The official inquiry, headed by Judge Cecil Margo, was unable to determine the cause of the fire. This lack of a conclusion led to conspiracy theories, debates and speculation about the nature of Flight 295's cargo, as well as a subsequent post-apartheid investigation and calls from relatives of those on the flight to re-open the investigation in the years following the accident.[5]
Aircraft and crew
The aircraft involved was a Boeing 747-244BMCombi registered ZS-SAS and named Helderberg. This was the 488th built 747, made its first flight on 12 November 1980 and was delivered to South African Airways (SAA) on 24 November 1980.[6]
The Boeing 747-200B Combi model permits the mixing of passengers and cargo on the main deck according to load factors on any given route and Class B cargo compartment regulations.[6] Flight 295 had 140 passengers and six pallets of cargo on the main deck.[6] The master waybills stated that 47,000 kilograms (104,000lb) of baggage and cargo were loaded on the aircraft.[7] A Taiwanese customs official performed a surprise inspection of some of the cargo; he did not find anything that could be characterised as suspicious.[7] According to Tinus Jacobs who was SAA's manager in Taiwan at the time of Flight 295, the flight crew appeared relaxed and "happy to fly" before takeoff and did not display any concerns about the cargo.[8]
The captain of Flight 295 was 49-year-old Dawid Jacobus Uys, a former South African Air Force pilot with 13,843 hours' experience of which 3,884 hours was on the Boeing 747 series airplanes.[9] Uys was described by colleagues as professional and skilled and at the time of the accident was considering retiring to take up a role with the South African Pilots' Association.[10] The flight crew also consisted of 36-year-old first officer David Attwell and 37-year-old relief first officer Geoffrey Birchall, with 7,362 and 8,749 hours' experience (including 4,096 and 4,555 hours on the Boeing 747) respectively; and 45-year-old flight engineer, Giuseppe "Joe" Bellagarda and 34-year-old relief flight engineer, Alan Daniel, with 7,804 hours and 1,595 hours (4,254 and 227 of them on the Boeing 747) of experience respectively.[11]
At some point during the flight, believed to be during the beginning of its landing approach to Mauritius, a fire developed in the cargo section on the main deck which was probably not extinguished before impact. The 'smoke evacuation' checklist calls for the aircraft to be depressurised, and for two of the cabin doors to be opened. No evidence exists that the checklist was followed or that the doors were opened. A crew member might have gone into the cargo hold to try to fight the fire. A charred fire extinguisher was later recovered from the wreckage on which investigators found molten metal.[7]
Springbok Two Nine Five, eh, Mauritius, eh, good morning, eh, go ahead.
23:49:07
295
Eh, good morning, we have, eh, a smoke, eh, eh, problemsss and we're doing emergency descent to level one five (in error), eh, one four zero. (flight level 140 is at 14,000 feet)
23:49:18
ATC
Confirm you wish to descend to flight level one four zero.
23:49:20
295
Ja, we have already commenced, an, due to [a] smoke problem in the aeroplane.
23:49:25
ATC
Eh, roger, you are clear to descend immediately to flight level one four zero.
23:49:30
295
Roger, we will appreciate if you can alert the fire, ehp, ehp eh (inhale) eh
23:49:40
ATC
Do you wish to eh, do you request a full emergency?
Request your actual position please and your DME distance?
23:50:51
295
Eh, we haven't got the DME yet.
23:50:55
ATC
Eh, roger and your actual position please.
23:51:00
295
Eh, say again.
23:51:02
ATC
Your actual position.
23:51:08
295
Now we've lost a lot of electrics, we haven't got anything on the, on the aircraft now.
23:51:12
ATC
Eh, roger, I declare a full emergency immediately.
23:51:15
295
Affirmative.
23:51:18
ATC
Roger.
23:52:19
ATC
Eh, Springbok Two Nine Five, do you have an Echo Tango Alfa Plaisance please?
23:52:30
ATC
Springbok Two Nine Five, Plaisance.
23:52:32
295
Ja, Plaisance?
23:52:33
ATC
Do you have an Echo Tango Alfa Plaisance please?
