through the captain's mind during this event and then let the FO keep flying. I can understand at first that he wanted the FO to get real world experience in an emergency but then came across your comment on how foolish that decision must have been.
I didn't think it was a new FO. Thought they said he was doing his last training flight to become Captain.
Not really. The Flight Engineer was fully qualified, only lacking solo experience. He should have known his systems. The Co-Pilot was similar, only lacking requisite hours to be certified. Apparently he handled the plane very well. It's actually the pilot not flying who has the biggest workload when landing, and the Captain probably had confidence in his Co-Pilots abilities and so took on the hard job himself. The only fault I can find in this is that they should have requested a "fly-by" so the tower could visually inspect the landing gear as they passed. This is a normal procedure for many airlines when there's a question of the landing gear's proper deployment. And the Engineer should have been more vocal about the low pressure and what it meant, asking for both Pilots to confirm that they heard and understood him. Today's concept and implementation of good "Cockpit Resource Management" would have prevented these errors. Many lessons are learned the hard way but this one happily saw nobody harmed.
the problem actually, nobody 'monitoring' the captain, really!
why didnt they opt for a fly by and eyeball ? they had plenty of fuel and unless somone can say for sure 3 engines would still have done it
Everyone survived by Almighty's grace and mercy and the excellent flying skills of the pilots. Salute and respect to them.
Flight Engineer: "We have 4 greens"
Pilot: "But we have 5 sets of landing gear"
Flight Engineer: "But we have 4 greens"
He's lucky no one got hurt due to his incompetence
That was bad communication. No one was penalized or retrained?
Atleast they are safe
Luck shouldn’t have anything to do with it unfortunately. But yes, you’re spot on. Makes me embarrassed to be a Sydney-sider. For a few hours, anyway.
The FE is a climate change denier.
That's exactly what I was thinking. 4 greens is good, but the 747 has 5 sets of landing gear.
Your videos are fantastic! The cars and semi trucks going down the freeway and the motor noises are so realistic!
There's even a car running into the back of a truck at about 44seconds in!!
@@salamander5703 I'll have to rewatch and look for that!
They still need to do some work on people walking. Getting better all the time.
I love this channel. One of the best civil aviation channels on YT IMHO
What a great example of "correlation is not causation". Great video.
What do you mean? I don't understand.
@@d716agq I think he instinuates on the situation that the pilot thought that the flaps 25 (or was it 50) setting had caused the landing gear issues, while it just coincided in reality.
12:43 - How in the world, when the Captain has repeatedly questioned whether the landing gear is down or not, how does the flight engineer not notice that the gear indicator was telling him it was NOT down?
Captain: "Huh, why is the landing gear malfunction alarm going off? It has to be a false positive."
The positive: Being the exact opposite of false to a ludicrous degree.
The captain bore ultimate responsibility. He should have requested a low & slow pass over the airfield for a ground observation report before attempting a landing.
I never did get to see ansett bit im lucky i was able to see the Qantas 747 a few times before retirement
That was dippy. A flyby and inspection of the gear by tower personnel was indicated.
In any industry, warning alarms mean just that WARNING. It happens so many times when people hear alarms or alerts they disregard them. What is your first thought when you hear a car alarm down the block? There is some psychology behind the denial of alarms and alerts.
Thank God all survived...pretty good flying by the FO keeping the nose up so long and gently putting it down.
the fact that this was made with FSX is amazing! it will never die!
It is p3d not fsx. P3d is still used alot, fsx is kinda dead
@@SpidaMez but it says in the description that it is fsx
@@miggis Sometimes it says Roblox is Call of Duty it definitely isn't perfect.
Ansett, now that’s a throwback to when I was a kid!
Honestly, 4 greens out of 5...I would be terrified by this, because it's clearly indicating it's not down...my gosh, it's a miracle nothing terrible happened and it went fairly well.
"Ladies and gentleman, this is your student pilot speaking. Today we will be practicing no-nosewheel landings, so please don't be concerned".
This “queen of the skies” was repaired to fly again. 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Hey TFC, could you start to add the date and year into the description as well? I feel like the year in particular can add a lot of context throughout and it can be easy to forget later on in the video (or if you miss it in the first few seconds)
I’ve watched 100’s of these videos, Aussie pilot crew resource management is the best there is, no egos, no chain of command, even when under intense pressure and mistakes are made, lets just get this broken bird landed and save as many lives as we can.
Not in this case.
I sort of expected a statement saying the ac was offline for two weeks for repairs. Guess I’m spoiled. Great video as usual. I’m a retired a/p mechanic so oddly I find these disasters relaxing so I tend to watch them before going to bed. Probably the music
I'm sure that'll buff out lol. I think they need to install cameras in various places of the planes where they can make visual inspections of various systems while in flight. Just as they started putting them on spacecraft to monitor things during launch and separation sequences. Great video as usual buddy. 👍
I have thought this for a long while. You watch the Bathurst 1000 and you see everything from multiple angles on the car. The technology is available - just program a MFD with four or five extra buttons. Gear, empennage, flaps, doors. Easy.
Great idea!
@@johnmclean6498 Back in the 60's they didn't have the videos, that is why the 747 had dual landing gear warning systems. Independent of each other. Both independent systems showed the nose gear was not down and locked!
It may not have been mandatory to check and service the oil thing, but coupled with the fact that they had been using excessive oil, you would think that it would have raised alarm bells to have it checked!
What a beautifully made video that was. Great job.
I would suggest that all commercial plane manufacturers start installing cameras inside and outside so that the pilots can see their aircraft to alert them to incidents like these and many more that I've watched on this channel
Was watching patiently all the way to the end, hoping to read some texts saying that the Flight Engineer had been held responsible for calmly letting hundreds of lives go through such dangerous event.
I am pretty sure that not only is there a visual observation window in the dog house but an emergency free fall extention release in the flight deck.
Sad to think Ansett Australia collapsed in 2002
airplanes need external cameras for the flight engineer
Such a huge plane could easily and cheaply carry one to view all landing gears at once if placed at the back bottom far enough.
correct, or at the very least have a very clear visual indicator of all landing gear in the cockpit? this is why aviation is so trash as its run by military people who simply dont have brains or common sense
I wouldn't trust that engineer to interpret a video image if he cant see that 4 out of 5 lights is a problem.
I'll take the extra time and walk, roller skate or skate board, especially these days with all that's going on with air travel and air planes. I question the people maintaining the planes, the people who travel by plane, the people who fly the planes, the entire transportation system and the man in charge of it all.
Should there have been "five greens" for the four main gear and one nose gear?
That's what I was wondering as well.
That is correct, five greens. The design was criticized in that rather than have for example a red light indicating a problem one of the five lights simply did not appear. The engineer was apparently unaware of what a problem with the landing gear as happened here was supposed to look like.
To be fair to AN, I am not certain they maintained their 747s - I have a vague memory that SQ maintained them, since AN leased them from SQ and SQ owned them anyway.
Ansett was a fine airline. A shame that it's gone.
Agreed. I flew on that airline everywhere in Aus & had brilliant experiences every time. A sad day.
Thank you, TheFlightChannel.⭐✈⭐
So sad. The demise of a great airline. Vale Ansett. ❤
as an experienced captain he shouldn't have overlooked the most obvious reason for the front landing gear warning inspite of one engine being shut down resulting in a sloppy response of the hydraulic system . . . but the B747-300 had a triple redundant hydraulic system . . .
Their 744s later were from ANA. The 743s were from SQ but the line captain was CX trained and at that time retired from CX.
