A 20 Years Old Mistake Causes Flight 611 To Disappear | Mayday: Air Disaster

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 21 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 1,9 тис.

  • @MaydayAirDisaster
    @MaydayAirDisaster  Рік тому +347

    What would you like to see more of on the OFFICIAL Mayday: Air Disaster channel?

    • @tomasinacovell4293
      @tomasinacovell4293 Рік тому +13

      Not really, I mean you can't even get the sound that a turboprop right, let alone a multi-engine.

    • @yarrlegap6940
      @yarrlegap6940 Рік тому +6

      Thank you for bringing us Reason No. 572 ... Why we should not fly ... ;-)

    • @tomasinacovell4293
      @tomasinacovell4293 Рік тому +5

      @@yarrlegap6940 No did Boeing way, they did Cheap-Charley way!

    • @GibusWearingMann
      @GibusWearingMann Рік тому +16

      Incidents with survivors, I think.

    • @michaelabadie746
      @michaelabadie746 Рік тому +5

      I thought she had crossed eyes, too.

  • @canadajane7993
    @canadajane7993 Рік тому +6172

    I'm just realizing I read the title wrong I thought a 20 year old caused the disaster 🤦🏻‍♀️

    • @ShaunHensley
      @ShaunHensley Рік тому +732

      You didn’t misread the title, it was miswritten

    • @C6Family
      @C6Family Рік тому +54

      @1:44 says 22 years not 20

    • @ShaunHensley
      @ShaunHensley Рік тому +477

      @@sebcharb7313 ‘A mistake made 20 years prior causes flight 611 to disappear.’ , is the way to write the title.

    • @mcguimont2993
      @mcguimont2993 Рік тому +88

      Me too!

    • @ronjon7942
      @ronjon7942 Рік тому +147

      @@ShaunHensley Yeah, but then a lot of us would have known we saw this one before - like me. I figured a 20yr old ATC somehow brought it down…pretty creative, actually. Except instead of a mistake, now it rises to the level of overt deception.

  • @moodyrick8503
    @moodyrick8503 Рік тому +640

    _Criminal negligence, causing death._
    An honest mistake is an honest mistake, but not doing the repair as instructed, and then lying about it, is absolutely criminal.

    • @Veladus
      @Veladus Рік тому +36

      This isn't regular manslaughter. This is *advanced* manslaughter.

    • @kimthomas8717
      @kimthomas8717 8 місяців тому +16

      Exactly , lied about it and tragedy happened when it could’ve been avoided by proper repairs

    • @peterwilson5528
      @peterwilson5528 Місяць тому +9

      I would imagine that the employee who did the bad repair and then lied about it would qualify for a high paying job in Boeing. What kind of profits did it save Boeing over 20 years.

    • @bryanlunt7579
      @bryanlunt7579 Місяць тому +2

      @@peterwilson5528 None, because the plane belonged to and was property of and maintained by the airline at this point.

    • @peterwilson5528
      @peterwilson5528 Місяць тому +3

      @@bryanlunt7579 But Boeing is still responsible for the work done on its behalf in maintaining the aircraft. I mean, it is not like getting a tune up on your car from the guy you met at the pub. This is a thing that can fly at over 40,000 feet and carry 150 between 400 people.

  • @richarddutton1981
    @richarddutton1981 9 місяців тому +686

    The fact that plane flew relatively perfectly for 20 years with all that structural damage is actually incredible.

    • @InMyPOV2u
      @InMyPOV2u 4 місяці тому +51

      And makes this crash that much more reckless and negligent.

    • @JoshRendall
      @JoshRendall Місяць тому +9

      It was actually 22 years before the accident.

    • @trnguy6137
      @trnguy6137 Місяць тому

      Back in the day before greedy turds took over Boeing... Their planes can tolerate bad structural maintenance. A testimony to an era long gone...

    • @ohhiitsmike
      @ohhiitsmike Місяць тому +10

      A testament to the build quality of the aircraft

    • @speedrace95
      @speedrace95 Місяць тому

      And yet people still thing Boeing is bad

  • @SilverliningSnowpaws
    @SilverliningSnowpaws Рік тому +923

    There's a saying on many aviation safety bulletin boards in hangars around the world. It says, "If you think safety is expensive...try an accident."

    • @bobbycv64
      @bobbycv64 Рік тому +49

      THERE YOU GO, CORRECT 100% - another saying, "You think Education is expensive, Try Ignorance"

    • @Louis-qi1gz
      @Louis-qi1gz Рік тому +4

      @@bobbycv64 hay ! You talkn to me?

    • @bobbycv64
      @bobbycv64 Рік тому +1

      @@Louis-qi1gz ???

    • @Louis-qi1gz
      @Louis-qi1gz Рік тому +4

      @@bobbycv64 yeah , I was just kidding around with ya 👍

    • @Louis-qi1gz
      @Louis-qi1gz Рік тому +4

      @@bobbycv64 it's been a long hard week 🙄

  • @Jack908r
    @Jack908r Рік тому +425

    I'm still amazed that investigators can sift through a mountain of debris and come up with the cause of the incident. It's needle in a haystack stuff. Great work.

    • @Fluffy-Fluffy
      @Fluffy-Fluffy Місяць тому +6

      I was just going to say that. But also how they can even identify parts of a plane to begin with, especially when mangled and not per se located where it was before break up.

    • @Fluffy-Fluffy
      @Fluffy-Fluffy Місяць тому

      Same. And also just identify the pieces in and of itself. When they build a skeleton of the hull for instance, I don't even see how they know where pieces go on that skeletal frame. How does one even learn this about virtually any plane?

    • @omgpix
      @omgpix Місяць тому

      @@Fluffy-Fluffy Not just which pieces that were damaged, but the when and how. Like how do you determine whether a burnt wire was the cause of the crash or the result of the crash, i.e it burned up on the ground after the accident. I don't know about the fire example specifically, but apparently there are pretty strong tells for other parts. They can tell whether an engine was damaged pre/post crash going by the way the propellers or turbines were bent, forward and the engine was running when it impacted, back and it had already lost power and they can go from there. They can tell whether it broke apart in the air or on the ground based on how widely the wreckage is distributed, and so on. It's also apparently made "easier" by the fact while there are thousands of components that could potentially fail, relatively speaking there are only a few reasons a plane would stop flying, which lets them narrow the scope a little.

    • @Fivizzz
      @Fivizzz Місяць тому +1

      @@Fluffy-Fluffy Investigators have full access to drawings, the manufacturer always takes part in investigations like these. The knowledge is there you just need the people who have it. With manufacturing and design engineers from the manufacturer you get all the knowledge you need about the plane itself, specialized structural engineers who are part of investigation bureaus such as the ASC & NTSB know exactly what to look for onto debris to understand how they failed, and by correlating the various pieces of the puzzle you can progressively rule out possible scenarios and start building a clearer picture of what generally happened.
      There are several examples in the video itself. They ruled out the bomb or missile because no burn marks, no trace of shrapnel peppering the debris, no burnt fuel, none of the victims displaying wounds consistent with an explosion. Well they use similar clues to rule out possible scenarios until they hopefully end up with the one remaining possibility.

    • @Andre-j8f7t
      @Andre-j8f7t 27 днів тому

      @fluffy there’s another machine in the one that lets you know

  • @ericrolland9092
    @ericrolland9092 Рік тому +790

    As someone in this field, these videos keep me humble and remind me to be as thorough as I possibly can.

    • @ChibiPanda8888
      @ChibiPanda8888 Рік тому +12

      Same here

    • @tedhardulak7698
      @tedhardulak7698 Рік тому +35

      That is very refreshing to hear. Keep up the great work! Any time someone says "Good enough" smack them.

    • @philalcoceli6328
      @philalcoceli6328 Рік тому +2

      SO-VERY-WELL-SAID!!

    • @gavinvalentino1313
      @gavinvalentino1313 Рік тому +4

      It tskes pandering UA-cam videos to remind you to do the job correctly? You have to be entertained by the mistakes of others so that you can do things the way they're supposed to br done?
      Wow.

    • @philalcoceli6328
      @philalcoceli6328 Рік тому +1

      @Gavin Valentino Your reply does not match ANYTHING in Eric Rolland's comment. At all. You are truly pandering to your intentional-and-malicious-distortion-imagination to feel like you are superior to others. We must all learn from your pathetic ego crash-and-burn so we stay humble and remember to be thorough and efficient in life.

  • @garciadany6759
    @garciadany6759 Рік тому +1210

    It’s amazing to think even though repairs were unsatisfactory the plane still endured 22 years more of pressurization 😵‍💫

    • @Tracert-mc1hu
      @Tracert-mc1hu Рік тому +148

      It shows how much safety margin they give on their recommendations, but for good reason.

    • @stanclark8824
      @stanclark8824 Рік тому +15

      which is rare for planes.

    • @michaelbujaki2462
      @michaelbujaki2462 Рік тому +30

      And the airline was so close to discovering the issue.

    • @jamescollier3
      @jamescollier3 Рік тому +60

      As an engineer that has worked in Asia, I'll say Safety is not first :)

    • @rickmiller3763
      @rickmiller3763 Рік тому

      ​@@Tracert-mc1hu Ju u

  • @marksamuelsen2750
    @marksamuelsen2750 Рік тому +390

    I was a corporate pilot for 35 years and I always went down to the maintenance shop when the 3 engine jet I flew everywhere around the planet was having routine maintenance and non-routine repairs were being done. From brake jobs to radio work. I was there! I’m now retired and am 68yo and I never scratched an airplane or scratched a person!

    • @rockland2
      @rockland2 Рік тому +12

      How many did you crash though, that's the real question!

    • @debbielwilliamson8546
      @debbielwilliamson8546 Рік тому +27

      Your eyes on the maintenance and any repairs put a human attachment to the plane.
      I'm guessing that made a big difference when the mechanics were working on it.

    • @dangray4322
      @dangray4322 Рік тому +15

      You never had an itch in your 68 years?

    • @brendachilders4879
      @brendachilders4879 Рік тому

      Go back to bed sleepy. You are childish.

    • @Hdffn
      @Hdffn Рік тому

      Aha

  • @keithadams812
    @keithadams812 Рік тому +596

    Could you imagine having your name on that repair and the FAA calling you 20 years later?
    There's criminal liability attached to this

    • @conradanderson3928
      @conradanderson3928 Рік тому

      The FAA has no authority in Taiwan (ROC).

    • @Momma_Tomma
      @Momma_Tomma Рік тому +41

      I was thinking that too. They need to be held accountable. Involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide.

    • @marinazagrai1623
      @marinazagrai1623 Рік тому +36

      Yes and let’s see anyone being held liable for this catastrophy. You are talking about the Chinese govt, so you would have a tough time in a country that is not governed by laws and lawyers. Mechanics, there, are told what they can do regardless of manuals.

    • @Chris-ty8iu
      @Chris-ty8iu Рік тому +7

      @@marinazagrai1623 ding ding ding

    • @TheRealSpartanWarrior
      @TheRealSpartanWarrior Рік тому +11

      That’s why you do the job the right way to begin with

  • @davidb2206
    @davidb2206 11 місяців тому +151

    The pilots who knew how to survive in WWII used to make the mechanic go on the first flight after a repair. Amazingly, some extra checks would suddenly need to be made on the repair work.

    • @mariekatherine5238
      @mariekatherine5238 Місяць тому +18

      My father did this job for the US Navy during the Korean Conflict. The policy was that the mechanics always took a flight in the helicopter before it was sent back for action. If you’ve done a hurried or sloppy job, or took short cuts, there’s no way you’re going to get on that chopper.

    • @ninabriesch4184
      @ninabriesch4184 Місяць тому +10

      Today they should make all the CEO's and other Bosses take a flight after repairs.. More even if and when they said no to a repair.

    • @thesidneychan
      @thesidneychan Місяць тому +3

      @@ninabriesch4184 unless you're Stockton Rush(ed).

    • @catecurl3790
      @catecurl3790 Місяць тому

      Hmm. Dreadful

    • @catecurl3790
      @catecurl3790 Місяць тому

      ​@mariekatheine5238 😮 jus5 awful

  • @billrivenbark8983
    @billrivenbark8983 Рік тому +65

    I’m a retired A&P mechanic and I can tell you that anytime I did a major repair I would ask myself, would I fly on this aircraft or let my family fly on this aircraft? If in doubt get a second opinion. Also following the Aircraft manufacturer manuals to the letter is paramount with no if ands or buts allowed.

    • @sharoncassell5273
      @sharoncassell5273 Рік тому +4

      I did similar for military aircraft C141A&B. 1979 through 1984. Went on to sunway signal repair maintainer then sanitation & retirement. Shortcuts don't work in maintenance. Keep the blue side up.

  • @Phostings1
    @Phostings1 Рік тому +264

    This is why I never skip doing anything that protocol ask for. I've seen lazy techs doing the bare minimum and getting fired just only a few months later when the logs did not match the work. I worked in the IT field, so it is a good thing no lives were spent, but for something like this that lives depend on, never skip out on protocol.

    • @kabo0m
      @kabo0m Рік тому +14

      Same with cars (as I have never worked on planes but I remember driving my car after getting a tire replaced and the wheel ending up falling off. I was so lucky as it finally fell off as I turned into a parking lot because my car was shaking so much. And I had just come off the express way going at 100km/hr.

    • @CynthiaSchoenbauer
      @CynthiaSchoenbauer 11 місяців тому +4

      Yes, if you feel inclined not to do it, find out exactly WHY it is in there and it will motivate more accurate work.

    • @kimmccabe1422
      @kimmccabe1422 11 місяців тому +1

      And, knew it wld fly 1000's of ppl. Shame. Karma a B. Even if it takes 20 yrs

    • @DiHandley
      @DiHandley Місяць тому

      The world needs more people like you.

    • @raerohan4241
      @raerohan4241 Місяць тому

      @@DiHandley It's better to say "I will be more like that" instead of saying other people should. If we all waited for other people to do something, nothing would get done

  • @BurritoMassacre
    @BurritoMassacre 11 місяців тому +38

    It broke my heart to see family holding up pictures of their loved ones. 😢

    • @WycliffeXhoza
      @WycliffeXhoza Місяць тому

      @@BurritoMassacre what! didn't see that

  • @prodbykeel
    @prodbykeel Рік тому +385

    ... Could you imagine the twisting feeling in your stomach and how much fear they must have had knowing that the plane and simply split into pieces and now you're free falling from thousands of feet and there's nothing you can do except see the ground getting closer and closer... I feel so bad for those people.

    • @madezra64
      @madezra64 Рік тому +162

      If it helps you feel better, at 35,000ft the air pressure is so low and thin with barely any oxygen that you lose consciousness within seconds. Most, if not all people probably never regained consciousness after the break up. Still though... Extremely scary no matter how you science it.

    • @samsngdevice5103
      @samsngdevice5103 Рік тому +10

      Code brown!

    • @derp195
      @derp195 Рік тому +47

      ​​​@@madezra64 Time of useful consciousness (means you can do things like fly a plane) is 30 seconds to 1 minute at 35,000 feet.
      By the time you hit that mark, you're already at 20,000 feet, at which is 30+ minutes of useful consciousness.
      Basically, it's very likely that most passengers didn't lose consciousness, but they'd probably be confused and drowsy toward the end of the fall.

    • @madezra64
      @madezra64 Рік тому +76

      @@derp195 While the oxygen amount at 35,000ft equates to 30 or so seconds of useful consciousness, it however does not account for trauma of explosive depressurization. If you're at 35,000ft and the plane rips in half, 99% of everyone onboard is going to be knocked out from the immediate drop in pressure, on top of that you're going to be hit by 600+MPH of wind which even that by itself would also render you unconscious almost instantly. You would have the immediate trauma of massive depressurization combined with the forces your body experiences while being flung around the now disintegrating airplane. You will be knocked out within a couple seconds after the combined trauma of everything your body is now experiencing. Time of useful consciousness is calculated based on how long you could technically function if your oxygen was reduced at that level. It does not take into consideration the explosive decompression, or the forces slamming into your body.

