UAL T38 Phlyer

No, I did not. That explains the zoom.

But I still don’t know why it appears to have winglets.

WhiskeyDelta

The winglets issue could be the curvature of the monitor the video is playing on. I think it distorted the wing tips just enough to make it look like it had winglets. I can make out enough of the engines to see they are the longer cowling from the -200.

Also, look at the time stamp. It jumps from 11:00 as the aircraft is falling to 16:06. That explains why there is no fireball in the video.

John Carr

And yet parts of it looked similar....

And the root cause wasn’t the cargo, it was a shift in the cargo.

rickair7777

Yeah, that's what I was alluding to. But that wouldn't happen to a pax airplane unless all the people got up and ran to the back all at once. It would be really hard to load a 73 so it could take off but then not fly.

SonicFlyer

Actually in the 74 incident it wasn't even the shifting of the cargo balance that brought it down, it was the fact that when the cargo shifted backwards it did so with enough force that it destroyed several hydraulic lines behind the aft pressure wall that controlled the elevator and thus the crew lost pitch control.

John Carr

And although slightly different things involved, could have been seen with a DC “back in the day” had there been cameras everywhere. I’m not talking about AA in ORD or UA SUX, completely different issue.

rickair7777

It actually destroyed the jackscrew. The initial investigation assumed the weight shift caused the crash, but they determined in the sim that it would have been recoverable, even with the degraded hydraulics. The cargo (a military vehicle) rolled back, through the aft bulkhead and took out the horizontal stabilizer jackscrew, I think that allowed the h. stab to float freely, which is typically not controllable. Same was that AS MD crash.

SonicFlyer

Good point.

sourdough44

On Jul 16th 2018 the airline released a 3 page press release stating, that cockpit voice and flight data recorders have been read out successfully. The investigation so far determined that the crew climbed the aircraft at too steep a pitch
angle (angle of attack) out of Havana leading to a stall and subsequent crash. The airline reasons that therefore the grounding of the airline as well as additional examinations imposed on the airline have no legal foundation, however, Mexico's DGCA have not responded to according requests by the airline. (Editorial note: according to ICAO rules only the investigation leader, Cuba's Accident Investigation Board, is permitted to talk about the progress of the investigation, participants in the investigation including the affected airline are not permitted to talk.

Some new info after the flight & data recorders were evaluated. Could be as simple as a stall caused by to high of a pitch on departure.

TheFly

Any official statements on this crash? Black box, cvr, info?