23:52:36
295
Ja, eh, zero zero, eh eh eh three zero.
23:52:40
ATC
Roger, zero zero three zero, thank you.
23:52:50
295
Hey Joe, shut down the oxygen left.
Inadvertent transmission from the aircraft
23:52:52
ATC
Sorry, say again please?
00:01:34
295
Eh, Plaisance, Springbok 295, we've opened the door[s] to see if we (can?)...we should be OK
00:01:36
295
Look there (?)
Exclamation by someone else, and is said over the last part of the previous sentence
00:01:45
295
Donnerse deur t...
[in Afrikaans] Close the bloody door (More directly translated: Damned door c...)
00:01:57
295
Joe, switch up quickly, then close the hole on your side.
00:02:10
295
Pressure(?) twelve thousand
00:02:14
295
...Genoeg is...Anders kan ons vlug verongeluk
[in Afrikaans] ...Is enough...otherwise our flight could come to grief (More directly translated: ...enough is... otherwise our flight might crash)
00:02:25
295
(Carrier wave only)
00:02:38
295
Eh Plaisance, Springbok Two Nine Five, do [did] you copy?
00:02:41
ATC
Eh negative, Two Nine Five, say again please, say again.
00:02:43
295
We're now sixty five miles.
00:02:45
ATC
Confirm sixty five miles.
Incorrectly understood by air traffic control to mean that the aircraft was 65 miles from the airport; in fact it was 65 miles from waypoint Xagal, and 145 miles from the airport.
00:02:47
295
Ja, affirmative Charlie Charlie.
00:02:50
ATC
Eh, Roger, Springbok eh Two Nine Five, eh re you're recleared flight level five zero. Recleared flight level five zero.
00:02:58
295
Roger, five zero.
00:03:00
ATC
And, Springbok Two Nine Five copy actual weather Plaisance Copy actual weather Plaisance. The wind one one zero degrees zero five knots. The visibility above one zero kilometres. And we have a precipitation in sight to the north. Clouds, five oktas one six zero zero, one okta five thousand feet. Temperature is twenty two, two two. And the QNH one zero one eight hectopascals, one zero one eight over.
00:03:28
295
Roger, one zero one eight.
00:03:31
ATC
Affirmative, eh and both runways available if you wish.
00:03:43
ATC
And two nine five, I request pilot's intention.
00:03:46
295
Eh, we'd like to track in eh, on eh one three.
00:03:51
ATC
Confirm runway one four.
00:03:54
295
Charlie Charlie
00:03:56
ATC
Affirmative and you're cleared, eh direct to Foxtrot Foxtrot. You report approaching five zero
Clearance granted to the Flic-en-Flac non-directional navigation beacon.
00:04:02
295
Kay
Last transmission from the aircraft
00:08:00
ATC
Two Nine Five, Plaisance
00:08:11
ATC
Springbok Two Nine Five, Plaisance
00:08:35
ATC
Springbok Two Nine Five Plaisance
No answer
The fire began to destroy the aircraft's important electrical systems, resulting in loss of communication and control of the aircraft. At exactly 00:07 UTC (4:07 local time), the aircraft broke apart in mid-air, the tail section breaking off first, due to the fire beginning to burn the structure of the aircraft, and crashed into the Indian Ocean, about 134 nautical miles (154mi; 248km) from the airport.[2] Other theories given for the ultimate demise of the aircraft were that the flight crew eventually became incapacitated by the smoke and fire or extensive damage to the 747's control systems rendered the plane uncontrollable before it hit the ocean.[15]
After communication with Flight 295 was lost for thirty-six minutes, at 00:44 (04:44 local time), air traffic control at Plaisance Airport formally declared an emergency.[7]
Map of the Indian Ocean, showing the origin of the flight in Taiwan, stopover in Mauritius, destination of Johannesburg and accident site near Mauritius
When Flight 295 last informed Plaisance air traffic control of its position, its report was incorrectly understood to be relative to the airport rather than its next waypoint, which caused the subsequent search to be concentrated too close to Mauritius.[13] The United States Navy sent aircraft from Diego Garcia, which were used to conduct immediate search and rescue operations in conjunction with the French Navy.[16] By the time the first surface debris was located twelve hours after impact, it had drifted considerably from the impact location. Oil slicks and eight bodies showing signs of extreme trauma appeared in the water.[7] There were no survivors.