    • @nemo196
      @nemo196 Рік тому +23

      Speed, air pressure air temperature violent break up. I would only guess that they would be unconscious instantly.

  • @jimdavis6833
    @jimdavis6833 Рік тому +275

    As a retired jet fighter mechanic, I can tell you it's even more critical to get it right the 1st time on a plane that can fly at Mach 2, or more.

    • @smudgey1kenobey
      @smudgey1kenobey Рік тому +5

      You must be so stressed at work with the high stakes? Do you have the support to do the best repairs possible?

    • @jimdavis6833
      @jimdavis6833 Рік тому +19

      @@smudgey1kenobey In the USAF, they have complete shops dedicated to everything from pneudraulics to sheet metal, and each electronic system has its own specialty, such as navigation, radar, and Comm. Another shop handles nothing but instruments, while another handles only life support systems. It'd definitely not like an auto shop.

    • @nickisnyder3450
      @nickisnyder3450 Рік тому +10

      Define "more"? Considering that a jet has only 1 occupant who can eject, verses a plane full of hundreds of people who have no access to a parachute.

    • @fjodorcornelisson6874
      @fjodorcornelisson6874 Рік тому +6

      @@nickisnyder3450 I doubt it would make any difference whether your can eject or not if the plane breaks up into pieces mid-air ... at supersonic speed ...

    • @DaRkLoRdZoRc
      @DaRkLoRdZoRc Рік тому +7

      I bet. A lot of people don't even realize that, at those speeds, the *air itself* might as well be a solid force, constantly buffeting and scraping over the plane like an endless sandstorm. I have no clue what kind of wizardry you guys use to weld or bolt pieces of metal together so they can withstand that kind of constant stress and friction, but it's pretty amazing.

  • @gamtngirl3655
    @gamtngirl3655 9 місяців тому +98

    The moral of this story is honesty and integrity, as opposed to the quick and easy.

    • @tesmith47
      @tesmith47 9 місяців тому +6

      But PROFIT over ALL😂😂😂😂😂😂

  • @robertheinkel6225
    @robertheinkel6225 9 місяців тому +15

    During my 24 years in the USAF, the number of repairs that were signed off and verified by a second person, and never completed, was unacceptable. Some folks don’t take it seriously

  • @canadianguy28
    @canadianguy28 Рік тому +294

    A pure COPY of Japan air flight 123 that happened 17 years earlier - when you make a repair, don't even quarter-ass it because it might take years (or even decades), but eventually it'll catch up and people will die.

    • @bluecollie55_movies25
      @bluecollie55_movies25 Рік тому +41

      It exactly reminded me of Japan Airlines 123 as well. Both crashes were caused by poor repairs of some years-old damage to each plane.

    • @V0rtexM
      @V0rtexM 9 місяців тому +3

      They played Russian Roulette with the people ! Absolutely horrific ! Actually , I can't even think of a word that describes this negligent, unnecessary rushed job. From now on people, when repairing or inspecting and passing inspection imagine u or a loved one being subjected to Russian Roulette!

    • @austindarrenor
      @austindarrenor 9 місяців тому +6

      It took 17 yrs for an anomaly the size of a grain of sand in a fan disc to bring down United flt 232. But that mistake was on GE.

    • @Giratina575
      @Giratina575 Місяць тому +2

      Add American 191 . Shortcut in maintenance procedure

    • @AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg
      @AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg Місяць тому

      Stating the obvious?......."Special" training required?

  • @TanNguyen-iv5yh
    @TanNguyen-iv5yh 11 місяців тому +32

    Hats off to the Investigation team. They spent so much work and effort to find out the true cause of the accident

  • @madmaxusa1
    @madmaxusa1 Рік тому +264

    I can only hope that videos like this are mandatory viewing for maintenance crews and supervisors who perform these kinds of repairs.

    • @tedhardulak7698
      @tedhardulak7698 Рік тому +29

      I agree 100%. Would make it all much more real for them. I have repaired things all my life. A term I despise is "Thats good enough"

    • @williamsplays8528
      @williamsplays8528 Рік тому +1

      They are now pretty sure. Of course theirs are probably more in depth.

    • @houstonbalaji4768
      @houstonbalaji4768 Рік тому +26

      Someone commented in one of the videos that these are made for glorifying NTSB, and their work. I’m like, so what if it glorifies them? They do an admirable job, they are superbly professional about it and they have probably saved hundreds if not thousands of lives just through their investigations. This is one damn good American agency and let’s keep it that way for the sake of safety!

    • @quantumpotential7639
      @quantumpotential7639 Рік тому +4

      That's good enough is what rules the world. In fact, in this day and age it's the gold standard for excellence. Don't believe me? Just ask the average American voter. Smdh

    • @dcpack
      @dcpack Рік тому +1

      Does not make a difference if maintenance is indifferent to correct procedures.

  • @aco319sig3
    @aco319sig3 Рік тому +82

    Pencil-whipping maintenance procedures has killed a lot of people over the years, and the culprits are almost never held accountable, as by that time, they have usually left their positions or retired. In this case, it took over 20 years for their laziness, or their supervisor's stinginess, to come back to haunt them.

    • @hub5343
      @hub5343 Місяць тому +1

      Yes - this means that a procedure needs to be in place to prevent these. Basically all repairs must be supervised by an independent body.

  • @KnawedOne
    @KnawedOne 9 місяців тому +14

    Knew someone who participated in airline crash analysis and diagnostics. It was incredibly sobering to hear the intense scrutiny of each tiny piece recovered. The efforts to recover everything are incredible especially underwater.

  • @Vinemaple
    @Vinemaple Рік тому +62

    "The workers did this, the workers did that..." Why no consideration that the orders came from their superiors? Or that the improper repair was the only way to meet unrealistic targets set by someone in an office somewhere? "Do it my way or else" is a management culture that I think we're all familiar with...

    • @conradanderson3928
      @conradanderson3928 Рік тому +11

      Keep in mind this is just a silly TV show. It's documented in the final report that CAL management ordered the repair to be accomplished knowing it did not comply with the Boeing SRM.

    • @Stephanie-we5ep
      @Stephanie-we5ep Рік тому +14

      Because sh*t rolls downhill. Keep in mind that this program doesn't always show the details of every issue that contributed to the crash.

    • @Vinemaple
      @Vinemaple Рік тому +7

      @@Stephanie-we5ep Agreed, and to Conrad Anderson as well. It's a very, very silly TV show, I'm disappointed that this stuff is starting to compete with the excellent indie documentaries native to UA-cam.

    • @davidlloyd7597
      @davidlloyd7597 Місяць тому +1

      There have been occasions when people from head office overruled the technical staff because of the bottom line. No way of knowing whether this happened here.

  • @somchaiwongma3813
    @somchaiwongma3813 Рік тому +101

    Very similar to the Japan Airlines crash years before, also as the result of a bad tail strike repair. Over 500 passengers died in that crash but unfortunately, airlines didn’t learn from this catastrophe.

    • @suzannebrown2505
      @suzannebrown2505 Рік тому +9

      Somchai: It‘s not that they don‘t learn, but that they don‘t care or get paid enough to think the repairs made might not be enough to hold as needed! 😮

    • @andrewtaylor940
      @andrewtaylor940 Рік тому +11

      Which is also a sign that this show overly dramatizes certain things. Such as the great mystery of what brought down this plane? The CVR told them more then the show implies. The last real sound in the cockpit is a chime that the plane has reached cruising altitude. 34,000 feet. So it’s reached max stress on the pressure vessel. At that moment they want to rule out a bomb, but their immediate biggest suspicion is failure of the pressure vessel. As soon as they worked out that it started in the rear they immediately would put “tail strike” at the top of their list. JAL123 was and is the nightmare case for air crash investigators. It’s the one they are always fearful of and always thinking about. Really I’m sure from the moment they got that simulation report the only questions they had was was it a failed tail strike repair? Or did the rear cargo door fail? With tail strike being the leading suspect due to how much of the tail came apart early. It is scary because you never really know how many of these things are out there?

