Mayday (2013) s16e10 Episode Script
Afghan Nightmare
At one of the busiest airfields on Earth OK.
He's clear.
Let's get going.
.
.
a 747 cargo plane is transporting a load of military equipment.
Within seconds, things go horribly wrong.
- Get the nose down! - I'm trying! It completely foundered and stalled.
I remember thinking, "He's lost all his engines.
" - The accident is caught on camera - Holy cow.
There it is.
.
.
leading investigators to what seems like an obvious conclusion.
Looks like a problem with the cargo load.
We really thought that we had the cause of the accident.
But later, we found out there was more to the story.
It takes one piece of overlooked evidence to tell investigators they were wrong.
(THEME MUSIC) Bagram Airfield in north-eastern Afghanistan.
It's a hive of activity.
Bagram ground, ISAF 95-Alpha-Quebec ready to taxi.
The crew of National Airlines Flight 102 is on the last leg of a gruelling shift.
- The air is just billowing outta here.
- Yeah.
Sure is.
They're flying cargo in a converted Boeing 747 and are parked on the tarmac waiting to depart.
Please tell the flight attendant I'm ready for my lobster dinner.
I think she's in first class handing out caviar at the moment.
Joking and humour among aircrews is probably more prevalent in times of stress when you get into these off-line, unusual situations.
The crew members are all American.
Captain Brad Hasler is heading home to his pregnant wife.
Beside him is First Officer Jamie Brokaw.
Augment Captain Jeremy Lipka is in the jump seat.
Is Sheets back there? I haven't seen him.
I hope he's in the back.
Yeah, he's back there.
In a cabin behind the cockpit is loadmaster Michael Sheets along with two technicians and an augment first officer.
With the additional pilots, the plane can be flown long distances non-stop.
The crewmembers are all civilians on contract for the US Department of Defense.
The United States military and its allies built more than 50 bases across Afghanistan during the war there.
Bagram was by far the biggest.
It's got gyms and seven dining facilities of enormous sizes.
It's got stores.
It had a Burger King.
At its peak, more than 40,000 people lived here.
Now, after 12 years of fighting, the military is scaling back their operation.
Troops, weapons and heavy machinery are all on the move.
Every day, air traffic control handles several hundred flights coming in and out of the airport.
Today, National Airlines flight 102 is just one piece of a hugely complex puzzle.
The flight plan has taken it from Chateauroux, France, to Camp Bastion, Afghanistan, where the crew loaded up 207,000lb of cargo.
They were supposed to take it straight to Dubai but were rerouted via Bagram.
The crew has been waiting more than an hour to depart.
5-Alpha-Quebec, I have your clearance.
- Advise when ready to copy.
- Yeah, let's do it.
Finally, they get clearance to go.
Ready to copy, 95-Alpha-Quebec.
95-Alpha-Quebec, taxi to runway three.
Controllers need to keep a sharp eye on the crowded taxiway that the 747 freighter shares with other military aircraft.
95-Alpha-Quebec, give way to the C-17.
Let him go first.
Roger.
We'll let him go first.
A C-17 military cargo plane moves to the runway ahead of them.
Although the military effort is winding down in Afghanistan, this is not the kind of place a civilian wants to linger.
Bagram is still a favourite target of the Taliban.
It's a dangerous place.
I mean, it's not JFK airport.
It's JFK airport surrounded by terrorists.
For the crew of flight 102, every delay means more risk.
OK.
He's clear.
Let's get going.
Following the C-17 for 95-Alpha-Quebec.
Before take-off checklist.
Flaps? Ten, ten, checked.
You're certainly thinking, "What do I do if somebody started firing at us on the ground?" Well, that's a great deal of mental pressure.
The C-17 ahead has cleared the runway.
How are we looking on that wing? - Everything look clear? - Everything's great.
- We all happy with that? - Yeah, I'm good.
They must now wait for take-off clearance.
They've been on duty for more than 20 straight hours.
Once in Dubai, they'll get a rest break.
We earned it, as far as I'm concerned, man.
Without minimum rest, I'd be dead tomorrow.
I think I'd have to agree with that sentiment.
It's a real stress situation.
They were rightfully ready for their day to be over.
Finally, at 3:25 pm, they are cleared for take-off.
95-Alpha-Quebec, runway three, full length.
- Runway three is verified.
- Prepare for departure.
The first officer is at the controls for this final leg.
They're scheduled to arrive in Dubai in 2.
5 hours.
When you've been in a long delay situation, when you finally get the clearance to go, it's a great relief.
At that same moment, military journalist Steven Hartov is on the base's perimeter road, returning from a day's work taking photographs for a magazine.
We decided we were gonna go get something to eat and I saw, off to the left of the truck, a white and purple 747.
And I remember thinking, "This is a beautiful aeroplane," 'cause it looked brand-new.
V-1.
Rotate.
Positive climb.
- Gear up.
- Gear up.
He pulled away from us and started to rotate.
And in this case, there was something immediately not right.
The climb is unusually steep.
What's going on with that aircraft? It was almost stuttering in the air.
And I immediately said to Chris, "What's going on with that aircraft? Is he taking fire?" Keep on that.
- Get the nose down! - I'm trying! The plane is suddenly uncontrollable.
The nose won't drop.
My aeroplane! In a matter of seconds, the crew is in emergency mode.
If they can't get the nose down fast, the plane will stall.
They're not very high above the ground, therefore don't have very much time to try very many things.
Bank angle.
Bank angle.
Bank angle.
For a moment, the plane hangs in the air, suspended.
And then the aircraft seemed to sort of careen in our direction.
Now you're looking at a big 747 coming at ya.
Stop the car.
And then it completely foundered and stalled and I remember thinking, "He's lost all his engines.
" Don't sink.
Don't sink.
And in a very slow motion, it just went straight down and pancaked into the ground.
The explosion was enormous.
It was a mushroom cloud, like a small atom bomb.
It was huge.
The entire base, you know, thundered under our feet.
The controller also watches helplessly as the aircraft comes down.
It is the worst civilian aviation accident ever at Bagram Airfield.
And I just pulled a camera out with the lens and just shot some pictures.
Instinct, you know, trigger instinct.
Uh, watching those people die was tough.
It was tough.
I still think about it.
Sometimes I wake up thinking about it.
Has a US cargo plane been shot down? The safety of thousands of people now hinges on the answer.
Today, officials identified seven Americans killed Monday in the crash of a cargo plane in Afghanistan.
National Airlines Flight 102 crashed at America's biggest air force base in Afghanistan.
Remarkably, no-one on the ground was hit, but the entire flight crew is dead.
You think about these poor seven people who were there on a contract job, you know, never went home.
The loss of life is tragic under any circumstance but when it's a fellow pilot, it's really, uh, hard to deal with.
Within hours, the Taliban claims responsibility.
Amid the spectre of a terrorist attack, the NTSB is assigned to lead the US investigation.
Although it wasn't ideal, it was one of those things that, we had a job to do and so let's go get it done.
