National Air Cargo crash at Bagram
02-04-2015, 06:27 AM
#631
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: Fairly local
Posts: 1,458
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
The CVR and FDR both cut out right after rotation... I found it very interesting about the strap failure discussion on the FDR as well.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/public%2F57000-5...3%2F567192.pdf
This document has valuable information and points toward what was suspected all along. RIP
http://dms.ntsb.gov/public%2F57000-5...3%2F567192.pdf
This document has valuable information and points toward what was suspected all along. RIP
I don't have time to post a link right now, but look for the document detailing damage to the actuator jackscrew. Lots of pics and good discussion.
02-15-2015, 12:50 AM
#632
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Position: dinosaur wrangler
Posts: 56
Those all came from the interview with the guy who built the pallets (the loadmaster who signed off on the loading was, of course, onboard the accident aircraft).
How does the military secure heavy wheeled cargo on a C-5 or C-17? Chains (or straps?) directly from the vehicle to the floor, no pallets, just drive them on and off?
I'm assuming the BCF floor can't take the load of the chains, so you go with less load on each attachment point and more attachments by using straps.
Fascinating analysis of the straps in the report too. I always wondered how strong the straps were with all the dirt and age on them, but I never thought of the UV exposure being a culprit too. Shows why I'm not a loadmaster, I guess.
Originally Posted by NTSB
The MRAPs were double palleted with PGF pallets. There are two metal pallets with a sheet of plywood in between.
Originally Posted by NTSB
MRAPs are secured to the pallets with chains.
Originally Posted by NTSB
They secured the pallets to the floor with straps, and did not use any other mechanical means to secure the pallets, like bear claws. He said the floor locks would not work on these pallets, only small pallets. The centerline load did not use the side locks or the regular locks since they were too small. He said they did not leave any locks up on the floor.
I'm assuming the BCF floor can't take the load of the chains, so you go with less load on each attachment point and more attachments by using straps.
Fascinating analysis of the straps in the report too. I always wondered how strong the straps were with all the dirt and age on them, but I never thought of the UV exposure being a culprit too. Shows why I'm not a loadmaster, I guess.
02-15-2015, 01:10 PM
#635
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,622
Originally Posted by EZRider
Those all came from the interview with the guy who built the pallets (the loadmaster who signed off on the loading was, of course, onboard the accident aircraft).
How does the military secure heavy wheeled cargo on a C-5 or C-17? Chains (or straps?) directly from the vehicle to the floor, no pallets, just drive them on and off?
I'm assuming the BCF floor can't take the load of the chains, so you go with less load on each attachment point and more attachments by using straps.
Fascinating analysis of the straps in the report too. I always wondered how strong the straps were with all the dirt and age on them, but I never thought of the UV exposure being a culprit too. Shows why I'm not a loadmaster, I guess.
How does the military secure heavy wheeled cargo on a C-5 or C-17? Chains (or straps?) directly from the vehicle to the floor, no pallets, just drive them on and off?
I'm assuming the BCF floor can't take the load of the chains, so you go with less load on each attachment point and more attachments by using straps.
Fascinating analysis of the straps in the report too. I always wondered how strong the straps were with all the dirt and age on them, but I never thought of the UV exposure being a culprit too. Shows why I'm not a loadmaster, I guess.
02-15-2015, 01:40 PM
#636
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 5,177
C-5 pilot here, yes, chains in all cases--vans to tanks to Mk5 boat (250,000# unit load). The boat was on a trailer that had designed in landing gear to take up any slack and prevent the tires from flexing. I understand straps and agree they will work, but chains are ultimately more reliable, less prone to uneven tensioning. I can't remember how many chains went on a boat, but it was in the dozens. No rolling stock was usually put on pallets either.
GF
GF
02-16-2015, 09:49 AM
#637
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,253
Not a professional loadmaster, but was qualified as a military collateral duty way back when. I recall chains for vehicles as well, but the military birds were obviously designed to accommodate that.
06-27-2015, 07:38 PM
#638
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
06-28-2015, 10:09 AM
#639
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: A-320
Posts: 1,122
Former C-5 loadmaster here. Wheeled vehicles are chained to the floor. C-5 tiedown rings are rated for 25,000lbs. Chains are rated for 25,000lbs for heavy duty chains and 10,000lbs for the lighter chains. Restraint was a minimum of 3g's FWD, 1.5AFT, 1.5 lateral and 2.0 vertical.
If a vehicle were on a pallet, the restraint would need to be calculated securing the load to the pallet and also for the pallet to the aircraft. Heavy loads on a pallet would likely require restraint from the load to the aircraft floor.
If a vehicle were on a pallet, the restraint would need to be calculated securing the load to the pallet and also for the pallet to the aircraft. Heavy loads on a pallet would likely require restraint from the load to the aircraft floor.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