    • @Sg_aviation
      @Sg_aviation Місяць тому

      @@somchaiwongma3813 Boeing did the repair for ja8119

  • @mike7106
    @mike7106 Рік тому +74

    Always watch a marathon of these videos when I have a flight coming up

    • @psalm2forliberty577
      @psalm2forliberty577 Рік тому +10

      Keeps one FROSTY 🥶 for the Flight !

    • @Dhaze1983
      @Dhaze1983 Рік тому +11

      I do this to myself. I don’t know what’s wrong with me.

    • @donnamariedavidson5065
      @donnamariedavidson5065 Рік тому +3

      Isn't that how it works, though? Lol I do the same thing!!

    • @psalm2forliberty577
      @psalm2forliberty577 Рік тому +1

      @@Dhaze1983
      Nothing wrong with you.
      Isn't is just "facing down our fears ?"
      Unspoken fear has power over us.
      Speaking them out & facing them cuts "fear down to size".
      Consider just how RARE these crashes are, literally a .000001 chance of death or injury.
      We take a 1000x greater risk simply driving to the Airport !
      Plus, God Almighty 'has our back' - He promises to "never leave or forsake ALL who call upon My name".
      So leave the worry in God's good hands & have an excellent safe FUN flight ✈️🛫!

    • @krisdunwoody7037
      @krisdunwoody7037 Рік тому +1

      My daughter, the night before taking a flight, watched one of those Air Port Crash Movies. I would have been a very nervous Airplane flyer if I had watched the Movie and flown the next day!

  • @richardkeilig4062
    @richardkeilig4062 Рік тому +91

    Very sad story. I watch your programs to be aware of dangers that can occur if maintenance is not done right. As a firefighter we cannot have our equipment mess up at a fire.

    • @beverlyarcher546
      @beverlyarcher546 Рік тому +3

      Oh god don't remind me of the year bad air in a few fire departments killed a few firefighters one 2 of the 3 firefighters that went into the water barely came out alive they got that thing forget the name of when come up to quickly in the water without stopping the third guy they believe had got caught on something they had gone in the water to retrieve a body of a man that had drowned and he had tried to get one of his buddies attention but at that point they were all running out of air so the guy didn't notice I forget what the cause was both firefighters would make it that reached the surface a day later they went to retrieve the 2 bodies and another station lost a few firefighters who ran into the same problem not enough air or there was something wrong with the tanks I don't remember oh ik is there was funerals for a few weeks because of that tank problem till they finally figured out what caused their deaths

    • @stigmatafan09
      @stigmatafan09 Рік тому +4

      ​@@beverlyarcher546"The bends" or decompression sickness

  • @jamesoncurry5224
    @jamesoncurry5224 Рік тому +104

    These poor aviators, god rest their soul and everyone onboard, literally nothing they could do about it, when they took off, it was already decided. :(

    • @reckontonottobemoved
      @reckontonottobemoved Рік тому +1

      Don't say GOD rest their souls many of these people serve buddah

    • @reckontonottobemoved
      @reckontonottobemoved Рік тому +1

      What god? GOD Is GOD NOT god

    • @MarinCipollina
      @MarinCipollina Рік тому +8

      Their fate was sealed at takeoff.

    • @SalvationIsInChristAlone
      @SalvationIsInChristAlone Рік тому +4

      @@reckontonottobemovedChrist’s gospel spans the seven continents. Don’t assume something about people you never met. The lord God has called people from all corners of the world to serve him. Cultural Christianity is a lie.

    • @kabo0m
      @kabo0m Рік тому +2

      @@reckontonottobemoved God came for all. It is up to God to decide. We can still pray for them. Stop being like the pharisees.

  • @everlynmilenazamora7044
    @everlynmilenazamora7044 Рік тому +50

    Very sad, the maintenance people often act like hundreds of lives don’t depend on their work. It’s terrifying.

    • @CynthiaSchoenbauer
      @CynthiaSchoenbauer 11 місяців тому +9

      Their pay and status may not reflect it either.

    • @nickjohansen9038
      @nickjohansen9038 7 місяців тому +4

      A lot of people make this childish mistake. They assume that because they view a job as important that the person doing the job is special and above what literally every other person does. Everybody gets complacent in their job. McDonald's worker, doctor, don't matter.

    • @AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg
      @AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg Місяць тому +1

      Most work is done late at night in cold darkened hangars. I worked as an Engineer's assistant on Airplane Maintenance, dotted every i, crossed every t. I then went into undertaking, another very professional occupation.

    • @raerohan4241
      @raerohan4241 Місяць тому

      ​@@AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg Doesn't matter. It's part of the job, you shouldn't use it as an excuse for subpar work, especially when being lazy could have potentially fatal consequences

    • @AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg
      @AnthonyOMulligan-yv9cg Місяць тому

      @@raerohan4241 what are you missing?

  • @thesisypheanjournal1271
    @thesisypheanjournal1271 Рік тому +35

    It wasn't a mistake. It was a deliberate failure to follow procedures. And they knew what they were doing was wrong or they wouldn't have covered it up.

  • @johnshields6852
    @johnshields6852 Рік тому +25

    I know flying is the safest way to travel, but the crashes are horrifying, especially when you know it's going down, sometimes for minutes, it's a terrifying thought.

    • @ats-3693
      @ats-3693 Місяць тому +3

      I think I'm ok with dying (but I don't know that for sure because I've never been faced with it), but yeah a airliner crash, if it was very quick you might not know it even happened but the aircraft falling from great height taking a long time with you knowing that death was imminent when you hit the ground would be fairly horrific. This one broke apart suddenly at 35,000ft so I'm guessing that most if not all aboard would have passed out instantly when the cabin explosively decompressed.

  • @kari34b54
    @kari34b54 Рік тому +39

    I’m surprised it lasted 20+ years until it broke apart.

  • @allisonshepard7321
    @allisonshepard7321 Рік тому +24

    It's such a shame with all of these malfunctions and crashes had to come with a loss of lives all to make sure flying today is safer.

  • @ronjon7942
    @ronjon7942 Рік тому +92

    Around 39:00 when they’re ‘riveting’ the panel back on, they’re missing a few parts on the rivet gun! :). Close enuf for demonstration purposes, I guess - only a sheetmetal nerd would notice.

    • @MrBsbotto
      @MrBsbotto Рік тому +10

      The rest of the video was riveting!

    • @dmedme9268
      @dmedme9268 Рік тому +5

      LoL same here

    • @ryokufox2281
      @ryokufox2281 Рік тому +6

      That drove me crazy! I used to build aircraft for a living lol!

    • @HiddenWindshield
      @HiddenWindshield Рік тому +6

      Also, a lot of the radio chatter isn't correct. Starting at 1:46, a "descend and maintain" instruction should be preceded by the airplane you're addressing (e.g. a flight number) and followed by an actual altitude.

    • @brennanvilcheck9469
      @brennanvilcheck9469 Рік тому +4

      @@ryokufox2281 same.
      Also when they removed the doubler and the rivet was not even bucked.
      Rivet gun was missing tip & containment spring, but also made drill sound not the taping/hammering sound.

  • @lilibetp
    @lilibetp Рік тому +62

    Maybe we should teach mechanics to ask themselves if they would feel comfortable having their children fly on the plane they've just serviced.

    • @Zanoab
      @Zanoab Рік тому +13

      You don't even need to ask the mechanics. After the Boeing 737 Max problems were discovered, the people building Boeing's planes admitted they don't trust riding in the planes they built.

    • @xy4489
      @xy4489 Рік тому +4

      That mechanic most likely would feel comfortable. Most likely this is an error of judgement/evaluation of the situation rather than cutting corners. Are cracks too deep or are they shallow enough?

    • @grumpycat4584
      @grumpycat4584 Рік тому +4

      I worked on corporate aircraft. Anytime the pilots asked me to fly with them, I would eagerly join them.