Tim LeBaron heads up the team of five investigators.
This investigation was a lot different because we were flying into a war zone.
When we first got there, we were given bulletproof vests and Kevlar helmets to wear into the accident site.
As this is an American base, the civilian NTSB will have to work closely with the military.
So, what have you got for me? A military sweep of the crash site has already turned up the black boxes.
The US military had found the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder before we arrived and had sent them back to the United States, to the NTSB laboratory.
And so we were very hopeful that we would get good information from those recorders that would help explain why the aeroplane had crashed.
Is there a report for me? But there's another surprising piece of news.
The sweep has uncovered no evidence of a missile attack.
You're sure? The Taliban claim was purely opportunistic.
Let's see what we have here, OK? With the most obvious explanation for the crash eliminated, the team must now take a new look at the wreckage.
The damage to this aircraft was some of the most extensive fire damage I've had to work with in my career.
So we really didn't have much to work with.
75% of the plane has been consumed by fire or destroyed by impact forces.
But the crucial tail section is still almost intact.
The tail wings hold the plane's flight control surfaces, including the all-important elevators, which the pilots move up or down to control the plane's pitch.
And pitch was a problem from the start of flight 102.
We had that structure remaining so we did have something of value to look at with regards to a possible scenario for the accident.
They take a close look at the tail wing mechanics.
We looked at the hydraulic actuators for the elevators and really couldn't find any problems with that.
So everything seems to check out.
No problem here.
Why couldn't those guys get that nose down? If the flight controls were working, then something else must have made the plane uncontrollable.
Every last scrap of evidence is collected, including a number of unidentified parts found on the runway, more than a mile from the crash site.
Anybody know what this is? Let's find out.
Our team was in Afghanistan one time and one time only.
So it was very important for our team that we document what we could, find what we could because we knew that we'd never be able to return and see the wreckage again.
Let's get those photos to Boeing right away.
The pieces of wreckage will be sent to the United States, where the manufacturer will have to identify them.
With all the evidence now collected from the crash site, investigators move their operations indoors.
Our headquarters was in the basement of an old control tower.
OK.
Let's clean this place up.
OK.
I'll set up there.
Yeah, there really was no workspace down there.
There were a bunch of computers.
There were signs that warned of asbestos.
And it was a pretty rough environment.
As they are settling into their temporary headquarters, a video of the accident appears on the internet.
Holy cow.
There it is.
Shot from an unknown vehicle on the perimeter road, it reveals a huge clue about the plane's erratic climb and fall.
Looks like a problem with the cargo load.
The aircraft's movement in the video suggests it was carrying too much weight and that the load threw the plane off balance.
The weight is very important in a cargo accident, more so than a passenger accident per se, because passengers have assigned weights.
It's very standard.
There's much more room - margin of error to work with passenger weights and baggage than when you're flying cargo.
A 747 freighter plane can carry just about any type of load.
It is the cargo company's responsibility to ensure that the aircraft is not over weight.
I've heard it frequently in the cargo business about, "You call, we haul.
" And sometimes the crew knows in advance what they're gonna be doing.
And sometimes it's all last minute.
Some of the early questions were, you know, "What was the cargo in the aeroplane? Was it full? How heavy was the cargo?" By examining the cargo manifest, investigators discover that the plane was carrying an unusual load, armoured vehicles called MRAPs, or Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles.
These massive, heavily armoured cars can sustain roadside bombs.
They even have bulletproof wheels.
The crew had never flown these type of vehicles in this charter.
In fact, the airline had not carried these kind of vehicles that were loaded on the aeroplane.
The plane was carrying five MRAPs, weighing between 12-18 tonnes.
Each vehicle was chained to a custom-built pallet and secured with straps to the plane's main deck.
The cargo in this particular case was very heavy.
It was the first time they'd ever flown five vehicles this heavy.
- Ready to put some numbers in there? - Yeah.
Go ahead.
The crew landed at Bagram airbase with a full cargo load of 207,000lb.
Then they refuelled, increasing the fuel load to 106,000lb.
Zero fuel weight is 2,592.
Investigators calculate the precise weight being carried.
Max take-off weight is 870,000lb.
We have 207,000lb of cargo, plus fuel.
They learn that even with the heavy cargo and fuel load, the plane was not overweight.
It was almost 200,000lb under the safe limit.
Weight was definitely not an issue.
Something else must have brought the 747 cargo plane down.
Even if the weight of the cargo was not responsible for the crash of flight 102, the balance of the load could be the problem.
If the aircraft is loaded, from the outset, out of balance, then that affects the performance of the aeroplane.
Bring up the schematics.
Investigators map out the placement of the MRAPs in the hold to study the balance of the load.
Fill it with our cargo.
Three MRAPS weigh 18 tonnes each.
On the ends are smaller versions that weigh 12 tonnes a piece.
The centre of gravity with their vehicles in position looks like 30.
4%.
After a few calculations, they determine the balance of the load.
The aeroplane actually could carry the weight and, as loaded, was within the centre of gravity.
It's a puzzling assessment.
But there's another possibility.
Even if the load was balanced before take-off, it could have shifted as the plane was lifting off.
The focus now turns to the loading procedures.
Specifically, were the MRAPs properly secured? Standard cargo containers are locked into a hardware system built on tracks in the floor.
But oddly shaped oversized cargo, like the MRAPs, can't use these locks.
Heavy nylon straps are secured to tie-down points around the hold.
What became critical to me was the process of calculating the number of straps necessary to restrain these five vehicles.
The loadmaster on-board the plane used a National Airlines manual to calculate how many straps were needed to secure the vehicles.
Based on their cargo operations manual, the numbers were determined to be 24 straps for the 28,000lb MATVs and 26 straps for the three 40,000lb Cougars.
And seeing his rationale for calculating those numbers, all seemed to make sense to me.
Despite the appearance of the dash cam video, analysis has shown that the plane was not overweight, it was properly balanced, and the load was secured according to company standards.
Investigators need to find out what was going on inside the plane.
Information from the black boxes will be crucial.
My aeroplane! Flight data recorders record what the elevator and the ailerons and what the control pitches are doing.
So we were very hopeful that we would get good information from those recorders that would help explain why the aeroplane had crashed.
Hello? A call comes in from the NTSB's head office in Washington, DC.
Hey.
You have the readouts? The black box data is in.
- That's great! - But there's a problem.
Really? I got a call from our director, John DeLisi.
And he informed me that, unfortunately, the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder had quit working shortly after take-off.
Things started to go wrong shortly after lift-off, known as the point of rotation, but this is precisely the moment when the black boxes stopped recording.
Having the FDR, CVR after the point of rotation would have been very helpful.
- We had none of that information.
- Thank you.
We really had to revert back to old methods of investigating.
So I call it old-school methods.
Investigators decide to contact eyewitnesses who might have seen the plane take off.
OK.
What else did you see? On a base of this size, there may be thousands of people who could provide potential clues.
Alright, well thanks very much.
You need, really, to interview many different witnesses and listen for the common thread that's the same through all of the witness statements.
Sorry.
What did you see? One witness reports an unusual sight.
A runway sweeper is sure he saw puffs of smoke trailing behind the aeroplane after lift-off.
And it wasn't coming off the wings or out of the engines? His testimony raises the possibility that a fire inside the plane may have caused the crash.
If a fire had started inside the cargo hold during lift-off, there would be evidence of this on the pieces of wreckage from the interior of the plane.
The interesting thing was the tail portion, the aft pressure bulkhead, which is white in its colour, did not have any evidence to support that we had a fire on-board the aeroplane before the impact.
There's no sign of any smoke residue.
There couldn't have been a fire on board.
Investigators are at another impasse.
They still have no hard evidence about the final fatal moments of flight 102.
When you go to an accident scene where everything appears to be burned up and there's not a lot left, how in the world can you do an investigation? One thing for sure is there's always evidence.
Bring up the CVR.
Standby.
In a search for answers, investigators turn to the cockpit voice recorder.
It cut out just three seconds after lift-off.
But it was recording during the crew's hour-long wait on the tarmac.
What the heck.
Let's hear the whole two hours.
There might be something there.
- There's your trouble, Brad.
- What is it? Sounds like the first officer is showing something to the captain.
- There's your trouble, Brad.
- What is it? - One of the damn straps is busted.
- Pause it there.
The CVR suggests the first officer found a broken strap inside the cargo hold.
Play.
So are you gonna be throwing more straps on that thing? - Well, it just shifted, apparently.
- Did the truck move? Yeah.
I just tightened up on the straps.
Holy crap.
One of those things actually moved? So, we're hearing the crew talk about that the load had shifted, also that a strap had broken.
It definitely piqued our interest.
Go again.
All the straps that were keeping them from moving backwards were loose.
Those things shouldn't budge an inch.
Despite investigators' earlier conclusion that the heavy load was properly secured and therefore could not shift, the CVR recording indicates that the opposite was true.
So, from that information, we know that they had a load shift when they came in and landed and that was very important to us in our investigation.
All the straps that were keeping them from moving backwards were loose.
What the hell do you think's gonna happen when you slam it on the runway, slam on the brakes and don't use reverse? Well, there ain't nothing you could've done about that.
I'm getting off this plane.
I'm scared! They have no idea how serious this really is.
Really, the crew is not trained or equipped to actually be involved in knowing whether the restraints are proper for the load.
I hope, instead of just replacing that strap, he's beefing the strap up more.
- Yeah, he's cinching them all down.
- Stop.
'He' would be Loadmaster Michael Sheets.
The loadmaster in a cargo operation is the one that's responsible for the security of the load.
- So everyone is depending upon them.
- What's up, dude? Did you throw that other strap away? Did you put a couple more on? How far did it move? A couple of inches? Yeah.
They just moved a couple of inches 'cause it's nylon, you know? Those things are so heavy you'd think they probably wouldn't hardly move no matter what.
They always move.
Everything moves.
So if those straps weren't fixed right, then the back vehicle could have come loose on take-off.
If that cargo shifts during rotation, you'll wind up with a potential pitch problem.
Did the MRAPs shift after take-off? To answer this question, the team must find a way to piece together events in the cargo hold in the moments before the crash.
So, there's no evidence of a Investigators need to prove that one of the heavy Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles shifted during the flight.
Clues might be hard to find in the minimal and scattered remains of the aircraft.
But the one thing as investigators that we do is we go into a very chaotic environment and we bring order to it.
OK, guys, great.
Just put that down right in the centre there.
So I gathered as much of the aft pressure bulkhead structure as I could and I believe we came up with at least 90-95% of it.
The aft pressure bulkhead is an airtight wall.
It protects the cargo area from the non-pressurised tail section of the aircraft.
Investigators sort out pieces of the liner that covers the cargo hold side of the bulkhead.
You definitely go with this guy here.
Take a look at this.
I can guess what that is.
And you could read the words 'Goodyear '.
What became obvious was that the tyre from the aft MATV had impacted the aft pressure bulkhead and left that tyre impact on the liner.
Bam! It looked as if that tyre had pressed up like a rubber stamp on the aft pressure bulkhead.
Only one tyre capable of doing that.
The mark matches the spare tyre in the top right corner of the rear vehicle.
The vehicle itself was found tipped over in the wreckage, damaged but not destroyed by fire.
Pass me that flashlight, will you? Thanks.
The metal antenna box from the rear of the same MRAP is damaged and provides another big clue.
Look at that.
Paint transfer.
The box sits up high at the back of the MRAP.
That looks like a direct hit.
The only place that we could think of where there was orange paint was the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder.
To hit the flight recorders, the MRAP would have had to shift at least 12ft.
Could it have moved that far? A few quick measurements show that the height of the paint transfer on the antenna box lines up neatly with the location of the orange recorders inside the plane.
The antennae box sat about 104 inches above floor level, and where the CVR and FDR are located is 104 inches above the floor of the aircraft.
Now you're starting to see a chain of events that this vehicle had to be moving in an aftward direction.
Both black boxes stopped recording seconds after take-off because a 12-tonne MRAP knocked them out.
But even if the heavy vehicle damaged the flight recorders, would it have been able to somehow bring down a huge 747? Investigators turn to the only wreckage left to examine, the collection of unidentified parts found on the runway.
These items were all recovered from the runway in the area near the point of rotation for the flight.
Rotate.
At Bagram Airfield, the runway stretches for over two miles.
The parts were discovered at the spot where the aircraft lifted off, one mile from the site of the crash.
It is uncertain what relevance, if any, they have.
Where were these parts on the aeroplane? Did they come from the nose section? Did they come from the aft section of the aeroplane? What function did they serve on the aeroplane? Experts at Boeing have been able to identify them.
Here we go.
Hydraulic return tubing.
One of the parts, a broken piece of tubing, comes from hydraulic system number two.
Bring up the hydraulic system schematic.
The 747 has four hydraulic lines that power the control systems of the aircraft.
Hydraulic system number two carries fluid along the deck floor and through the aft pressure bulkhead at the back of the plane.
The tube runs through here.
The number two hydraulic system operates one of the four aeroplane elevator panels.
The elevator panels control pitch from the tail of the aircraft.
If the rear vehicle shifted backwards through the bulkhead, it could have hit the hydraulic tubing, affecting control of the aeroplane.
OK, let's play it.
Investigators decide to take a closer look at the dash cam video.
Play it again, this time in slow motion.
Upon close examination, they notice something odd.
Freeze.
Something's not right.
Advance a few frames.
A little more.
A little more.
Stop.
What's going on? Something's wonky with the landing gear.
Large aircraft like the 747 have a very complicated landing gear system to carry the loads that they carry.
They come down together and they go up together and it takes several hydraulic systems to make that happen.