After recovery of the wreckage from 4,000m (13,000ft) below the surface of the ocean, the aircraft's fuselage and cabin interior were partly reassembled in one of SAA's hangars at Jan Smuts Airport, where it was examined and finally opened for viewing to the airline's staff and selected members of the public.[citation needed]
Investigation
Rennie Van Zyl, South Africa's head crash investigator, examined three wristwatches from baggage recovered from the surface; two of the watches were still running according to Taiwan time. Van Zyl deduced the approximate time of impact at 00:07:00, around three minutes after the last communication with air traffic control.[7]
Immediately after the crash, the press and public opinion suspected that terrorism brought down Flight 295. South Africa, then under the control of the apartheid government, was the target of terrorism both domestically and internationally, and offices for SAA, the country's flag carrier, had previously been attacked.[17] Experts searched for indicators of an explosion on the initial pieces of wreckage discovered, such as surface pitting, impact cavities and spatter cavities caused by white-hot fragments from explosive devices that strike and melt metal alloys found in aircraft structures. Experts found none of this evidence.[7] The investigators drew blood samples from two of the recovered bodies and found that the bodies had soot in their tracheae, indicating that at least two had died from smoke inhalation before the aircraft had crashed, and concluded that some of the passengers would have already lost their lives even if the pilots had successfully reached the airport.[7][18][19]
South Africa mounted an underwater search, named 'Operation Resolve', to try to locate the wreckage. The underwater locator beacons (ULBs) attached to the flight recorders were not designed for deep ocean use; nevertheless, a two-month-long sonar search for them was carried out before the effort was abandoned on 8 January 1988 when the ULBs were known to have stopped transmitting (at the time a ULB had to generate sonic pulses for thirty days).[20]Steadfast Oceaneering, a specialist deep-ocean recovery company in the US, was contracted at great expense to find the site and recover the flight recorders.[21] The search area is described as being comparable in size to that of the wreck of the Titanic, with the water at 5,000 metres (16,000ft) being considerably deeper than any previously successful salvage operation.[22] The wreckage was found within two days of Steadfast Oceaneering commencing its search.[22]
Van Zyl took the voice recorder to the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in Washington, DC, both to show his goodwill and to ensure neutral observers.[7] Van Zyl believes that if he kept the CVR in South Africa he could have been accused of covering up the truth.[7] At the NTSB, Van Zyl felt frustration that the degraded (but still functional) CVR, which had been in the deep ocean for fourteen months,[23] did not initially yield any useful information. Around twenty-eight minutes into the recording the CVR indicated that the fire alarm sounded. Fourteen seconds after the fire alarm, the circuit breakers began to pop. Investigators believe that around eighty circuit breakers failed. The CVR cable failed eighty-one seconds after the alarm. The recording revealed the extent of the fire.[7]
Van Zyl discovered that the front-right pallet located in the main deck's cargo hold was the seat of the fire. The flight manifest said that pallet mostly comprised computers in polystyrene packaging. The investigators said that the localised fire likely came in contact with the packaging and produced gases that accumulated near the ceiling. They also said that gases ignited into a flash fire that affected the entire cargo hold. The fire did not burn lower than one metre above the cargo floor. The walls and ceiling of the cargo hold received severe fire damage. Van Zyl ended his investigation without discovering why the fire started.[7]
The official report noted the presence of the computer equipment, and suggested that a possible cause could have been the batteries contained in the computers exploding or spontaneously combusting, although this was not given as a conclusive cause of the fire.[24]
Margo commission
An official commission of inquiry was chaired by South African Judge Cecil Margo,[18][25] with co-operation from the NTSB and the aircraft's manufacturer, Boeing. The board of the "Margo Commission" consisted of Judge Cecil S. Margo, Judge Hurrylall Goburdhun (Mauritius), George N. Tompkins Jr (USA), G.C. Wilkinson (UK), Dr Y. Funatsu (Japan), J.J.S. Germisuys (South Africa), Dr J. Gilliland (South Africa) and Colonel Liang Lung (Taiwan).[26]
