DC-4 Fairbanks Alaska Crash & eerie similar accidents & incidents.

Рет қаралды 7,314

3 ай бұрын

Watch this video of an engine falling off another DC-4 • Burning Plane Crash. (...
Are these other DC-4 accidents and incidents related to this accident. Some can perhaps provide clues as to what COULD, have happened? What do you think? Please comment below with any thoughts you have. N3054V brief synopsis from The Aviation Safety Network
A Douglas C-54D-DC Skymaster, operated by Alaska Air Fuel, was destroyed when it crashed into a steep hill on the bank of the Tanana River, about six minutes after takeoff from Fairbanks International Airport (FAI/PAFA), Fairbanks, Alaska.
Both pilots perished.
ADS-B data shows that the airplane was climbing to about 1500 feet before it began a descending left turn towards the river. An online video shows that one of the engines on the left side exploded, followed by the airplane entering a steep left bank less than 10 seconds later.
NOTE: These incidents and accidents mentioned here are not the only ones that have possible related scenarios. These are just the latest. For a complete list of all DC-4 (C-54) accidents and incidents see the Aviation Safety Network and the NTSB databases.
LINKS:
#aviationsafetynetwork
aviation-safety.net/
www.ntsb.gov/Pages/monthly.aspx
blancoliro video about this crash • N3054V DC-4 Alaska Cra...
ATC audio communications • Douglas DC-4 Down In F...
Condolences to the families

Пікірлер: 49

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

In addition to this accident and the 5 others discussed in this video there have been 26 other DC-4 (C-54) accidents involving a single engine fire and or catastrophic failure. Some of which resulted in the engine departing from the airplane. Seven others were inflight fires of unknown origin resulting in the total loss of the aircraft. All of these destroyed control continuity to the point of uncontrollability. Condolences to all those families who have lost.

@randalldunkley1042 3 ай бұрын

You would think an AD would have been issued many years ago. These failures apply to C-54 (C-118) and DC-4 AC or just C-54 AC? P&W R2000 kind of a rare engine in WW2 era aircraft.

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

@@randalldunkley1042 Not sure what the failure range based on specific model is. The data base on Aviation Safety Network does cover all models. If you go in there it will detail each by specific model under the DC-4 tab. There are nearly 500 occurrences so it will take some time. Hope that helps.

@memphisharris447 2 ай бұрын

The older they get the more maintenance they require. The r2000 engine is not that great of an engine. That engine literally exploded.

@SPak-rt2gb 3 ай бұрын

Now that's an interesting coincidence. Wonder if it was some kind of design flaw nobody caught. Surprised Ron didn't bring this up on his channel.

@reggiepaulk 3 ай бұрын

Good job on finding those accident reports… it definitely adds color to this latest accident. If I were crewing a DC-4, I’d seriously consider whether that was a good idea or not.

@randalldunkley1042 3 ай бұрын

Circumstantial evidence suggests a fuel leak developing behind the firewall that the fire extinguishing system cannot reach effectively. The voided space fills with fuel vapors and an explosion can occur with enough force to fail the wing with at least the engine mounts coming apart from the melting fire wall. If it is a difficult area to access to inspect or is not AD related or appears on the normal list of maintenance requirements, then it could go years just waiting to fail.

@fat_biker 2 ай бұрын

I imagine that void can fill with fuel vapour in all sorts of circumstances every time the plane flies, or every time the tanks are topped off, or every random third wednesday, but it only turns into a catastrophe if there's an engine fire that coincides with the nacelle being full of an explosive mixture of fuel vapour... if there's no fuel being fed to an engine, but e.g. the engine oil is still burning, doesn't that give you a decent period of time to get the plane on the ground under control, along with a good chance that the fire goes out before anything falls off? An explosion in an engine nacelle can surely only happen with a build up of fuel vapour in an enclosed space (like the nacelle or the wing or a fuel tank) & a source of ignition. If the fuel vapour is inside a nacelle, & the ignition source is than engine fire, then the engine firewall... isn't!

@user-bb3yv8dy7q 2 ай бұрын

@@fat_biker Curtiss C46 had a problem with fuel leaks and the wing not being vented and a spark caused an explosion, my dad witnessed some of these in WWII while in the Philippines where the planes took off then exploded.

@fideldevivo1875 3 ай бұрын

Condolences to the families 🙏🏻

@mountainmarauder2575 3 ай бұрын

I wonder if the engine shutdown procedure is the same or similar to the DC-6 which calls for the engine feather prior to firing the extinguisher. The reason is that pressing the feather button shuts off all fuel and oil to the engine as well as feathering the propeller. I think the DC-4 had Pratt and Whitney R-2000 engines but not sure.

@privateerinvestor2773 3 ай бұрын

Excellent data collection and presentation. Thank you for this.

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

Thank you! I am so appreciative that you found it interesting and worth your time.

@memphisharris447 2 ай бұрын

Sounds like the origin of the fires was inside the wing fuel tank. We had to perform a.d.s after flt 800. Degraded insulation on the boost pumps caused arcing. Which could explain why fire extinguisher was ineffective. I cut my teeth on c-54 as a very young mechanic. Pretty darn good plane. Very simple. Let's figure this one out.

@salamander5703 3 ай бұрын

Do DC3s (or military equivalents of DC3/4) have similar incidents? Maybe they need better fire extinguisher systems and also look to see whether engines departing the aircraft (which may be less hazardous than retaining them) can cause damage to control surfaces or cables. The 2024 crash looks like the plane lost a lot of lift on the left wing as the No. 1 engine peeled back.

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

Great question. As I read these other DC-4 accidents I wondered the same thing. I wasn't expecting to see what I saw. I was simply nerd curious. As you say the engine at some point will depart which they are designed to do. With these fires spreading at such an extreme rate they apear to be coming off as the mounts loose integrity and or the engine exploding. There was that DC-10 years ago (1979 flt 191) that lost it's left engine. When it departed it damaged the hydraulic lines in that wing which caused the LW slats to retract and the airplaned rolled left into the ground. That was from improper maintenance. Be interesting to see the history on this DC-4. These airplanes fly a lot and the last one built (from what I can find) was in 1945.

@PeterNGloor 2 ай бұрын

@@maxtanicfilms ...fly a lot? This one is said to have been the last one flying.

@maxtanicfilms 2 ай бұрын

@@PeterNGloor According to Airliners.net there are still around 80 in service. Douglas DC-4 - Airliners.net. Fly, flown, whatever you want to call it they have had many years in service.

@memphisharris447 2 ай бұрын

@@maxtanicfilms I saw your presentation. It's very good and certainly raised some interesting information. It's up to FAA and NTSB to find the cause as always. Being an A&P mechanic I find all the information presented here valuable. As I've stated here it's been over 40 years since I've worked with the R2000. I'm 70 now and I must have been 23 when I spent 2 years at Central air service. The engine mount is heavy steel. The plane does have a stainless steel firewall. My question relates to the basic fire triangle. Fuel, air, ignition source. Remove one part fire should go out. The physical act of pulling the fire handle out cuts off everything at the firewall. Fuel, oil, electric. To deploy extinguisher you rotate the handle left and right. That's two fire bottle systems each motor. Question I'm wondering is what position is the prop if the prop governor fails. On a jet pulling the handle shuts down the engine.

@maxtanicfilms 2 ай бұрын

@@memphisharris447 Very true, there was a DC6 crash some years ago where they had an engine fire on #3.NTSB final report stated the crew pulled the extinguishing system prior to feathering the prop which is reverse procedure. This deminishes the ability of extinguishing system. The right wing failed due to the fire and the airplane crashed on base to final, all were killed. Scary stuff.

@randalldunkley1042 3 ай бұрын

I was also wondering how many aircraft of this model were lost in South and Central America as many were used down there for a variety of tasks. Are the records available?

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

As a matter of fact there are. Aviation Safety Network and NTSB. I read these and the number of highjacked DC-4's in the 70s down in the area you speak, unbelievable. Insane really. Go onto their database and check it out.

@joncox9719 3 ай бұрын

These OLD Freight Dogs are deplorable! Lived in AK for 12 years and they just patch these things together to keep them in the air! It's ALL about Money and Profit! These airframes and engines aren't geting any younger!

@huh4233 3 ай бұрын

Like retired military a/c as fire bombers. These are perfect examples of profit margins. People are just dying to learn to fly the old stuff. It's very cool if you understand the risks.