    • @sharoncassell9358
      @sharoncassell9358 Рік тому +3

      I was an aircraft mechanic and had all the confidence to fly my own fixins' and did. I had buddies who have flown the same crafts. I knew pilots who flew them too. I always double check any repair we were responsible for. In military down time was not as critical money wise. Except combat times. Pilots rushed a plane for quick turn around.

  • @christopherpardell4418
    @christopherpardell4418 Рік тому +86

    I flew flight 611 half a dozen times every time I did a biz trip to China. It was the connecting flight between Taipei and Hong Kong. It was this exact same plane, same registration number by the door. China Air had this plane assigned to run the heavy traffic flights between Hong Kong and Taipei.. it just flew this route, back and forth several times each day. The morning leg out of Taipei to Hong Kong was always labeled flight 611. It was the exact same crew every morning. I was on flight 611, on this very plane, the morning before it crashed. I flew it so often I knew the stewardess in business class by name and they knew me. It was a shock to see the news the next day and know those sweet young women had died on the very next 611 leg. Had I booked my trip one day later… I would have been with them.

    • @Ethiopia69
      @Ethiopia69 Місяць тому +1

      @@christopherpardell4418 you are lucky

    • @preethancarvalho2204
      @preethancarvalho2204 Місяць тому +1

      @@christopherpardell4418 god's plan ur so lucky!

    • @dannysigurdson7108
      @dannysigurdson7108 Місяць тому

      What a shame someone else lost their life. If only...

  • @MS-715-7Y
    @MS-715-7Y Рік тому +38

    The patch was barely larger than the damaged area; but they said the scratches and cracks grew slowly over time. Why weren't the expanding scratches showing up outside the perimeter of the patch? There should have been some evidence of cracking beyond the unexposed section of the repair patch at some point.

    • @bunzeebear2973
      @bunzeebear2973 Рік тому

      Inspectors tend to "sluff by" the repair points figuring they are done already so lets look at another area of the plane. Human nature. "Grog killed the animal with his club" No need for you to bash its skull in AGAIN. Dead is Dead....type of thinking.

    • @SuperPickle15
      @SuperPickle15 Рік тому +12

      microfractures would be hidden under the paint.

    • @sharoncassell5273
      @sharoncassell5273 Рік тому

      & im sure it is more now.

  • @SonneCreations
    @SonneCreations 8 місяців тому +15

    It’s like having a an infection in your finger and thinking, “That looks gross” and so you cover it up with a bandaid so you don’t have to look at it anymore. Until one day you wake up and the finger is black with gangrene and having to get the part amputated.

    • @warpiouss
      @warpiouss Місяць тому +1

      @@SonneCreations that's such a good metaphor omg

  • @youtubeobserverz
    @youtubeobserverz Рік тому +97

    The statement from the NTSB equivalent at 6'06" to 6'20" is absolutely stunning! Amazing anyone would fly this airline, an accident every 4 years...

    • @eggreedgious5194
      @eggreedgious5194 Рік тому +6

      Communism for ya

    • @deathbug
      @deathbug Рік тому +6

      Most likely they had no other options.

    • @dev0random
      @dev0random Рік тому

      It hasn't had an accident for almost 15 years other than a freighter snow skid incident in Chicago.

    • @beverlyarcher546
      @beverlyarcher546 Рік тому

      Chinese made things suck they don't last but communism who use children god the Democrats love child labor since they support these child labor countries

    • @aarond0623
      @aarond0623 Рік тому +40

      @@eggreedgious5194Taiwan isn't communist. China is. Taiwan is the democratic Chinese government in exile.

  • @firemangan
    @firemangan Рік тому +14

    The title got my dying. I thought it ment a 20 year old ATC who is a mistake made the flight crash.

  • @MyTube4Utoo
    @MyTube4Utoo Рік тому +12

    You wouldn't have to be a certified airplane maintenance engineer to know that a doubler should be substantially larger than the damaged area it's covering. The repair wasn't done correctly, but if the doubler had been larger the plane may have held together for another 5 months, until the second part of the inspection, when the doubler would have been removed, and the faulty repair exposed.

  • @poppabear9279
    @poppabear9279 Рік тому +22

    I flew on this same exact airplane, the only passenger 747-200 in their fleet.
    I flew from Taipei CKS airport.
    This was basically a shuttle flight.
    I still have a photo of the pocket card. I always took a photo of pocket cards and my ticket stub.

  • @xaviercast970
    @xaviercast970 9 місяців тому +4

    Inspection of repairs need to be examined more frequently to avoid disasters like this one.

  • @CryptoInvest-LunaticCapital
    @CryptoInvest-LunaticCapital Рік тому +49

    i am not into this type of career, i think am only good at washing dishes, but after seeing a lot of these videos, i think i am more capable now, to apply as a lead investigator of any flight crash.

    • @quantumpotential7639
      @quantumpotential7639 Рік тому +22

      You're certainly qualified to reconstruct any incidents where a plate or saucer accidental falls off the table, which can be catastrophic if the contents of that saucer or plate is such that it causes someone to slip and fall as a result possibly leading to death because someone hit their head on the corner of a sharp corner resulting from the devasting spill. Now let us pray 🙏.

    • @johnbowman1076
      @johnbowman1076 Рік тому +7

      Me too. Only problem... I'd be too afraid to take a jet to the crash site.

    • @grylltheonion
      @grylltheonion 11 місяців тому +1

      ​@@quantumpotential7639goddamn my friend 😂

  • @Gazdatronik
    @Gazdatronik Рік тому +54

    This happens more than you think. Questionable repairs happen constantly. Sometimes, the workmen know the repair is not going to hold and they would rather not log the repair at all than to take any credit for it, because they know it will fail. I've seen it more often than I care to mention.

    • @ElTee842
      @ElTee842 Рік тому +15

      You’ve literally admitted to being negligent if you aren’t reporting these negligent repairs.

    • @MarinCipollina
      @MarinCipollina Рік тому +3

      This is why every repair and maintenance item needs the signature of the responsible party.

    • @ElTee842
      @ElTee842 Рік тому +8

      @@MarinCipollina except if OP is seeing them do negligent maintenance and doesn’t speak up he is also responsible for any accidents or loss of life.

    • @Ahn-mu3db
      @Ahn-mu3db Рік тому +11

      You are also responsible if you don't speak up, what a shame on your part.

    • @kabo0m
      @kabo0m Рік тому +5

      @@ElTee842 He might have but .. sometimes even the bosses don't care sadly. Can't say the bosses did not know. I mean, a stain like that 44:33 was pretty evident. They chose not to investigate it.

  • @icarus313
    @icarus313 Рік тому +9

    The price of safety improvements is high, but the price we pay in human blood is infinitely higher.

  • @applemauzel
    @applemauzel Рік тому +17

    2:26 You know its bad when you see the same dude that piloted Singapore Airlines Flight 006 again.

  • @hambam7533
    @hambam7533 Рік тому +70

    I have flown across the pacific ocean 8 times and these type of things are always on my mind it would be a terrifying ordeal to be involved in one of these crashes

    • @Interitus1
      @Interitus1 Рік тому +6

      Hundreds of flights cross the oceans of the world every single day. Because of the volume of passengers and their size we worry about their safety. But between 1982 and 2019 only 47,719 fatalities occurred. Consider how many flights happened in that time. Now consider that roughly 1.3 million people die due to cars every single year. And start worrying more about crossing the street than crossing an ocean.

    • @oahuhawaii2141
      @oahuhawaii2141 Рік тому +2

      The destruction of China Air 611 happened so suddenly that nobody on board the flight knew that they'd be dead in a moment.

    • @MarinCipollina
      @MarinCipollina Рік тому

      @@oahuhawaii2141 I bet when they realized the back of the plane was missing, they knew.

    • @pattydella4
      @pattydella4 Рік тому

      ​@Interitus1 You're right, but most people will always worry more about flying than driving because 1.We drive far more than we fly (normalcy bias); 2. It's simply unnatural for humans to be up so high from the Earth.

    • @neatstuff1988
      @neatstuff1988 Рік тому

      @@Interitus1 flown in the similar air frame over the ocean two thousand three hundred times. I'm here to tell you a fuel pump just doesn't do this.