Inexperience is the name of the game here. The FE was on his first waged flight on a B747 after recently being certified. I would've expected them to know that the landing gear consisted of five units but even the captain failed to ask the question correctly. He basically had two rookies as his flight crew for this plane and I doubt they'd even flown together before so no understanding of how each person communicates. Just fortunate it turned out okay, even if Ansett had to get a specialist team of cleaners in to get the stench out of the seating after almost everyone on board crapped themselves. Not the flight attendants. Nothing phases them. Especially those Ansett women back in the day.
Good choice, good piloting. Great plane! Landed beautifully with no nose gear. 👍
I love your videos. keep it up
the landing was good. The choices before it not so much.
I miss Ansett a real Australian icon
I thought this was a old video of yours but it was uploaded 45 minutes ago. Whoopee! Let's get into it
It's always the little things in life that will get you.
Ok I'm being honest, I highly doubt that with "giving more time" the landing gear would've eventually come out. How long were they waiting on the nose gear to come out? Because if all of the others ones had no problem coming out, then it had to be a mechanical problem with the nose that would've required much more than just "a few extra moments". Theres definitely something more to that
It would help if you explained what the "engine angle gearbox housing"is. We're not typically mechanics.
Imagine the stench of the cabin when the doors were opened.
"Four Greens" when you have 5 to be Green -- says a lot... 🤦🏻♂
I like the screaming bits when they face their destiny in a mountainside.
flight engineer's first and only B747 trip ?
When I flew 743s and 744s on AN as pax threy never used a remote gate. I did see the plane starnded on runway 16R at 5pm or so from General Holmes Drive.
Jesus...no nosewheel and no comment. I don't understand this one at all. How the flight engineer didn't recognize the incorrect landing configuration and why the Captain and FO didn't identify it in the landing checklist tells me the flight crew and not the plane were on autopilot. They were damn lucky.
moments before landing, the FE was still busy counting to 5 using his fingers.......by the time he got to his 5th finger, it was too late...... management retrained the FE to have his finger tips numbered with permanent tattoos going forward
the captain did an excellent job to the land the plane without the nose land gear
Here’s the thing! The flight engineer didn’t see the landing lights also the pilot lost situational awareness due to the lack of probability management of the airlines!
I don’t fly this old version of the 747, but don’t they have an indication on the panel showing a green light for each landing gear? In which case also the flight crew should have seen that the nose wasn’t “green”… (May be the old 74’s had the landing gear indication on the FE’s panel only…)
Well despite all that, it was a magnificent landing. Pity such an illustrious career ends like this. I suppose you're only as good as your last flight
Great work as always. I was wondering if you'll post an updated version for Sriwijaya Air Flight 182 since the final report is released?
Brilliant re-creation of the actual events. 👍
The one sad truth about regulations regarding all types of transportation is that frequently they are written in blood. It really shouldn't take a tragedy to change hazardous operational procedures, but it seems to almost always be the case. We need to do better. We MUST do better
The situation with the nose landing gear means that the airplane should be equipped with a video camara watching the position of landing gears so that the captain be informed without fail.
2:10 I WISH people boarded that fast!
we love you the flightchannell
Thank God, due to the advancement in aviation technology, aircrafts have better cockpit instrumentation that assist the cockpit crew in avoiding these types of incidents. I know this, because I grew up an airline brat, having a father who worked for United Airlines for almost 40 years. I've flown on so many different airplane models in my 64 years then I can tell you how much safer it is to fly now. I once worked for a non-commercial airline myself. Today, FAA regulations are much more stringent, thank God! Back in the day when I was a kid, I could tell you stories told by my dad that would make you wonder, if you are as old as I am, how we survived any plane flight back then. I won't go there. 😉
I didn't even know about this one. I would of been 13 at the time. I think it's very demanding to be a captain training a new pilot as well as having a new engineer. My feel is if 3 people are working in the cockpit only one should be training or brand new. It puts too much on the plate of the captain. However the co-pilot did an excellent job landing. They were lucky to be able to slow it down and not cause a fire. The captain knows the plane. If you are getting a warning sound and it's telling you a problem with the gear and you have a brand new engineer my view is that they should of tried to go by the airport and have ground atc check to see if the gear was down. I do get that he was probably concerned with the hydrolics too because if your having slow moving flaps and gear you kind of want to be out of the sky as fast as you can. You want your passengers to be safe. I don’t understand how the FE stated all greens and then later stated they were all set. If you don’t know what you are looking at speak up. If you aren’t sure say something. Don’t assume. I don’t like the fact that there are planes out there that have a flight engineer. I say this because you have the captain and the co-pilot who are flying the plane based on the instruments in front of them. If they can’t see other instruments and you have a guy that is relaying info that you can’t see, you are putting a heck of a lot of trust in them. Whereas if it’s just a captain and co-pilot they can look at the other persons instrumentations.
