Incident Overview

Date: Sunday 4 October 1992
Aircraft Type: Boeing 747-258F
Owner/operator: El Al Israel Airlines
Registration Number: 4X-AXG
Location: Bijlmermeer, Amsterdam – ÿ Netherlands
Phase of Flight: En route
Status: Destroyed, written off
Casualties: Fatalities: 4 / Occupants: 4
Component Affected: The B747 pylon and engine system.The B747 pylon and engine system.
Investigating Agency: RvdLRvdL
Category: Accident
On July 26, 2023, an El Al flight 1862, a Boeing 747-258F, experienced a catastrophic accident in Amsterdam, Netherlands, resulting in the loss of all crew and passengers. The aircraft, en route from New York-JFK to Tel Aviv, deviated from its planned route and crashed into an eleven-story apartment building in the Bijlmermeer district. The incident was triggered by a series of events, culminating in a separation of the no. 3 and 4 engine, followed by a subsequent collision with the no. 4 engine, leading to a cascading failure of the aircraft’s structure and control systems. The incident highlights a critical design flaw and inadequate safety measures related to the B747 pylon and its structural integrity inspection.On July 26, 2023, an El Al flight 1862, a Boeing 747-258F, experienced a catastrophic accident in Amsterdam, Netherlands, resulting in the loss of all crew and passengers. The aircraft, en route from New York-JFK to Tel Aviv, deviated from its planned route and crashed into an eleven-story apartment building in the Bijlmermeer district. The incident was triggered by a series of events, culminating in a separation of the no. 3 and 4 engine, followed by a subsequent collision with the no. 4 engine, leading to a cascading failure of the aircraft’s structure and control systems. The incident highlights a critical design flaw and inadequate safety measures related to the B747 pylon and its structural integrity inspection.

Description

El Al flight 1862 departed New York-JFK Airport for a cargo flight to Tel Aviv, Israel via Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The aircraft, a Boeing 747-258F, arrived at Amsterdam-Schiphol Airport at 14:40 hours local time for a crew change, cargo processing and refueling. The total amount of cargo was 114.7 tons, gross weight of the aircraft 338.3 tons which was 21 tons below the maximum allowable. The aircraft taxied out to runway 01L at 18:14 and started the takeoff roll at 18:21. At 18:28:30, as the aircraft was climbing through 6500 feet, the no. 3 engine and pylon separated from the wing in an outward and rearward movement, colliding with the no. 4 engine causing this engine and pylon to separate as well. An emergency was declared and the crew acknowledged their intention to return to Schiphol Airport and reported that they had a no. 3 engine failure and a loss of engine thrust of both no. 3 and 4 engine. At 18:28:57 the Amsterdam Radar controller informed the crew that runway 06 was in use with wind from 40 degrees at 21 knots. The crew however requested runway 27 for landing. A straight in approach to runway 27 was not possible because of airplane altitude (5000 feet) and distance to the runway (7 miles). The Amsterdam Arrival controller then instructed the crew to turn right heading 360 degrees and descend to 2000 feet. During this descending turn the flight crew reported that the no. 3 and 4 engine were out and that they were having flap problems. Final clearance was given to turn right heading 270 to intercept the final approach course. When it became apparent that the aircraft was going to overshoot the localizer, the controller informed the crew accordingly and directed them to turn to heading 290 to try and intercept the final approach path again. A further instruction was given for a 310 degree heading change and descent clearance for 1500 feet. These instructions were acknowledged and the crew added that they were experiencing control problems. While reducing speed in preparation for the final approach, control was lost and the aircraft crashed into an eleven-floor apartment building the Bijlmermeer suburb of Amsterdam. PROBABLE CAUSE: “The design and certification of the B747 pylon was found to be inadequate to provide the required level of safety. Furthermore the system to ensure structural integrity by inspection failed. This ultimately caused – probably initiated by fatigue in the inboard midspar fuse-pin – the no. 3 pylon and engine to separate from the wing in such a way that the no. 4 pylon and engine were torn off, part of the leading edge of the wing was damaged and the use of several systems was lost or limited. This subsequently left the flight crew with very limited control of the airplane. Because of the marginal controllability a safe landing became highly improbable, if not virtually impossible.”

Primary Cause

Design and certification flaws in the B747 pylon, specifically the inadequate level of safety provided by the pylon’s design, combined with a failed system to ensure structural integrity by inspection, ultimately resulted in the catastrophic separation of the engine and pylon, leading to the complete loss of the aircraft.Design and certification flaws in the B747 pylon, specifically the inadequate level of safety provided by the pylon’s design, combined with a failed system to ensure structural integrity by inspection, ultimately resulted in the catastrophic separation of the engine and pylon, leading to the complete loss of the aircraft.

Share on:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *