Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
rebr wrote:Is it just me or are all the thrust reversers still deployed in all these pictures?
PatrickZ80 wrote:Looks like a rejected take-off, during the rejection the plane became unsteerable and ended up in the grass.
The runway in Maastricht is quite short for such large cargo aircraft, most cargo airports got far longer runways. That might have made a difference.
76er wrote:Excuse my ignorance in this matter, but isn’t this the same airline that crashed a 747F in Bishkek this january?
The runway being relatively short should be no excuse for an overrun. A correct takeoff performance calculation should guarantee a safe stop before the end of the runway. Lets hope the investigators will get an honest look at the loadsheet, the crew’s takoff calculation, CVR and DFDR. This could have ended much worse.
PatrickZ80 wrote:The runway in Maastricht is quite short for such large cargo aircraft, most cargo airports got far longer runways. That might have made a difference.
JVSpotter wrote:
trent900 wrote:JVSpotter wrote:
Zooming in on the photo, it looks like bucking just to the rear of the nose gear. Must have hit some soft ground at a fare rate when it left the runway!
76er wrote:According to Planespotters it’s a 15-year old -ERF. Definately worth it to iron out the wrinkles.
https://m.planespotters.net/airframe/Bo ... s/17xqsZYY
AirlineCritic wrote:Why did they remove the tail fin during the reparations???
AirlineCritic wrote:Why did they remove the tail fin during the reparations???