  • @TomLeg
    @TomLeg Рік тому +25

    The proper procedure was to cut away the damaged skin, and "double" a larger area. They did "double skin", though not sufficiently large an area, without cutting away the damaged area beneath. I can see how having too small a patch could lead to eventual failure, but it seems to me that having the inner layer, however ineffectual, should only provide some additional support ... at the cost of a little extra weight. ... OK< as soon as I re-started the video, my questions were explained. :-)

    • @SuperPickle15
      @SuperPickle15 Рік тому +3

      allowing the damaged material is what lead to the catastrophic failure. The microfractures continued to spread every time the metal was stress. If the damaged area was removed, there would been no fractures to spread.

  • @charlessomerset9754
    @charlessomerset9754 Рік тому +46

    Are airplane maintenance records public? If you can get a carfax, you should be able to get a planefax. Just the ability to view those records would light a fire under the airlines to keep perfect records for their entire fleet.

    • @HiddenWindshield
      @HiddenWindshield Рік тому +25

      If you wanted to go over a specific airplane's records before boarding it, there's very little chance you'd finish before the airplane is retired from service. There's an aphorism in the aviation industry that an airplane isn't actually legal to fly until the paperwork on it weighs more than the plane itself.

    • @charlessomerset9754
      @charlessomerset9754 Рік тому +8

      @@HiddenWindshield That's horrifying and hilarious at the same time.

    • @oahuhawaii2141
      @oahuhawaii2141 Рік тому +6

      @HiddenWindshield: The more common saying is "A newly designed plane won't fly until its R&D documents weigh more than the plane itself."

    • @rwill156
      @rwill156 Рік тому +13

      And you'd probably never figure out anything bad anyways. As a mechanic it would take me forever to go through the logs to see if everything was concurrent. Between horrible penmanship and cryptic entries it's tough. I once found a entry that was just "Replaced p/n:XXXXXXX ". I looked it up and it was the entire left wing assembly, so in other words the plane had most likely had some kind of accident that necessitated a new wing, but they didn't want that clearly in the logs if they were to sell it.

    • @rhuttrho88
      @rhuttrho88 Рік тому +2

      ​@@rwill156 😬

  • @timrussell1559
    @timrussell1559 Рік тому +33

    This begs the question: What is a reasonable service life for something that is basically just a large aluminum container? How many thousands of expansion/contraction cycles are acceptable for thin aluminum sheet metal panels that are riveted together to form an enormous tube? Logically, there has to be some scientific formula to calculate how many times the fuselage of these huge jetliners can be pressurized before cracks can reasonably be expected to start forming. Visually examining these internal panels is obviously not possible, and the technology to accurately inspect an entire aircraft in a timely and effective manner does not yet exist. Its nothing short of a miracle that these catastrophic failures do not happen more often given that these planes are flown for tens of thousands of hours over several decades of brutal use. Improper repairs notwithstanding

    • @nickyblue4866
      @nickyblue4866 Рік тому +3

      Maybe... just maybe... these planes are built quite well

    • @conradanderson3928
      @conradanderson3928 Рік тому +16

      30 years is the typical expected service life of a commercial aircraft.
      Also, the entire aircraft structure is inspected for defects using real-time-radiography on a time controlled basis. This technology has existed for decades.

    • @qwertyman9560
      @qwertyman9560 Рік тому +1

      Not a structural expert, but from my understanding of basic Fatigue, the number of cycles to failure depends on the stress level, the higher the stress level, the smaller number of cycles to failure.

    • @chexlemeneux8790
      @chexlemeneux8790 Рік тому +4

      Look at Aloha air lines flight 243 , 35,000 flight hours and nearly 90,000 flight cycles on that air frame before it burst. They aren't rated for anywhere near that many cycles . If they are repaired properly and not used long after they should have been retired , the fuselages are extremely resilient .

    • @krisdunwoody7037
      @krisdunwoody7037 11 місяців тому

      There is , I believe, a formula for airplane life based on Pressure Cycles, but in the case of the Hawaiian Airlines flight, they forgot about Corrosion of being by the Ocean (the flight that lost it's top in the first third just behind the Pilot Cabin). (Your post was on the Video about the China Flight 611 that broke up 747 in air).

  • @tommurphy116
    @tommurphy116 Рік тому +7

    My guess on this is investigators were on to the fact that this aircraft had previously suffered structural damage before any wreckage was brought up. I think they were waiting and hoping those specific pieces would be recovered. Its a somewhat different order than portrayed here.

  • @ahndeux
    @ahndeux Рік тому +22

    In the aviation maintenance world, the technical term used for the repair is a "flim flam job".

    • @jennifermoran9088
      @jennifermoran9088 Рік тому

      Asians are notorious for cutting corners and disregarding regulations. They themselves are all flim flam jobs.

  • @sirxavior1583
    @sirxavior1583 Рік тому +8

    Damm. @6:04: "China Airlines have had a very poor safety record. As a matter of fact, it was considered one of the worst in the world. Typically it had 1 major accident every 4 years." The last three accidents happened in 2022, 2007, 2002. So maybe they tried to improve after 2007. Prior to that he's not wrong.

  • @anonnimoose7987
    @anonnimoose7987 Рік тому +38

    A 20 year old damage from a tail strike shattered the plane

    • @hittrewweuy7595
      @hittrewweuy7595 Рік тому +10

      Actually was a bad repair

    • @oahuhawaii2141
      @oahuhawaii2141 Рік тому +3

      No, the plane was fine with a proper cut & patch. The plane broke apart because the improper patch failed at high altitude, causing the plane to break apart. If the patch had failed at low altitude, the plane's inside atmosphere wouldn't have pressurized, and the crew would return to the airport to figure out the problem.

    • @Abrams17
      @Abrams17 3 місяці тому +1

      @@hittrewweuy7595 both the tail strike and the bad repair caused the accident

  • @lloydthegreat7851
    @lloydthegreat7851 Рік тому +40

    Sitting on the tarmac inside a china air plane we were delayed for over 2 hours. While sitting there I felt vibrations and bumps resembling people working on the plane and sounds of grinding and a large impact wrench. They were making repairs with over 200 passengers on board. I never flew China air again.

    • @kabo0m
      @kabo0m Рік тому +6

      It isn't just China Air that may do that.

    • @fighterjetsteve
      @fighterjetsteve Рік тому +6

      They were just changing a tire. That's the only maintenance they would ever do with passengers on board.

    • @151mcx
      @151mcx Рік тому +4

      probably was the food truck, honey bucket truck or fuel truck topping off the plane. Doesn't take much for anyone to feel small bumps, and opening of doors, and listening to hydrolic lifts on the trucks. I highly doubt anyone was doing major repairs while people were sitting in the aircraft.

  • @C.Church
    @C.Church Рік тому +38

    An age old phenomenon. The Jethros only informed enough to know HOW to do something decided they knew enough to say "That's dumb. It's just a beauty patch. Just gitr done and say you followed the Poindexters' instructions."
    The Poindexters, the ones who know WHY you do it that way.

  • @TurboMountTV
    @TurboMountTV Рік тому +3

    Geez that's 2 major 747 crashes initially caused by tail strikes years earlier.
    Ironically around same time.

  • @lorenfulghum2393
    @lorenfulghum2393 Рік тому +5

    there is serious metal fatigue on all the load bearing members, the wiring is substandard and totally inadequate for our power needs, and the neighborhood is like a demilitarized zone.

  • @bishop_98
    @bishop_98 Рік тому +34

    This is alarmingly similar to Japan Air Flight 123.

  • @vickichavez9956
    @vickichavez9956 Рік тому +6

    Glad they were able to figure out the problem and fix it

  • @aznsbd
    @aznsbd Рік тому +5

    You have to at least commend Boeing for building an aircraft that lasted 22 more years with a defect that should have grounded the plane.

  • @SS-Tommy
    @SS-Tommy 10 місяців тому +3

    Why do they have 20+ year old planes flying? It’s not a car. They need to be new. We’re in the air.

    • @matrox
      @matrox 10 місяців тому +2

      Cost too much. Cheaper to get sued and to pay off insurance claims. But with the proper mainten. they can be as safe as new.