The hydraulic systems that control landing gear also regulate various other parts of the plane, including control surfaces that affect pitch.
Using animation software, the investigators create a match for the 747 with its five sets of landing gear.
Now let's compare the model to the video.
These are down and this one here is up.
That shouldn't happen.
Positive climb.
On National Airlines flight 102, one of the last commands recorded refers to the landing gear.
- Gear up.
- Gear up.
But after that exchange, not all the gear retracted.
When I see a configuration of an aeroplane with part of the landing gear up, part of it down, I immediately think that they've had a hydraulic failure of one or more of the hydraulic systems.
It looks like damage to one of the four hydraulic lines may have happened in the air.
Now, which systems are out? Body landing gear.
The nose and body landing gear didn't retract.
It must have been system one.
We were able to determine that the number one hydraulic system had been damaged at some point before the aeroplane hit the ground.
The discovery of the broken hydraulic line explains the eyewitness account of smoke.
As hydraulic fluid vaporises behind the aeroplane, it appears to look like smoke.
Investigators think they have finally cracked the mystery.
The heavy armoured vehicle came loose, smashed through the back of the plane and took out the hydraulic lines, making the plane uncontrollable.
After 11 days in Bagram, the investigators are ready to head home.
All that's left to do is wrap up the case with a simulation test back in Washington.
We really thought that we had the cause of the accident.
But there was more to the story.
At NTSB headquarters in Washington, DC Glad to be back.
.
.
investigators are preparing to finalise the case.
All they have to do is to verify their theory that damaged hydraulics made it impossible for the pilots to recover from the steep climb.
So, once we got back to the United States, the next step was to do simulations, re-enact the accident scenario.
First, they model the 747 with two broken hydraulic systems to test the cargo shift.
Aeroplane Performance Group chairman Tim Burtch oversees the simulations.
If I had one of these armoured vehicles move back and there was an associated centre of gravity shift, is the aeroplane controllable? OK.
What else do we know? Let's try the new balance numbers.
Let's take what we know up to a point and then start doing the what-if scenarios with the simulation to see if we can put together a story that makes sense.
OK, plane, let's see what you do now.
But when they run the simulation of the rear vehicle coming loose, something totally unexpected happens.
Nose comes down and flies out of trouble.
Let's shift even more weight back.
Let's push the centre of gravity even further.
Let's try that.
Even with two hydraulic systems broken and an MRAP crushed into the back of the plane, the simulations show that the aircraft can be controlled.
Alright.
We're missing something.
The theory that seemed so solid in Afghanistan is now a bust.
So we started scratching our heads.
There was something more that we were missing.
Most of the aeroplane wreckage now lies buried near the crash site in Afghanistan, thousands of miles away.
Only selected parts have been sent to the United States for analysis.
Investigators must sift through photographs from the site to search for new evidence that might explain what caused the crash.
Hmm.
I wonder.
So we needed to look further, and the next thing behind the aft pressure bulk head that can control pitch on the aircraft is the jackscrew.
Hey.
Where'd that stabiliser jackscrew end up? The horizontal stabiliser is a large control surface that helps balance the plane in the air.
The jackscrew, about 6ft tall, lowers and raises the edge of the stabiliser in response to the pilot's commands.
The jackscrew found at the crash site was bent and severed right near its base.
The most likely explanation seemed to be that the damage occurred on impact.
But, just to make sure, it was sent to the US for testing.
What we were surprised to find out was that that jackscrew had actually been pushed aft and had broken loose from the aeroplane.
Results show that the jackscrew was bent backwards, the opposite of how it would have bent in the crash.
So that raised the big question - why? What could have pushed it aft? Do we have a printout of this? To find out what could have hit the jackscrew, investigators consult a diagram of the aeroplane's aft section.
They take some careful measurements and come up with a match.
Yep.
Straight hit.
I was able to determine that the bumper of the MATV lines up directly with the motor of the jackscrew in the area where it detached from the lower fuselage.
They input the new data.
The simulation now includes a broken jackscrew that makes the stabiliser free-floating.
One MRAP at the back.
So two elevators down equals one uncontrollable plane.
Investigators finally know that an MRAP crashing into the jackscrew is what brought the aeroplane down.
But there's still one major mystery.
We're not done yet.
There's one more question.
How did that MRAP come loose? In Bagram, the loadmaster had calculated the correct number of straps to use on each vehicle.
He based his calculations on the company's cargo operating manual.
How could the cargo have come loose if he followed the right procedure? I immediately began contacting other cargo operators to understand what is supposed to be done to restrain free-floating cargo using straps.
When executives from Boeing review the procedures, they're less than impressed.
The manufacturers were quite shocked at how they were interpreting the requirements.
To get the maximum load capacity out of each strap, it has to be tied down at a precise angle.
Changing the angle changes the strap's capacity.
The airline hadn't spelled this out in its manual.
Boeing, when you look at their manual, they say that if you pull on a strap directly, let's say that it's worth 3,500lb.
But if you go up on a 45-degree angle, it's worth even less.
And if you pull on it on a 90-degree angle, it's worth zero.
National Airlines' manual said regardless of angle each strap could be counted for 5,000lb.
Boeing's own calculations found that National Airlines flight 102 took off with less than half the straps required on each vehicle.
At the most, they could have carried one MATV vehicle.
What's up, dude? Investigators find no fault with flight loadmaster Michael Sheets.
He had little training.
He wasn't certified.
Without knowing it, he'd based his calculations on a faulty manual.
My heart goes out the loadmaster in this situation.
The data, the manuals that he had to go by were incorrect.
So he was really in a no-win situation.
But the cargo shift itself would not have brought down the plane.
The crash ultimately occurred because the sliding MRAP damaged the horizontal stabiliser.
You take away the horizontal tail, you're not gonna be able to control this aeroplane and pitch.
This was an uncontrollable event.
Without the horizontal stabiliser, the pilots' inputs made the plane do the exact opposite of what they wanted.
A command to lower the nose suddenly caused the plane to pitch up.
There's a total disconnect between what you're doing as a pilot and what the aeroplane's doing.
And it must have been terrifying.
I can't truthfully imagine it other than just sheer panic.
The NTSB's final report finds that the probable cause of the accident was National Airlines' inadequate procedures for restraining special cargo loads.
It concludes that the improper restraint of the rear vehicle allowed it to move back, hit the aft pressure bulkhead, knocked out the two hydraulic systems and the horizontal stabiliser, making it impossible for the crew to regain control of the aeroplane.
One of the key recommendations is for mandatory certification of all cargo-handling personnel, a move that would standardise their procedures, training and workloads.
I know that there are economics involved in using more certified people.
But I certainly hope that they end up making loadmasters in these cargo operations certified just like anybody else.
So, reflecting back on this investigation, there were many hurdles.
We had went into Afghanistan with a very, very small team.
We had to go back to old-school methods.
But at the end, we actually came out with safety recommendations that I believe are going to prevent an accident like this one from happening again.