The official report determined that while Flight 295 was over the Indian Ocean, a fire had occurred in the cargo hold of the main deck, originating in the front right-hand cargo pallet.[18] Aircraft parts recovered from the ocean floor showed fire damage sustained in temperatures over 300°C (570°F); tests showed that temperatures of 600°C (1,100°F) would have been required to melt a carbon-fibre tennis racket recovered from the crash site. The fire also damaged and destroyed the aircraft's electrical systems resulting in the loss of many of the instruments on the flight deck and rendering the crew unable to determine their position.[19] The reason for the aircraft's loss was not identified beyond doubt, but there were two possibilities detailed in the official report: firstly, that the crew became incapacitated due to smoke penetrating into the cockpit;[18] and secondly, that the fire weakened the structure so that the tail separated, leading to impact with the ocean. The commission concluded that it was not possible to apportion blame to any one individual for the fire, removing any terrorism concerns.[27] Boeing is quoted in the report as having "contested" any scenario that involved a break-up of the aircraft, hence the commission went no further than simply mentioning the two possible scenarios in its final report, as incidental to the primary cause of the accident.[15]
The commission determined that inadequate fire detection and suppression facilities in the class B cargo bays (the type used aboard the 747-200 Combi) were the primary cause of the aircraft's loss.[5] The accident alerted aviation authorities worldwide that the regulations regarding class B cargo bays had lagged far behind the growth in their capacity. The exact source of ignition was never determined, but the report concluded that there was sufficient evidence to confirm that the fire had burned for some considerable time and that it might have caused structural damage.[28]
Combi design
The crash was the first fire incident on the 747 Combi and one of few fires on widebody aircraft. Fred Bereswill, the investigator from Boeing, characterised the Flight 295 fire as significant for this reason.[29] Barry Strauch of the NTSB visited Boeing's headquarters to inquire about the Combi's design. Boeing's fire test in the Combi models did not accurately match the conditions of Flight 295's cargo hold; in accordance with federal US rules, the Boeing test involved setting a bale of tobacco leaves ablaze. The fire stayed within the cargo hold. The air in the passenger cabin was designed to have a marginally higher pressure than cargo area hold, so if a crew member opened the door to the cargo hold, the air from the passenger cabin would flow into the cargo hold, stopping any smoke or gases from exiting through the door.[7]
Investigators devised a new test involving a cargo hold with conditions similar to the conditions of Flight 295; the plastic covers and extra pallets provided fuel for the fire, which would spread quickly before generating enough smoke to activate smoke alarms. The hotter flame achieved in the new test heated the air in the cargo hold. This heated air had a higher pressure than normal, and overcame the pressure differential between the cargo hold and the passenger cabin. When the door between the passenger and cargo holds was open, smoke and gases therefore flowed into the passenger cabin.[7]
The test, as well as evidence from the accident site, proved to the investigators that the 747 Combi's use of a class B cargo hold did not provide enough fire protection to the passengers.[30][31] The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) confirmed this finding in 1993 with its own series of tests.[32]
After the accident, SAA discontinued use of the Combi and the FAA introduced new regulations in 1993 specifying that manual firefighting must not be the primary means of fire suppression in the cargo compartment of the main deck.[33][34] The new regulations banned larger cargo hold variants of the 747 Combi, the smaller variants also need to comply with these new standards, which required weight increases, made the 747 Combi less efficient. Nevertheless, the Combi variants remained in the 747 product line up until 2002, when the last 747-400 Combi was delivered to KLM.[35]
In January 1992, the journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS) reported that the inquiry into the in-flight fire that destroyed Flight 295 might be reopened because SAA had allegedly confirmed that its passenger jets had carried cargo for Armscor, a South African arms manufacturer. The RAeS journal, Aerospace, asserted: "It is known that the crew and passengers were overcome by a main deck cargo fire, and the ignition of missile rocket fuel is one cause now under suspicion."[36] A complaint against the newspaper that first published the allegations, Weekend Star, was lodged by Armscor.[37]
The inquiry was not reopened, which likely led to the proliferation of a number of conspiracy theories concerning the nature of the cargo that caused the fire, which subsequently increased public doubts about the outcome of the initial inquiry.[38] Examples of such theories include:
Reports from the Project Coast investigation suggested there was a waybill showing that 300grams of activated carbon had been placed on board Flight 295, leading to speculation that this substance had caused the fire.[39]
In 2000, the South African television program Carte Blanche dedicated an investigation to a number of these allegations.[40]
A South African government chemist examined a microscopic particle on the nylon netting next to the front-right pallet on Flight 295. The chemist found that the airflow patterns on the iron suggested that it travelled at a high velocity while in a molten state; therefore the fire on Flight 295 may have not been a flash fire triggered by packaging.[7] Fred Bereswill, the investigator from Boeing, said that this would suggest that the source of the fire would have had properties like a sparkler, with the source including its own oxidising agent. A British fire and explosion analyst examined the exterior skin of the aircraft which had been located above the pallet; the analyst found that the skin became as hot as 300 degrees Celsius. Bereswill said that it would be difficult for a fire to burn through the skin of an aircraft in-flight because of the cool airflow outside the aircraft.[7]
David Klatzow's theory
David Klatzow was one of the forensic scientists who was retained to work on the case by Boeing's counsel around the time of the official enquiry.[41] He subsequently criticised the Margo commission for spending an inordinate amount of time looking into "relatively irrelevant issues" and that the commission ignored the most important question, what was the source of the fire and who had been responsible for loading it onto the aircraft? Klatzow believes that there are certain irregularities in parts of the commission transcript that indicate that something on the CVR transcript had to be concealed.[42]
Klatzow put forward a theory that the fire likely involved substances that would not normally be carried on a passenger aircraft and that the fire was not likely a wood, cardboard, or plastic fire.[7] South Africa was under an arms embargo at the time; the South African government therefore had to buy arms clandestinely.[43] Klatzow's theory postulates that the government placed a rocket system in the cargo hold, and that vibration caused the ignition of unstable ammonium perchlorate, which is a chemical compound used as a missile propellant.[44]
Klatzow contends that conversation of the crew suggests that the fire started above the South China Sea, shortly after takeoff; he believes that this indicates that the voice recorder was not working for a long period of the flight or that the crew turned it off (CVRs in aircraft at that time only recorded thirty minutes[45]). If this is the case, he says it is then likely that an unknown number of the passengers would have already died from smoke inhalation from the first fire. Klatzow believes that theory is consistent with reports that found most of the passengers were in the first class area at the front of the aircraft as smoke from the rear cabin forced them to move forward. The captain did not land the aircraft directly after the fire, Klatzow argues, because if he had he would have been arrested for endangering the lives of his passengers and it would have caused a major problem for South Africa, costing the country and SAA R400 million (approx. $200 million in 1987). Klatzow argues that the captain, who was also a reservist in the South African Air Force, would therefore have been ordered to carry on to South Africa in hopes of making it there before the aircraft's structural integrity gave in.[46] These points have been disputed.[47]
On 20 July 2011, retired SAA captain Clair Fichardt announced that he had made a statement in connection with the missing Johannesburg air traffic control tapes, after he was persuaded to do so by Klatzow.[48] Fichardt claimed that Captain James Deale admitted to handing the tapes to Captain Mickey Mitchell, who was chief pilot at the Johannesburg control centre on the night of the crash. Deale would further have stated that Gert van der Veer, head of SAA, and lawyer Ardie Malherbe were present during the transfer of the tapes. Earlier, during the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) hearings, Klatzow had cross-examined Van der Veer, Mitchell, and Vernon Nadel, the operations officer who was on duty.[49]
Post-apartheid investigation
In 1996, the TRC, established by the post-apartheid South African government, investigated apartheid-era atrocities. In particular, Flight 295 was investigated to determine if there was any truth behind conspiracy theories that asserted that the Margo Commission had covered up or missed any evidence that might implicate the previous government.[38] Klatzow was invited by the TRC to explain his theories and cross-examine witnesses. Unlike most other hearings of the TRC, the hearing into Flight 295 was conducted in camera,[41] and without any representation from the South African Civil Aviation Authority (CAA);[47] Klatzow considered the CAA untrustworthy because it had participated in the official enquiry, which he considered flawed. A number of key aspects of Klatzow's theory hinged on his criticism of the actions of Judge Margo during the official enquiry, yet Judge Margo was not summoned to answer any of the allegations made against him.[41]
The TRC concluded that nothing listed in the flight manifest could have caused the fire, a conclusion that was met with controversy within the public. Following public pressure, the TRC records were released into the public domain in May 2000. Upon receiving the documents, Transport Minister Dullah Omar stated that the inquiry would be reopened if any fresh evidence was discovered.[50] The South African Police Service were tasked to investigate whether there was any new evidence, and to make a recommendation to the minister. In October 2002, the minister announced that no new evidence had been found to justify re-opening the enquiry.[51][38]
On the 25th anniversary of the crash, Peter Otzen Jnr, the son of one of the victims, announced that he was approaching the Constitutional Court of South Africa in an attempt to have the commission of inquiry into the disaster reopened.[52] In pursuit of this, he had obtained affidavits from former SAA employees who had never given any evidence before. An Australian national named Allan Dexter who had worked in public relations for SAA gave a sworn statement to Mr. Otzen claiming that he had been informed by the SAA manager at Taipei airport that Flight 295 was carrying rocket fuel which caused it to crash, and that the Captain had expressed concerns about the safety of the cargo but had been ordered from Johannesburg to fly the plane.[53] In a 2014 interview, some of the accusations were disputed by Tinus Jacobs, SAA's manager in Taiwan who saw Flight 295 off. Jacobs claimed that due to Taiwan's status under martial law at the time, only one telephone at the airport (located in the office of China Airlines) could be used to make international calls and that none of Flight 295's crew had access to it. Jacobs furthermore claimed that Captain Uys and the other crew members appeared relaxed and routine both the previous day and on the evening of the flight's departure.[54]
Newer theories
In 2014, South African investigative journalist Mark D. Young presented a theory that a short circuit in the onboard electronics may have started the fire.[55][56] The so-called wet arc tracking arises from the action of moisture when the insulation of live wires is damaged. A leakage current to another damaged wire with the respective potential difference may form. The resulting flashover may reach temperatures of up to 5,000°C (9,000°F). This temperature is sufficient to ignite the thermal-acoustic insulation blankets that were in use at the time until the late 1990s. Such a short circuit may have caused the fire on board Swissair Flight 111, resulting in the crash of the aircraft in 1998.[57]:253
Passengers and crew
Passengers and crew nationalities on board SAA Flight 295:[58]
Taiwanese authorities stated that 58 passengers began flying in Taipei, including 30 Taiwanese citizens, 19 South Africans, 47 Japanese, two Mauritians, one Dane, one Dutch, one Briton, and one West German. The other passengers transferred from other flights arriving in Taipei, and as such their nationalities were not known to Taiwanese authorities.[60]
At least two passengers died of smoke inhalation. The rest died from the extreme trauma sustained in the crash.[7]
Among the passengers was Kazuharu Sonoda, a Japanese professional wrestler also known as Haru Sonoda and Magic Dragon, and his wife, who were travelling as part of their honeymoon. They were offered and sent on the flight by All Japan Pro-Wrestling president Giant Baba to appear on a wrestling show in South Africa, promoted by fellow wrestler Tiger Jeet Singh.[61]
Dramatisation
The crash was featured in Season 5 of the Canadian-made, internationally distributed documentary series Mayday, in the episode "Fanning the Flames."[7]
The Boeing 747 is a large, long-range wide-body airliner designed and manufactured by Boeing Commercial Airplanes in the United States between 1968 and 2023. After introducing the 707 in October 1958, Pan Am wanted a jet 2+1⁄2 times its size, to reduce its seat cost by 30%. In 1965, Joe Sutter left the 737 development program to design the 747. In April 1966, Pan Am ordered 25 Boeing 747-100 aircraft, and in late 1966, Pratt & Whitney agreed to develop the JT9D engine, a high-bypass turbofan. On September 30, 1968, the first 747 was rolled out of the custom-built Everett Plant, the world's largest building by volume. The first flight took place on February 9, 1969, and the 747 was certified in December of that year. It entered service with Pan Am on January 22, 1970. The 747 was the first airplane called a "Jumbo Jet" as the first wide-body airliner.
South African Airways (SAA) is the flag carrier of South Africa. Founded in 1934, the airline is headquartered in Airways Park at O. R. Tambo International Airport in Johannesburg and operates a hub-and-spoke network, serving ten destinations in Africa. The carrier joined Star Alliance in April 2006, making it the first African carrier to sign with one of the three major airline alliances.
Atlas Air, Inc. is a major American cargo airline, passenger charter airline, and aircraft lessor based in Purchase, New York. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings. Atlas Air is the world's largest operator of the Boeing 747 aircraft, with a total fleet of 54 of this specific fleet type. In 2021, the airline had 4,056 employees and operated to more than 300 global destinations.
An aviation accident is defined by the Convention on International Civil Aviation Annex 13 as an occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft, which takes place from the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until all such persons have disembarked, and in which (a) a person is fatally or seriously injured, (b) the aircraft sustains significant damage or structural failure, or (c) the aircraft goes missing or becomes completely inaccessible. Annex 13 defines an aviation incident as an occurrence, other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft that affects or could affect the safety of operation.
Kalitta Air is an American cargo airline headquartered at Willow Run Airport, Ypsilanti Township, Michigan. The company operates international scheduled and cargo charter services. Its call sign "Connie" is from its founder, Connie Kalitta.
The Boeing 747-400 is a large, long-range wide-body airliner produced by Boeing Commercial Airplanes, an advanced variant of the initial Boeing 747. The "Advanced Series 300" was announced at the September 1984 Farnborough Airshow, targeting a 10% cost reduction with more efficient engines and 1,000 nautical miles [nmi] of additional range. Northwest Airlines became the first customer with an order for 10 aircraft on October 22, 1985. The first 747-400 was rolled out on January 26, 1988, and made its maiden flight on April 29, 1988. Type certification was received on January 9, 1989, and it entered service with NWA on February 9, 1989.
Avianca Flight 011, registration HK-2910X, was a Boeing 747-200M on an international scheduled passenger flight from Frankfurt to Bogotá via Paris, Madrid, and Caracas that crashed near Madrid on 27 November 1983. It took off from Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris at 22:25 on 26 November 1983 for Madrid Barajas Airport; take-off was delayed waiting for additional passengers from a Lufthansa flight due to a cancellation of the Paris-Frankfurt-Paris segment by Avianca for operational reasons.
Lufthansa Flight 540 was a scheduled commercial flight for Lufthansa, serving the Frankfurt–Nairobi–Johannesburg route.
Combi aircraft in commercial aviation are aircraft that can be used to carry either passengers as an airliner, or cargo as a freighter, and may have a partition in the aircraft cabin to allow both uses at the same time in a mixed passenger/freight combination. The name combi comes from the word combination. The concept originated in railroading with the combine car, a passenger car that contains a separate compartment for mail or baggage.
Cecil Stanley Margo, QC, FRAeS was an Allied World War II hero. Margo was also a Supreme Court Justice who oversaw a number of international air-crash investigations, including into the crash of South African Airways Flight 295.
As of July 2020, a total of 60 Boeing 747 aircraft, or just under 4% of the total number of 747s built, first flown commercially in 1970, have been involved in accidents and incidents resulting in a hull loss, meaning that the aircraft was either destroyed or damaged beyond economical repair. Of the 60 Boeing 747 aircraft losses, 32 resulted in no loss of life; in one, a hostage was murdered; and in one, a terrorist died. Some of the aircraft that were declared damaged beyond economical repair were older 747s that sustained relatively minor damage. Had these planes been newer, repairing them might have been economically viable, although with the 747's increasing obsolescence, this is becoming less common. Some 747s have been involved in accidents resulting in the highest death toll of any civil aviation accident, the highest death toll of any single airplane accident, and the highest death toll of a midair collision. As with most airliner accidents, the root of cause(s) in these incidents involved a confluence of multiple factors that rarely could be ascribed to flaws with the 747's design or its flying characteristics.