  • @kefahksebe
    @kefahksebe Рік тому +6

    Do it correctly the first time and b proud of your work

  • @ken7875
    @ken7875 Рік тому +24

    It’s called smoking rivets, it lets a mechanic know, if he is observant and know what he is looking at, it is telling him the rivets are loosening their grip strength. Which holds the skin to the Skelton Frame 49:18 work. Just like the titanic, when the iceberg slid down the side of the ship, it scraped the bulb head rivet off which then caused the skin to open up and let the water in. In an airplane it’s the air going out.
    That’s why aircraft should only have a life time of 20 years.😮

    • @bunzeebear2973
      @bunzeebear2973 Рік тому +2

      The skin opened on the Titanic because the cast iron rivets cannot handle any movement in the plating(and there was over 5 mm movement when the side of the ship hit the berg. Then the next one also popped beside it and it ripped along like a zipper. the Cast Iron rivets were used near the bow of the ship because they are more like putty when red hot so hand pounding was possible. The workers were also given a lower grade iron rivet(a #3 instead of #4)(with more impurities making it weaker) In the middle they used steel rivets. They have managed to salvage some of the rivets from the Titanic and put through an electron microscope. If it never hit a berg it would be still plying the waters. (or put in a naval museum) or sent to the bottom by a soviet or German sub. Or be in a breaking yard being broken down to make another ship.

  • @velvetnightmare3133
    @velvetnightmare3133 Рік тому +25

    It's so crazy to watch this and realize that I've seen the other episode about the Turkish airlines crash, explaining why the floor has different dados...

  • @kenneth1755
    @kenneth1755 Рік тому +5

    I don't know. But it seems like undue pressurisation may have been a routine factor. Total time in air is one and a half hours to travel 450 miles across a wide open sea. Why do you need to shoot for 35,000 ft in that short a distance. That's almost straight up and straight down. Probably not at altitude for more than a half hour max. Spent a lot of years working on a lot of acft including 747s and sometimes they just create their own misery. The "C" and "D" checks are fairly extended and long winded but the "Work Cards" are routinely pinched for time. If you take more time than allowed on the card regardless of clear necessity you will get "released."

  • @Chris-cv1ll
    @Chris-cv1ll Рік тому +4

    I love how the rivet gun made a drill sound when riveting in the doubler.
    Oh and those scratches are through the cladding. That means the aluminum alloy below was oxidizing and weakening. No mention of ultrasonic inspection, only visual. If I did this kind of work I would be walked out and charged with sabotage.

  • @pamelaliegh
    @pamelaliegh Рік тому +39

    I’d like to give props to the person who knows the English language well enough to attempt to write titles.
    English is said to be one of the most difficult languages to learn .
    To know one’s own language and to learn another is an achievement!

  • @kityancypoloyapoy4012
    @kityancypoloyapoy4012 Місяць тому +3

    similar to the JAL flight 123. the plane suffers a tailstrike.. it was repaired but done incorrectly. cracks begins to form and after 7 years it eventually gave away as the vertical stabilizer of the plane rips off and crashed. it was also a boeing 747

    • @nou7401
      @nou7401 Місяць тому +3

      TAIWAN IS AN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY

  • @PlateletRichGel
    @PlateletRichGel 10 місяців тому +2

    I'm amazed that investigators can figure out what happened to a plane just from scraps. I'm glad it gives the family some closure. However in this particular case, to blame the maintenance engineer after a patch fails, after 22 YEARS. I would say a patch that last 22 years is a pretty good patch. These planes are regularly inspected and nobody caught it later. I'm sure there are pressure tests of each section to find weak spots. How long is a patch supposed to last?

  • @LastAvailableAlias
    @LastAvailableAlias Рік тому +19

    I've watched enough of these to now know if something goes wrong on a flight I can advise the crew lol
    This series is well done. They stick to the actual recordings for the scripts, interviews with the actual participants and experts and they don't dumb down the investigation for viewers. Dramatization is kept to a reasonable degree. Sometimes they do a little too much flashy editing but it isn't terrible.

  • @jdsstegman
    @jdsstegman Рік тому +3

    This is why I believe all repairs should be made public. So any one can look up the service records of any aircraft they may fly on!
    And then on top of the crappy repair, how did anyone miss the growing cracks. If the doubler was too small, the cracks would have been growing outside of the doubler!! This is absurd this could even happen. This is total incompetence and neglect.

  • @stella44424
    @stella44424 Рік тому +6

    flew on this a/c 3 weeks before breakup was covered with scab patches didn't want to board

  • @salmonkill7
    @salmonkill7 9 місяців тому +1

    I remember the accident. Excellent structural mechanics analysis!! Explosive decompression!

  • @QueenCallisto
    @QueenCallisto Рік тому +4

    A proper repair costs time and money. Which many airlines would prefer to avoid paying for?

  • @marktuttle3609
    @marktuttle3609 Рік тому +2

    I used to work on technical manuals for aircraft. We went to extreme lengths to ensure the manuals were correct because we knew that an incorrect manual could lead to an incorrect repair leading to the loss of an aircraft.

  • @craigpridemore7566
    @craigpridemore7566 Рік тому +21

    If he thinks that mechanics don't think about the people that will ride the aircraft, he hasn't talked to enough good mechanics. Good mechanics know and care.

    • @ramblerdave1339
      @ramblerdave1339 Рік тому +4

      My experience working in car dealers, suggest "good" describes about 30 percent of mechanics in that category, another 60% are just parts changers, the other 10%, no mechanical aptitude... just there for the money. 🙁

    • @Veladus
      @Veladus Рік тому +4

      Yeah that's kind of the thing, good mechanics didn't do this repair.

  • @madmadmal
    @madmadmal Рік тому +2

    225 people on a 747 is a golden route? That may fill a 757/767 on that route, way under a 747.

  • @ronjon7942
    @ronjon7942 Рік тому +27

    Omg, I couldn’t imagine being stuck inside a cabin with people smoking in it.

    • @joanfrellburg4901
      @joanfrellburg4901 Рік тому +9

      I know. Second hand smoke is never as tasty as first hand. Times were tough back then.

    • @ShaunHensley
      @ShaunHensley Рік тому +11

      The days before smoking restrictions sucked, but it did drive us kids outside to play 😂

    • @joanfrellburg4901
      @joanfrellburg4901 Рік тому +2

      @@ShaunHensley 🔥⭐

    • @tracycolvin7789
      @tracycolvin7789 Рік тому +8

      You make me feel old!! I started working for AA in 1987.. I totally remember asking passengers if they preferred smoking or no smoking. As I too was a smoker back then, I remember flying in first class with a cigarette in one hand, and a bloody Mary in the other hand!

    • @WhitneyDawe
      @WhitneyDawe Рік тому +7

      Lmao I’m old enough to remember when you still could. It’s not that noticeable. They had a good air filtering system.

  • @pauldavis9387
    @pauldavis9387 9 місяців тому +1

    I have been working as an aircraft mechanic since 1992. I have heard stories that would shock you. Like a main spare (the thing the wing is built on) being heavily corroded and the mechanics just used bondo to cover it up. That happened in Israel.

  • @ThomasDickensheets
    @ThomasDickensheets 11 місяців тому +3

    China Airlines Flight 611 Fatalities 225
    Survivors 0

  • @JavierBonillaC
    @JavierBonillaC Рік тому +2

    It is ridiculous that in this era there is not a camera in the top of the vertical fin showing the whole airplane.

    • @sabotabby3372
      @sabotabby3372 Рік тому +1

      The data storage or bandwidth issues would be too much of a pain, not to mention implemention and adoption

  • @donreinke5863
    @donreinke5863 Рік тому +7

    In my trade, the only systems that have bearing on safety are steering and braking. I wouldnt want to be an A&P (airframe and powerplant for those who dont know) mechanic. Any one of thousands of things on hundreds of systems which are done incorrectly (or not done at all) can potentially cause a fatal accident.
    You cant pull off to the side of the road at 35,000 feet if something fails.
    ANY and ALL issues that I find are repaired on steering and braking systems.
    It boggles the mind that someone would even consider doing a mickey-mouse repair on ANY aircraft, even if its a single engine Cessna.