I don't forget the tragedy but I also have a lot of pride that I believe that we've been able to make a difference.
He's clear.
Let's get going.
.
.
a 747 cargo plane is transporting a load of military equipment.
Within seconds, things go horribly wrong.
- Get the nose down! - I'm trying! It completely foundered and stalled.
I remember thinking, "He's lost all his engines.
" - The accident is caught on camera - Holy cow.
There it is.
.
.
leading investigators to what seems like an obvious conclusion.
Looks like a problem with the cargo load.
We really thought that we had the cause of the accident.
But later, we found out there was more to the story.
It takes one piece of overlooked evidence to tell investigators they were wrong.
(THEME MUSIC) Bagram Airfield in north-eastern Afghanistan.
It's a hive of activity.
Bagram ground, ISAF 95-Alpha-Quebec ready to taxi.
The crew of National Airlines Flight 102 is on the last leg of a gruelling shift.
- The air is just billowing outta here.
- Yeah.
Sure is.
They're flying cargo in a converted Boeing 747 and are parked on the tarmac waiting to depart.
Please tell the flight attendant I'm ready for my lobster dinner.
I think she's in first class handing out caviar at the moment.
Joking and humour among aircrews is probably more prevalent in times of stress when you get into these off-line, unusual situations.
The crew members are all American.
Captain Brad Hasler is heading home to his pregnant wife.
Beside him is First Officer Jamie Brokaw.
Augment Captain Jeremy Lipka is in the jump seat.
Is Sheets back there? I haven't seen him.
I hope he's in the back.
Yeah, he's back there.
In a cabin behind the cockpit is loadmaster Michael Sheets along with two technicians and an augment first officer.
With the additional pilots, the plane can be flown long distances non-stop.
The crewmembers are all civilians on contract for the US Department of Defense.
The United States military and its allies built more than 50 bases across Afghanistan during the war there.
Bagram was by far the biggest.
It's got gyms and seven dining facilities of enormous sizes.
It's got stores.
It had a Burger King.
At its peak, more than 40,000 people lived here.
Now, after 12 years of fighting, the military is scaling back their operation.
Troops, weapons and heavy machinery are all on the move.
Every day, air traffic control handles several hundred flights coming in and out of the airport.
Today, National Airlines flight 102 is just one piece of a hugely complex puzzle.
The flight plan has taken it from Chateauroux, France, to Camp Bastion, Afghanistan, where the crew loaded up 207,000lb of cargo.
They were supposed to take it straight to Dubai but were rerouted via Bagram.
The crew has been waiting more than an hour to depart.
5-Alpha-Quebec, I have your clearance.
- Advise when ready to copy.
- Yeah, let's do it.
Finally, they get clearance to go.
Ready to copy, 95-Alpha-Quebec.
95-Alpha-Quebec, taxi to runway three.
Controllers need to keep a sharp eye on the crowded taxiway that the 747 freighter shares with other military aircraft.
95-Alpha-Quebec, give way to the C-17.
Let him go first.
Roger.
We'll let him go first.
A C-17 military cargo plane moves to the runway ahead of them.
Although the military effort is winding down in Afghanistan, this is not the kind of place a civilian wants to linger.
Bagram is still a favourite target of the Taliban.
It's a dangerous place.
I mean, it's not JFK airport.
It's JFK airport surrounded by terrorists.
For the crew of flight 102, every delay means more risk.
OK.
He's clear.
Let's get going.
Following the C-17 for 95-Alpha-Quebec.
Before take-off checklist.
Flaps? Ten, ten, checked.
You're certainly thinking, "What do I do if somebody started firing at us on the ground?" Well, that's a great deal of mental pressure.
The C-17 ahead has cleared the runway.
How are we looking on that wing? - Everything look clear? - Everything's great.
- We all happy with that? - Yeah, I'm good.
They must now wait for take-off clearance.
They've been on duty for more than 20 straight hours.
Once in Dubai, they'll get a rest break.
We earned it, as far as I'm concerned, man.
Without minimum rest, I'd be dead tomorrow.
I think I'd have to agree with that sentiment.
It's a real stress situation.
They were rightfully ready for their day to be over.
Finally, at 3:25 pm, they are cleared for take-off.
95-Alpha-Quebec, runway three, full length.
- Runway three is verified.
- Prepare for departure.
The first officer is at the controls for this final leg.
They're scheduled to arrive in Dubai in 2.
5 hours.
When you've been in a long delay situation, when you finally get the clearance to go, it's a great relief.
At that same moment, military journalist Steven Hartov is on the base's perimeter road, returning from a day's work taking photographs for a magazine.
We decided we were gonna go get something to eat and I saw, off to the left of the truck, a white and purple 747.
And I remember thinking, "This is a beautiful aeroplane," 'cause it looked brand-new.
V-1.
Rotate.
Positive climb.
- Gear up.
- Gear up.
He pulled away from us and started to rotate.
And in this case, there was something immediately not right.
The climb is unusually steep.
What's going on with that aircraft? It was almost stuttering in the air.
And I immediately said to Chris, "What's going on with that aircraft? Is he taking fire?" Keep on that.
- Get the nose down! - I'm trying! The plane is suddenly uncontrollable.
The nose won't drop.
My aeroplane! In a matter of seconds, the crew is in emergency mode.
If they can't get the nose down fast, the plane will stall.
They're not very high above the ground, therefore don't have very much time to try very many things.
Bank angle.
Bank angle.
Bank angle.
For a moment, the plane hangs in the air, suspended.
And then the aircraft seemed to sort of careen in our direction.
Now you're looking at a big 747 coming at ya.
Stop the car.
And then it completely foundered and stalled and I remember thinking, "He's lost all his engines.
" Don't sink.
Don't sink.
And in a very slow motion, it just went straight down and pancaked into the ground.
The explosion was enormous.
It was a mushroom cloud, like a small atom bomb.
It was huge.
The entire base, you know, thundered under our feet.
The controller also watches helplessly as the aircraft comes down.
It is the worst civilian aviation accident ever at Bagram Airfield.
And I just pulled a camera out with the lens and just shot some pictures.
Instinct, you know, trigger instinct.
Uh, watching those people die was tough.
It was tough.
I still think about it.
Sometimes I wake up thinking about it.
Has a US cargo plane been shot down? The safety of thousands of people now hinges on the answer.
Today, officials identified seven Americans killed Monday in the crash of a cargo plane in Afghanistan.
National Airlines Flight 102 crashed at America's biggest air force base in Afghanistan.
Remarkably, no-one on the ground was hit, but the entire flight crew is dead.
You think about these poor seven people who were there on a contract job, you know, never went home.
The loss of life is tragic under any circumstance but when it's a fellow pilot, it's really, uh, hard to deal with.
Within hours, the Taliban claims responsibility.
Amid the spectre of a terrorist attack, the NTSB is assigned to lead the US investigation.
Although it wasn't ideal, it was one of those things that, we had a job to do and so let's go get it done.