That should never have happened...there should have been an experienced FE on board a training flight.
The pilots had the indication in front of them and they disregarded it. They had a continuous Aural warning horn and disregarded it. They should have done a go round , cleaned up and looked again. They may have even found the #1 ADP switch in the wrong position.
@@robsmith3291 I agree
I love the music, it is hopeful and sad at the same time.
Excellent work! Would it be possible to do a crash video on Malev flight 240?
The demise of a once great Australian airline.
*'Just how tough is a 'Boeing-747?'*
*500,000 pound airplane lands ON IT'S NOSE and survives intact*
( *'Grandfather' is a 'B-17' so I guess those genes are still there...although plane probably wonders 'Where are my GUNS and and where is 'bomb-doors open' switch?* )
back in 1994, Ansett leased a pair of b747-300 classic from Singapore airlines rather than the video shown 747-400
Thanks for your comment. The video may have mentioned that the model shown was different.
WOW ! FANTASTIC JOB !!
Great comment re the Ansett metaphor. My original flying instructor was an AN 320 Captain and one day at the gate his plane went U/S and he was directed by Air NZ employee in AUK (current owners ) to disemabrk along with pax and go to another gate which was a 767 and told them he was not allowed to fly that. I will not comment on the reply as cannot be verified but it was a rediciulous comment if true.
Well this must be very old, because Ansett last flight was in 2002.
It was a good Australian Airline that flew for 65 years.
Even this animated version is very accurate because Aussies do drive on the left side of the freeway like the Brits
And here in South Africa 🇿🇦
Excellent video. Thank you.
If the pilot had been a Cardassian, he would've made sure the FE saw five lights (obscure ST:TNG reference). In an unrelated note, it's coming up on the 50th anniversary of the crash of United flight 553 near Midway Airport in Chicago (December 8, 1972). I was wondering if TFC will ever do a video on that crash. I've seen other YT videos on the disaster, but since TFC's quality is head and shoulders above the rest I was hoping it'll be covered here.
To which the FE said “THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!!” after the landing.
😂😂😂
@@love2fly558 lol
Good one!
Aww yes Ansett Australia. 🇦🇺 ☺️
Tell me Picard, how many lights do you see?....."THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!" 🤣
Great video!
#Everyone_Survived the best words.
#Exciting Video throughout.
Thank you #TheFlightChannel
Hey FE, see that red gear indicator light? Maybe you should mention it to the captain.
A generic ‘warning sound’ is not much use.
What is it warning about?
Yes, having 155 different warning noises is not going to help either. Oh a bell and a whistle, with a drum sound, what is that? Not heard that since the simulator 8 months ago!
I drove a customers car and it went ‘ding, ding, ding’ for miles, but there were no warning lights on anywhere. What was it unhappy about? To this day I have not got a clue.
Been to Australia, just about every animal there can kill you plus a hole in the ozone layer overhead. Great food and people though.
No native animals in Australia kill you if you leave them alone. The biggest cause of animal related deaths and injury down here is cows. Agree with rest of your statement. 😀🇦🇺