On 4 October 1992, El Al Flight 1862, a Boeing 747 cargo aircraft of the Israeli airline El Al, crashed into the Groeneveen and Klein-Kruitberg flats in the Bijlmermeer neighbourhood of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The crash is known in Dutch as the Bijlmerramp.
MK Airlines Flight 1602 was an MK Airlines Boeing 747-200F cargo flight on a flight from Halifax Stanfield International Airport, Nova Scotia, Canada, to Zaragoza Airport, Spain. It crashed on take-off in 2004, killing the crew of 7. It was the fourth accident for MK Airlines, as well as the deadliest.
UPS Airlines Flight 6 was a cargo flight operated by UPS Airlines. On September 3, 2010, the Boeing 747-400F flying the route between Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and Cologne, Germany, developed an in-flight fire, which caused the aircraft to crash, killing both crew members, the only people on board. It was the first fatal air crash for UPS Airlines. The crash prompted a re-evaluation of safety procedures protecting airliners from cockpit smoke.
On 28 July 2011, Asiana Airlines Flight 991, a Boeing 747-400F flying from Seoul, South Korea, to Shanghai, China, crashed into the sea off Jeju Island after suffering a main-deck fire. Both pilots, the only two people on board, were killed. The accident marked the second loss of a 747 freighter due to a cargo hold fire in less than a year, following the crash of UPS Airlines Flight 6 in Dubai in September 2010.
In aeronautics, loss of control (LOC) is the unintended departure of an aircraft from controlled flight and is a significant factor in several aviation accidents worldwide. In 2015 it was the leading cause of general aviation accidents. Loss of control may be the result of mechanical failure, external disturbances, aircraft upset conditions, or inappropriate crew actions or responses.
National Airlines Flight 102 (N8102/NCR102) was a cargo flight operated by National Airlines between Camp Shorabak in Afghanistan and Al Maktoum Airport in Dubai, with a refueling stop at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan. On 29 April 2013, the Boeing 747-400 operating the flight crashed moments after taking off from Bagram, killing all seven people on board.
Turkish Airlines Flight 6491 was a scheduled international cargo flight operated by ACT Airlines on behalf of Turkish Cargo, from Hong Kong to Istanbul via Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. On 16 January 2017, the Boeing 747-400F flying the route crashed in a residential area while attempting to land in thick fog at Manas International Airport, Bishkek. A total of 39 people – all four crew members on board and 35 residents on the ground – were killed.
Aeroflot Flight 558 was a scheduled Ilyushin Il-18V domestic passenger flight from Karaganda to Moscow that crashed into a field in the Abzelilovsky District on 31 August 1972 as a result of a fire stemming from exploded passenger baggage, killing all 102 people on board.
In aviation, an in-flight fire is a type of aviation accident where an aircraft catches on fire in-flight. They are considered one of the most dangerous hazards in aviation, with a report from the British Civil Aviation Authority showing that after a fire on an aircraft starts, flight crews only have on average only 17 minutes to land their aircraft before it becomes uncontrollable. Between 1981 and 1990, approximately 20% of all fatalities on US airlines were caused by in-flight fires.
Zwecker, Wolfram (21 July 2011). "Helderberg: Hý vat opnames"[Helderberg: He took recordings]. Beeld (in Afrikaans). Johannesburg. Archived from the original on 14 February 2012. Retrieved 21 July 2011.
Further reading
Lillie, Joanne; Luck, Dominique (2014). Surviving 295: Life After the Helderberg. Cape Town: Jacana Media..
Abridged ATC Recording An MP3 format of part of the actual ATC recording. The real recording starts at 21 minutes. It is slightly abridged, with some empty sound cut short.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