Tim LeBaron heads up the team of five investigators.
This investigation was a lot different because we were flying into a war zone.
When we first got there, we were given bulletproof vests and Kevlar helmets to wear into the accident site.
As this is an American base, the civilian NTSB will have to work closely with the military.
So, what have you got for me? A military sweep of the crash site has already turned up the black boxes.
The US military had found the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder before we arrived and had sent them back to the United States, to the NTSB laboratory.
And so we were very hopeful that we would get good information from those recorders that would help explain why the aeroplane had crashed.
Is there a report for me? But there's another surprising piece of news.
The sweep has uncovered no evidence of a missile attack.
You're sure? The Taliban claim was purely opportunistic.
Let's see what we have here, OK? With the most obvious explanation for the crash eliminated, the team must now take a new look at the wreckage.
The damage to this aircraft was some of the most extensive fire damage I've had to work with in my career.
So we really didn't have much to work with.
75% of the plane has been consumed by fire or destroyed by impact forces.
But the crucial tail section is still almost intact.
The tail wings hold the plane's flight control surfaces, including the all-important elevators, which the pilots move up or down to control the plane's pitch.
And pitch was a problem from the start of flight 102.
We had that structure remaining so we did have something of value to look at with regards to a possible scenario for the accident.
They take a close look at the tail wing mechanics.
We looked at the hydraulic actuators for the elevators and really couldn't find any problems with that.
So everything seems to check out.
No problem here.
Why couldn't those guys get that nose down? If the flight controls were working, then something else must have made the plane uncontrollable.
Every last scrap of evidence is collected, including a number of unidentified parts found on the runway, more than a mile from the crash site.
Anybody know what this is? Let's find out.
Our team was in Afghanistan one time and one time only.
So it was very important for our team that we document what we could, find what we could because we knew that we'd never be able to return and see the wreckage again.
Let's get those photos to Boeing right away.
The pieces of wreckage will be sent to the United States, where the manufacturer will have to identify them.
With all the evidence now collected from the crash site, investigators move their operations indoors.
Our headquarters was in the basement of an old control tower.
OK.
Let's clean this place up.
OK.
I'll set up there.
Yeah, there really was no workspace down there.
There were a bunch of computers.
There were signs that warned of asbestos.
And it was a pretty rough environment.
As they are settling into their temporary headquarters, a video of the accident appears on the internet.
Holy cow.
There it is.
Shot from an unknown vehicle on the perimeter road, it reveals a huge clue about the plane's erratic climb and fall.
Looks like a problem with the cargo load.
The aircraft's movement in the video suggests it was carrying too much weight and that the load threw the plane off balance.
The weight is very important in a cargo accident, more so than a passenger accident per se, because passengers have assigned weights.
It's very standard.
There's much more room - margin of error to work with passenger weights and baggage than when you're flying cargo.
A 747 freighter plane can carry just about any type of load.
It is the cargo company's responsibility to ensure that the aircraft is not over weight.
I've heard it frequently in the cargo business about, "You call, we haul.
" And sometimes the crew knows in advance what they're gonna be doing.
And sometimes it's all last minute.
Some of the early questions were, you know, "What was the cargo in the aeroplane? Was it full? How heavy was the cargo?" By examining the cargo manifest, investigators discover that the plane was carrying an unusual load, armoured vehicles called MRAPs, or Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles.
These massive, heavily armoured cars can sustain roadside bombs.
They even have bulletproof wheels.
The crew had never flown these type of vehicles in this charter.
In fact, the airline had not carried these kind of vehicles that were loaded on the aeroplane.
The plane was carrying five MRAPs, weighing between 12-18 tonnes.
Each vehicle was chained to a custom-built pallet and secured with straps to the plane's main deck.
The cargo in this particular case was very heavy.
It was the first time they'd ever flown five vehicles this heavy.
- Ready to put some numbers in there? - Yeah.
Go ahead.
The crew landed at Bagram airbase with a full cargo load of 207,000lb.
Then they refuelled, increasing the fuel load to 106,000lb.
Zero fuel weight is 2,592.
Investigators calculate the precise weight being carried.
Max take-off weight is 870,000lb.
We have 207,000lb of cargo, plus fuel.
They learn that even with the heavy cargo and fuel load, the plane was not overweight.
It was almost 200,000lb under the safe limit.
Weight was definitely not an issue.
Something else must have brought the 747 cargo plane down.
Even if the weight of the cargo was not responsible for the crash of flight 102, the balance of the load could be the problem.
If the aircraft is loaded, from the outset, out of balance, then that affects the performance of the aeroplane.
Bring up the schematics.
Investigators map out the placement of the MRAPs in the hold to study the balance of the load.
Fill it with our cargo.
Three MRAPS weigh 18 tonnes each.
On the ends are smaller versions that weigh 12 tonnes a piece.
The centre of gravity with their vehicles in position looks like 30.
4%.
After a few calculations, they determine the balance of the load.
The aeroplane actually could carry the weight and, as loaded, was within the centre of gravity.
It's a puzzling assessment.
But there's another possibility.
Even if the load was balanced before take-off, it could have shifted as the plane was lifting off.
The focus now turns to the loading procedures.
Specifically, were the MRAPs properly secured? Standard cargo containers are locked into a hardware system built on tracks in the floor.
But oddly shaped oversized cargo, like the MRAPs, can't use these locks.
Heavy nylon straps are secured to tie-down points around the hold.
What became critical to me was the process of calculating the number of straps necessary to restrain these five vehicles.
The loadmaster on-board the plane used a National Airlines manual to calculate how many straps were needed to secure the vehicles.
Based on their cargo operations manual, the numbers were determined to be 24 straps for the 28,000lb MATVs and 26 straps for the three 40,000lb Cougars.
And seeing his rationale for calculating those numbers, all seemed to make sense to me.
Despite the appearance of the dash cam video, analysis has shown that the plane was not overweight, it was properly balanced, and the load was secured according to company standards.
Investigators need to find out what was going on inside the plane.
Information from the black boxes will be crucial.
My aeroplane! Flight data recorders record what the elevator and the ailerons and what the control pitches are doing.
So we were very hopeful that we would get good information from those recorders that would help explain why the aeroplane had crashed.
Hello? A call comes in from the NTSB's head office in Washington, DC.
Hey.
You have the readouts? The black box data is in.
- That's great! - But there's a problem.
Really? I got a call from our director, John DeLisi.
And he informed me that, unfortunately, the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder had quit working shortly after take-off.
Things started to go wrong shortly after lift-off, known as the point of rotation, but this is precisely the moment when the black boxes stopped recording.
Having the FDR, CVR after the point of rotation would have been very helpful.
- We had none of that information.
- Thank you.
We really had to revert back to old methods of investigating.
So I call it old-school methods.
Investigators decide to contact eyewitnesses who might have seen the plane take off.
OK.
What else did you see? On a base of this size, there may be thousands of people who could provide potential clues.
Alright, well thanks very much.
You need, really, to interview many different witnesses and listen for the common thread that's the same through all of the witness statements.
Sorry.
What did you see? One witness reports an unusual sight.
A runway sweeper is sure he saw puffs of smoke trailing behind the aeroplane after lift-off.
And it wasn't coming off the wings or out of the engines? His testimony raises the possibility that a fire inside the plane may have caused the crash.
If a fire had started inside the cargo hold during lift-off, there would be evidence of this on the pieces of wreckage from the interior of the plane.
The interesting thing was the tail portion, the aft pressure bulkhead, which is white in its colour, did not have any evidence to support that we had a fire on-board the aeroplane before the impact.
There's no sign of any smoke residue.
There couldn't have been a fire on board.
Investigators are at another impasse.
They still have no hard evidence about the final fatal moments of flight 102.
When you go to an accident scene where everything appears to be burned up and there's not a lot left, how in the world can you do an investigation? One thing for sure is there's always evidence.
Bring up the CVR.
Standby.
In a search for answers, investigators turn to the cockpit voice recorder.
It cut out just three seconds after lift-off.
But it was recording during the crew's hour-long wait on the tarmac.
What the heck.
Let's hear the whole two hours.
There might be something there.
- There's your trouble, Brad.
- What is it? Sounds like the first officer is showing something to the captain.
- There's your trouble, Brad.
- What is it? - One of the damn straps is busted.
- Pause it there.
The CVR suggests the first officer found a broken strap inside the cargo hold.
Play.
So are you gonna be throwing more straps on that thing? - Well, it just shifted, apparently.
- Did the truck move? Yeah.
I just tightened up on the straps.
Holy crap.
One of those things actually moved? So, we're hearing the crew talk about that the load had shifted, also that a strap had broken.
It definitely piqued our interest.
Go again.
All the straps that were keeping them from moving backwards were loose.
Those things shouldn't budge an inch.
Despite investigators' earlier conclusion that the heavy load was properly secured and therefore could not shift, the CVR recording indicates that the opposite was true.
So, from that information, we know that they had a load shift when they came in and landed and that was very important to us in our investigation.
All the straps that were keeping them from moving backwards were loose.
What the hell do you think's gonna happen when you slam it on the runway, slam on the brakes and don't use reverse? Well, there ain't nothing you could've done about that.
I'm getting off this plane.
I'm scared! They have no idea how serious this really is.
Really, the crew is not trained or equipped to actually be involved in knowing whether the restraints are proper for the load.
I hope, instead of just replacing that strap, he's beefing the strap up more.
- Yeah, he's cinching them all down.
- Stop.
'He' would be Loadmaster Michael Sheets.
The loadmaster in a cargo operation is the one that's responsible for the security of the load.
- So everyone is depending upon them.
- What's up, dude? Did you throw that other strap away? Did you put a couple more on? How far did it move? A couple of inches? Yeah.
They just moved a couple of inches 'cause it's nylon, you know? Those things are so heavy you'd think they probably wouldn't hardly move no matter what.
They always move.
Everything moves.
So if those straps weren't fixed right, then the back vehicle could have come loose on take-off.
If that cargo shifts during rotation, you'll wind up with a potential pitch problem.
Did the MRAPs shift after take-off? To answer this question, the team must find a way to piece together events in the cargo hold in the moments before the crash.
So, there's no evidence of a Investigators need to prove that one of the heavy Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles shifted during the flight.
Clues might be hard to find in the minimal and scattered remains of the aircraft.
But the one thing as investigators that we do is we go into a very chaotic environment and we bring order to it.
OK, guys, great.
Just put that down right in the centre there.
So I gathered as much of the aft pressure bulkhead structure as I could and I believe we came up with at least 90-95% of it.
The aft pressure bulkhead is an airtight wall.
It protects the cargo area from the non-pressurised tail section of the aircraft.
Investigators sort out pieces of the liner that covers the cargo hold side of the bulkhead.
You definitely go with this guy here.
Take a look at this.
I can guess what that is.
And you could read the words 'Goodyear '.
What became obvious was that the tyre from the aft MATV had impacted the aft pressure bulkhead and left that tyre impact on the liner.
Bam! It looked as if that tyre had pressed up like a rubber stamp on the aft pressure bulkhead.
Only one tyre capable of doing that.
The mark matches the spare tyre in the top right corner of the rear vehicle.
The vehicle itself was found tipped over in the wreckage, damaged but not destroyed by fire.
Pass me that flashlight, will you? Thanks.
The metal antenna box from the rear of the same MRAP is damaged and provides another big clue.
Look at that.
Paint transfer.
The box sits up high at the back of the MRAP.
That looks like a direct hit.
The only place that we could think of where there was orange paint was the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder.
To hit the flight recorders, the MRAP would have had to shift at least 12ft.
Could it have moved that far? A few quick measurements show that the height of the paint transfer on the antenna box lines up neatly with the location of the orange recorders inside the plane.
The antennae box sat about 104 inches above floor level, and where the CVR and FDR are located is 104 inches above the floor of the aircraft.
Now you're starting to see a chain of events that this vehicle had to be moving in an aftward direction.
Both black boxes stopped recording seconds after take-off because a 12-tonne MRAP knocked them out.
But even if the heavy vehicle damaged the flight recorders, would it have been able to somehow bring down a huge 747? Investigators turn to the only wreckage left to examine, the collection of unidentified parts found on the runway.
These items were all recovered from the runway in the area near the point of rotation for the flight.
Rotate.
At Bagram Airfield, the runway stretches for over two miles.
The parts were discovered at the spot where the aircraft lifted off, one mile from the site of the crash.
It is uncertain what relevance, if any, they have.
Where were these parts on the aeroplane? Did they come from the nose section? Did they come from the aft section of the aeroplane? What function did they serve on the aeroplane? Experts at Boeing have been able to identify them.
Here we go.
Hydraulic return tubing.
One of the parts, a broken piece of tubing, comes from hydraulic system number two.
Bring up the hydraulic system schematic.
The 747 has four hydraulic lines that power the control systems of the aircraft.
Hydraulic system number two carries fluid along the deck floor and through the aft pressure bulkhead at the back of the plane.
The tube runs through here.
The number two hydraulic system operates one of the four aeroplane elevator panels.
The elevator panels control pitch from the tail of the aircraft.
If the rear vehicle shifted backwards through the bulkhead, it could have hit the hydraulic tubing, affecting control of the aeroplane.
OK, let's play it.
Investigators decide to take a closer look at the dash cam video.
Play it again, this time in slow motion.
Upon close examination, they notice something odd.
Freeze.
Something's not right.
Advance a few frames.
A little more.
A little more.
Stop.
What's going on? Something's wonky with the landing gear.
Large aircraft like the 747 have a very complicated landing gear system to carry the loads that they carry.
They come down together and they go up together and it takes several hydraulic systems to make that happen.
The hydraulic systems that control landing gear also regulate various other parts of the plane, including control surfaces that affect pitch.