    • @gingerhiser7312
      @gingerhiser7312 Рік тому

      Just flow the Service Repair Manual. It does the thinking for you.

    • @oahuhawaii2141
      @oahuhawaii2141 Рік тому

      *follow

    • @donreinke5863
      @donreinke5863 Рік тому +1

      @@oahuhawaii2141 That was the problem in this case.
      Instead of checking the manual and realizing the damage was severe enough to require replacement of the entire damaged section, they threw a doubler plate on it and called it good. None of the redundant systems commonly found on commercial aircraft would have prevented disaster in this case. The further failure to thoroughly inspect the area near the repair when obvious nicotine stains from escaping cabin air were found doomed the aircraft with considerable loss of life.
      Do it right....or DONT do it at all.
      If I were a pilot doing a walkaround and detected ANY issues, I would refuse to fly the aircraft until inspected by a qualified engineer/technician.

    • @oahuhawaii2141
      @oahuhawaii2141 Рік тому

      @@donreinke5863: It's possible the A&P techs didn't fully understand the manual, and decided to "wing it" when they saw that the section was too big to cut out. They sanded down the deep grooves from the tail strike, and put in a patch that was too small.
      It's possible that if you refused to fly that plane, the techs who are called in to examine the patch will say the fix is fine, since they don't know the problem that lay underneath the patch. They would rely on the maintenance logs (which claimed the fix was done according to the manual), and not remove the patch to reveal the problem.

    • @donreinke5863
      @donreinke5863 Рік тому

      @@oahuhawaii2141 Possibly, but seeing strange discoloration from the edges of the doubler plate would raise concern at least to me, but I am very used to noticing things that are out of the ordinary and according to the video the staining was quite obvious.
      It reminds me of the incident where a Hawaiian airline was flying an ancient 737 apparently between two of the islands and a large portion of the upper fuselage simply broke apart in flight. Against all odds that plane landed successfully, although one person was sucked out while it was at altitude.
      Supposedly, there is technology that allows the aluminum "skin" to be analyzed even under a repair, but I doubt it was available at that time

  • @izabelawozniczka3698
    @izabelawozniczka3698 Місяць тому +1

    I have so much respect for the Col. Huang he really put people first and acted so quickly, they waisted no time in coming to search area.

  • @AkkuBakku999
    @AkkuBakku999 Місяць тому +3

    The fact that this 747 flew flawless for over 2 decades is symbol of finasse of American engineering

    • @hayleycooper9299
      @hayleycooper9299 Місяць тому +1

      Boeing have always had good quality control, oh wait......

  • @sheripacori2097
    @sheripacori2097 7 місяців тому +2

    Its too bad that this repair wasnt followed up years after it had been done. Why was the repair done improperly in the first place? Sad.

  • @mississaugaicedogs
    @mississaugaicedogs Рік тому +10

    My family flew back to Canada aboard China Airlines from Taipei, i heard about this before our flight and I got scared, but we were fine

    • @billthecat129
      @billthecat129 Рік тому +2

      Yes clearly...

    • @eh-269
      @eh-269 Рік тому +1

      Honestly, I wouldn’t recommend China airlines, as a Taiwanese, like the safety record is definitely terrible, and service weren’t great either. The two times I flew on it, the fa’s were definitely looking like they didn’t want to be there. I fly with Eva air, another airline of Taiwan, but it’s a private airlines, so it is definitely more expensive, but premium service, and no accident since its start, no hull loss, safety risks etc.

    • @LiberianChimp
      @LiberianChimp Рік тому

      @@eh-269I mean it’s better now, back then it was like one of the deadliest airlines but rn it seems to be doing fine

  • @alaintremaine3302
    @alaintremaine3302 Місяць тому +2

    Correction: 'A 20-Year-Old Mistake Caused Flight 611 to Disappear.'

  • @nzkshatriya6298
    @nzkshatriya6298 Рік тому +3

    We would like to see accurate sounds of aircraft on new episodes, and coverage of military accidents

    • @LeoneLaTwerk2
      @LeoneLaTwerk2 Рік тому

      This was aired in 2002... the way to suggest this is to them direct. They focus on commercial airlines and effects on the industry. I could have sworn they did military episodes but that may be Secondd from Disaster

  • @samiraperi467
    @samiraperi467 2 дні тому +1

    0:16 "A little bit more to the right" *pans left*

  • @PriddhasPengu
    @PriddhasPengu Рік тому +3

    An improperly repaired Boeing 747 derivative flying for an Asian carrier falling victim to fatigue cracks, both having essential parts fall off mid-air (in Dynasty 611's case, the whole thing disintegrated) and were involved in prior tailstrike incidents. Save for some differences as the way they fell from the sky, it's almost a spitting image of the JAL123 incident that occurred 17 years earlier. And the funny thing is that CI611 was hastily patched up a mere 7 years after that 747SR-46 went down near Ueno.

  • @shortfuze5685
    @shortfuze5685 Рік тому +1

    Probably arguably the one of the worst ways to die. It's your worst fear coming true.

  • @DesGardius-me7gf
    @DesGardius-me7gf Рік тому +4

    Reminds me a lot of Japan Air 123, only the people on Flight 611 had a much more merciful death, since the plane broke up in mid-flight.

  • @itsmehere1
    @itsmehere1 9 місяців тому +2

    It's crazy to think that any plane no matter how expensive it is to create can be allowed to fly for more than 20 years, no matter how much and how good you can repair a plane, without completely replacing every part of the plane to be a new plane anyways there is no way you can be sure without any doubt at all that a plane can still be trusted to not have an incident after 20 years, no matter how severe.

  • @dianalynntritch1970
    @dianalynntritch1970 Рік тому +9

    I marvel, all the time, at how much we grow. Too often, we blame repair crews for how things go wrong. But we must understand, they are only doing what they have been taught. If one can say there is a "good" thing that happens here, it is that by really looking at what has gone wrong, it is that, the more we know, the less such catastrophies will happen. Every time I see one of these, I still pray for the people gone on. That God took them quickly Home.

  • @kimmccabe1422
    @kimmccabe1422 11 місяців тому +1

    All the lost souls on board did not die in vain. Their deaths caused changes that makes it safer for us to fly today. Thank you! R.i.p

  • @eunhyuekpark6159
    @eunhyuekpark6159 Рік тому +4

    Oof, pretty sure the guys who did the repair know they did shoddy work and are responsible for so many deaths. Such a great loss of life...sad.

  • @georgekelly5338
    @georgekelly5338 Рік тому +2

    This is why I hate flying. I don't like the idea of hurtling through the air at 500mph in a pressurized sardine can, with only two ways to come down- crash or land safely. And I have no control over who's flying or maintaining the damn thing.

  • @davidimhoff2118
    @davidimhoff2118 Рік тому +16

    I remember this because it was 8 months after 9/11 here in the US. There was a crash a month after 9/11 too. It was a really bad time. I just hope they didn't know what was happening

    • @frankzeppelin
      @frankzeppelin Рік тому +5

      Yeah, that one right after 9/11 was American Airlines Flight 587. The first thought on everyone's mind was terrorism but it turned out to be bad procedures for handling wake turbulence.

    • @fn0rd-f5o
      @fn0rd-f5o Рік тому +2

      of course they knew what was happening. for the whole 3 minutes it takes to fall. maybe some passed out because of pressure but I doubt it.

    • @davidimhoff2118
      @davidimhoff2118 Рік тому +3

      @@fn0rd-f5o dude obviously they knew. I said I “hope”. Do you just come on UA-cam to comment on other peoples comments in an ignorant fashion? There is no need to be a troll.

    • @debbielwilliamson8546
      @debbielwilliamson8546 Рік тому +3

      ​@@fn0rd-f5o
      hypoxia at 35,000 30-60 seconds.

    • @patedwards8844
      @patedwards8844 Рік тому +2

      @@debbielwilliamson8546 wow even that's a long time considering