@RayToutuver 3 ай бұрын

I’d request Buffalo’s footage - believe it was on Discovery Canada during that time (TV show)

@waynemanning3262 3 ай бұрын

How many people who commented here have any experience in aviation? I mean other than have been a passenger!

@fideldevivo1875 3 ай бұрын

I think it’s time to put these flying museums to rest,, 80 year old airplanes belong in a museum!!!

@TheTexasPsyclone 3 ай бұрын

I was wondering if they were already having trouble with number 2 (because they were turning back long before the explosion we see in the video) and then we see in the video the number 1 explodes and with the additional asymmetrical thrust from 3 and 4 it just rolls over and is down 10 seconds later.

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

You could be correct. If you listen to the ATC recording (see the link here in the description) it sounds like they had a fire in number one but not certain. They began a return to the airport. See the blancolirio link to security camera footage. Looks like you can just see fire on #1 right before it explodes? Review those and see what you think. In reading these other DC-4 engine failures I was shocked at how many were catastrophic. Engines falling off, exploding, burning wings off. These airplanes based on what I read have fuel tanks aft of the engines. Many seem to start because of fuel leaks in these areas. They start a fire, burn through the firewall and into the oil cooler. Some I read where the fire alarm in the cockpit would display long after the extinguishing system could put out the fire. Scary as hell reading those.

@TheTexasPsyclone 3 ай бұрын

@maxtanicfilms Listened to a couple of different reviews of the full audio. Their last transmission is truly heartbreaking. I think Juan didn't include that on purpose. I didn't hear them call out a specific engine. But again there are a few different versions of the timeline audio-wise. That last explosion before impact definitely changed things. Maybe lost the ailerons. So few seconds from the fireball to impact.

@bernieschiff5919 3 ай бұрын

We are assuming an engine losing a cylinder head, there have been comments about a fuel leak or fire aft of the firewall causing an explosion in the mostly empty nacelle behind the engine. Cause of a fire here could be a failed turbocharger which has a magnesium casing. A break in a fuel line in this area could cause a fuel air explosion, as what seems to happen in the video.

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

@@bernieschiff5919 Magnesium, talk about a deadly fire. Putting that out is a tough ask.

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

@@TheTexasPsyclone Yeah I heard that as well, devistating.

@Jim-fp3kt 3 ай бұрын

I know I’m going to get some grief for saying this but here it goes. Seventy year old airplanes need to be banned by the FAA for any commercial service 121, 135 or sub part. I know what you’re going to say, if they are maintained properly they can remain airworthy indefinitely. Old, outdated, underpowered planes like these should only be showing up at air shows in my opinion. They are nostalgic neat old planes that need to put to pasture.

@climbtime4614 3 ай бұрын

Well they had a part 91 exemption. And other tankers in Alaska fly part 125.

@nathanmeece9794 3 ай бұрын

They need to permanently ground these old planes since they have all the same issues. They should investigate maintenance records and those who maintain the planes. They need to replace the DC4s with planes that are used but newer such as retired military surplus C130s.

@climbtime4614 3 ай бұрын

What a silly statement. “Just replace your Honda Civic with a Ferrari, duh”

@PeterNGloor 2 ай бұрын

apparently not many Hercs are around.

@terryboehler5752 3 ай бұрын

I'm waiting to hear mention of zone 1 or zone 2

@ACCAFLITE 3 ай бұрын

82 year old planes are a lot like 82 year old men.....Any outing (flight) could well be your last.. I try not to think about it, but i would have serious reservations about having anything do do with an 82 year old museum piece, no matter how well it has been maintained. Old men and old planes should be put out to pasture before the wreak havoc on the general populace. i I LOVE old planes but. do not ask me to get into one and fly. anywhere. Those are my thoughts and i am sticking to it. BY THE WAY, I AM 82 YEARS OILD..

@maxtanicfilms 3 ай бұрын

Very good points. My father quit flying at 80, he's now 86 and just runs his boat and cars into things. All minor but the airplane of course wouldn't be. Appreciate the comments :)

@ZIGZAGBureauofInvestigation 3 ай бұрын

Its one thing to have a Restored old CAR from the Past Its another to have IT Flying in the AIR. Too many old large and small aircraft operating in us airspace.