Using animation software, the investigators create a match for the 747 with its five sets of landing gear.
Now let's compare the model to the video.
These are down and this one here is up.
That shouldn't happen.
Positive climb.
On National Airlines flight 102, one of the last commands recorded refers to the landing gear.
- Gear up.
- Gear up.
But after that exchange, not all the gear retracted.
When I see a configuration of an aeroplane with part of the landing gear up, part of it down, I immediately think that they've had a hydraulic failure of one or more of the hydraulic systems.
It looks like damage to one of the four hydraulic lines may have happened in the air.
Now, which systems are out? Body landing gear.
The nose and body landing gear didn't retract.
It must have been system one.
We were able to determine that the number one hydraulic system had been damaged at some point before the aeroplane hit the ground.
The discovery of the broken hydraulic line explains the eyewitness account of smoke.
As hydraulic fluid vaporises behind the aeroplane, it appears to look like smoke.
Investigators think they have finally cracked the mystery.
The heavy armoured vehicle came loose, smashed through the back of the plane and took out the hydraulic lines, making the plane uncontrollable.
After 11 days in Bagram, the investigators are ready to head home.
All that's left to do is wrap up the case with a simulation test back in Washington.
We really thought that we had the cause of the accident.
But there was more to the story.
At NTSB headquarters in Washington, DC Glad to be back.
.
.
investigators are preparing to finalise the case.
All they have to do is to verify their theory that damaged hydraulics made it impossible for the pilots to recover from the steep climb.
So, once we got back to the United States, the next step was to do simulations, re-enact the accident scenario.
First, they model the 747 with two broken hydraulic systems to test the cargo shift.
Aeroplane Performance Group chairman Tim Burtch oversees the simulations.
If I had one of these armoured vehicles move back and there was an associated centre of gravity shift, is the aeroplane controllable? OK.
What else do we know? Let's try the new balance numbers.
Let's take what we know up to a point and then start doing the what-if scenarios with the simulation to see if we can put together a story that makes sense.
OK, plane, let's see what you do now.
But when they run the simulation of the rear vehicle coming loose, something totally unexpected happens.
Nose comes down and flies out of trouble.
Let's shift even more weight back.
Let's push the centre of gravity even further.
Let's try that.
Even with two hydraulic systems broken and an MRAP crushed into the back of the plane, the simulations show that the aircraft can be controlled.
Alright.
We're missing something.
The theory that seemed so solid in Afghanistan is now a bust.
So we started scratching our heads.
There was something more that we were missing.
Most of the aeroplane wreckage now lies buried near the crash site in Afghanistan, thousands of miles away.
Only selected parts have been sent to the United States for analysis.
Investigators must sift through photographs from the site to search for new evidence that might explain what caused the crash.
Hmm.
I wonder.
So we needed to look further, and the next thing behind the aft pressure bulk head that can control pitch on the aircraft is the jackscrew.
Hey.
Where'd that stabiliser jackscrew end up? The horizontal stabiliser is a large control surface that helps balance the plane in the air.
The jackscrew, about 6ft tall, lowers and raises the edge of the stabiliser in response to the pilot's commands.
The jackscrew found at the crash site was bent and severed right near its base.
The most likely explanation seemed to be that the damage occurred on impact.
But, just to make sure, it was sent to the US for testing.
What we were surprised to find out was that that jackscrew had actually been pushed aft and had broken loose from the aeroplane.
Results show that the jackscrew was bent backwards, the opposite of how it would have bent in the crash.
So that raised the big question - why? What could have pushed it aft? Do we have a printout of this? To find out what could have hit the jackscrew, investigators consult a diagram of the aeroplane's aft section.
They take some careful measurements and come up with a match.
Yep.
Straight hit.
I was able to determine that the bumper of the MATV lines up directly with the motor of the jackscrew in the area where it detached from the lower fuselage.
They input the new data.
The simulation now includes a broken jackscrew that makes the stabiliser free-floating.
One MRAP at the back.
So two elevators down equals one uncontrollable plane.
Investigators finally know that an MRAP crashing into the jackscrew is what brought the aeroplane down.
But there's still one major mystery.
We're not done yet.
There's one more question.
How did that MRAP come loose? In Bagram, the loadmaster had calculated the correct number of straps to use on each vehicle.
He based his calculations on the company's cargo operating manual.
How could the cargo have come loose if he followed the right procedure? I immediately began contacting other cargo operators to understand what is supposed to be done to restrain free-floating cargo using straps.
When executives from Boeing review the procedures, they're less than impressed.
The manufacturers were quite shocked at how they were interpreting the requirements.
To get the maximum load capacity out of each strap, it has to be tied down at a precise angle.
Changing the angle changes the strap's capacity.
The airline hadn't spelled this out in its manual.
Boeing, when you look at their manual, they say that if you pull on a strap directly, let's say that it's worth 3,500lb.
But if you go up on a 45-degree angle, it's worth even less.
And if you pull on it on a 90-degree angle, it's worth zero.
National Airlines' manual said regardless of angle each strap could be counted for 5,000lb.
Boeing's own calculations found that National Airlines flight 102 took off with less than half the straps required on each vehicle.
At the most, they could have carried one MATV vehicle.
What's up, dude? Investigators find no fault with flight loadmaster Michael Sheets.
He had little training.
He wasn't certified.
Without knowing it, he'd based his calculations on a faulty manual.
My heart goes out the loadmaster in this situation.
The data, the manuals that he had to go by were incorrect.
So he was really in a no-win situation.
But the cargo shift itself would not have brought down the plane.
The crash ultimately occurred because the sliding MRAP damaged the horizontal stabiliser.
You take away the horizontal tail, you're not gonna be able to control this aeroplane and pitch.
This was an uncontrollable event.
Without the horizontal stabiliser, the pilots' inputs made the plane do the exact opposite of what they wanted.
A command to lower the nose suddenly caused the plane to pitch up.
There's a total disconnect between what you're doing as a pilot and what the aeroplane's doing.
And it must have been terrifying.
I can't truthfully imagine it other than just sheer panic.
The NTSB's final report finds that the probable cause of the accident was National Airlines' inadequate procedures for restraining special cargo loads.
It concludes that the improper restraint of the rear vehicle allowed it to move back, hit the aft pressure bulkhead, knocked out the two hydraulic systems and the horizontal stabiliser, making it impossible for the crew to regain control of the aeroplane.
One of the key recommendations is for mandatory certification of all cargo-handling personnel, a move that would standardise their procedures, training and workloads.
I know that there are economics involved in using more certified people.
But I certainly hope that they end up making loadmasters in these cargo operations certified just like anybody else.
So, reflecting back on this investigation, there were many hurdles.
We had went into Afghanistan with a very, very small team.
We had to go back to old-school methods.
But at the end, we actually came out with safety recommendations that I believe are going to prevent an accident like this one from happening again.
I don't forget the tragedy but I also have a lot of pride that I believe that we've been able to make a difference.