Background
Roberto Clemente was a baseball star for theAircraft
The accident aircraft was a Douglas DC-7CF, a freighter conversion of the DC-7 (cn/msn 45130/823), registered in the United States as N500AE. The aircraft first flew in 1957.Accident
The accident caused the deaths of all five people on board, including Clemente. The airplane crashed immediately after takeoff fromCargo carrier
Clemente and a relief committee had leased the aircraft for $4,000 from a local airline, American Air Express Leasing Company,NTSB Report: F.A.A. accident report dated February 22, 1973, Factual Report of Investigation NYC-73-A-N094 and Briefs of Accidents File 3-3757 which was owned by a 27-year-old Puerto Rican named Arthur J. Rivera. Unknown to Clemente or to the pilot, the four-engine Douglas DC-7 had suffered a non-fatal taxiway accident just 29 days before the fateful flight took place. This accident damaged the No. 2 and No. 3 propeller blades and the No. 3 engine cooler scoop. Advised to replace one of the engines, Rivera pressed his mechanics to do what they could to inspect the engine and keep it in service, but after inspecting the engines, the mechanics could not find a reason to justify replacing one. The standard procedure after the sudden stop of a piston engine is to disassemble the engine to magnaflux its parts for cracks, but this was not done. An FAA maintenance inspector inspected the propeller shaft limits after the sudden stoppage repairs and found them within tolerances, though a later report said that he merely witnessed the inspection. The post-war era in which cargo carriers operated surplus piston-driven prop planes was at its end, as high maintenance costs restricted the ability to keep up with newer aircraft technology. Rivera had just regained his FAA clearance to operate a cargo plane, claiming that it was his only livelihood. Struggling to keep American Air Express Leasing afloat against a tide of change in the airline industry, he began to cut corners.Bad omens
Clemente's father, his wife Vera and son Roberto, Jr. warned him that they had bad feelings and premonitions about the flight, and just a few days before the flight, Clemente had a dream about overlooking his own funeral. However, Clemente insisted on conducting the planned relief mission and taking off on December 31 as planned, despite bad weather having hit the area near Isla Verde International Airport.Crew
After volunteers spent most of the afternoon loading the aircraft, pilot Jerry Hill boarded the plane as the sole member of the flight crew. Owner Rivera sat in the co-pilot's seat, though he was only certified to fly the twin-engineLoaded aircraft weight
Weight calculations
The commercial airline industry of the 1970s used general factors in calculating takeoff weight and maximum weight limits. However, applying more current scientific knowledge may lead to a more accurate estimate of the aircraft's takeoff weight. The aircraft's fuel weight was a focus of conjecture. The investigation found evidence that the aircraft was fueled for a round trip. The investigators calculated the weight of that fuel and pushed the aircraft weight to 148,943 pounds. The 1,420-mile distance to Nicaragua was less than half the 3,605-mile range of a fully loaded DC-7C, which holds 7,825 gallons of fuel. At takeoff, the plane was filled to 60% of fuel capacity. However, the 1972 investigation was limited, because at the time, the effect of temperature on fuel density and weight was not well understood by the airline industry. Depending on temperature, gasoline ranges from under six pounds per gallon to 6.75 pounds per gallon at 60 °F. The fuel needed for the four-hour flight to Nicaragua and four-hour return to Puerto Rico was somewhere between 28,480 and 32,400 pounds, a 3,900-pound difference. Puerto Rico has a hot climate, with the December temperature usually above 80 °F, so the fuel would have actually weighed on the low side. The estimated 4,193 pounds by which the flight was overweight is equivalent to 707 gallons of fuel, 9% of a DC-7's fuel capacity, sufficient for an hour of flight. Another concept introduced after the 1970s is zero-fuel weight, the total weight of the airplane and all its contents minus the total weight of the usable fuel on board. The weight of fuel in the wings has less of a structural effect than that of the fuselage—modern planes have a zero-fuel weight that allows for increasing the maximum takeoff weight when that weight is in fuel. Air density affects the maximum takeoff weight. Colder air provides more buoyancy, more engine performance and a wider safe engine operating band. The later takeoff time meant the air temperature was 76 °F, 10 °F cooler than daytime evening air. The cooler, denser air provided both better buoyancy and increased engine performance, which at sea level provides a considerable increase to the aircraft's weight capacity (a DC-7C could see a 7,000-pound change with a 10° drop in air temperature). The flight might not have been overloaded after all. Regardless, Hill would not have known the concepts of fuel density, zero-fuel weight or air buoyancy adjustment, though by experience he should have become familiar with the engine performance change. The NTSB investigators found that while weight was a factor in the accident, it was not the cause. A more interesting calculation is that the plane could not have landed with both a full cargo load and enough fuel for a return trip; if at takeoff the aircraft was 148,943 pounds, then in Nicaragua it would have landed after burning 14,240 pounds of fuel and would weigh 134,700 pounds, which is 25,700 pounds over the landing-weight limit. To land at a specified weight and have return fuel would limit the cargo to 12,600 pounds. The takeoff and landing limits are commercial peacetime limits, but war emergency load limits may be up to 20% higher. The war emergency takeoff limit would be 178,000 pounds and the landing limit would be 160,000; the DC-7C was within those limits, which are set for new military aircraft receiving military maintenance. Hill would have been aware of these emergency cargo limits from his time as a U.S. Air Force major flying theSafety oversight
As air traffic control is merely responsible for directing traffic and cannot be expected to determine if a flight should take off, a lawsuit was brought charging that the FAA should have prohibited the takeoff. The FAA argued that the aircraft was overloaded rather than mechanically unsound. The court ruled that because the FAA had not inspected planes at that airport previously, it was not liable, despite its knowledge of the aircraft's condition and its failure to act. The court stated that the takeoff decision is ultimately the pilot's responsibility, though it did not find Hill at fault.Takeoff
On the dark, moonless night of December 31, 1972, at 9:11 p.m. local time, after the previously aborted takeoff and additional mechanical work, the plane taxied around the airport's runway 7. By then the weather had cleared and visibility was at 10 miles, with only a few clouds visible. After engine run-up by the crew, the flight was cleared for takeoff at 9:20:30 p.m. for the four-hour flight to Nicaragua. The aircraft took an exceptionally long takeoff roll and gained very little altitude. A left turn was commenced towards the north, and at 9:23:15 p.m., the San Juan tower received the following transmission: "N500AE coming back around." To land safely, the aircraft would have first needed toIssues with engine design
That a DC-7 had lost an engine on takeoff was not unexpected. During World War II, twice as many aircraft were lost because of problems with the same type of engine (in aircraft such as theRecovery
Recovery efforts started almost immediately after the aircraft went down. By 11:00 p.m., radio and television stations across Puerto Rico were informing the public about the accident. A crowd formed around Piñones Beach, many of whom tried to help search efforts. Of the five people on board the plane, only Hill's body was recovered. Because of extremely rough surface conditions and poor underwater visibility, the wreckage site was not discovered until January 4, 1973. On or after January 7, divers from a naval ship reported that the aircraft wreckage was scattered throughout the bottom of the ocean at a depth of 100 to 130 feet, in an area of approximately four acres. The aircraft was broken into several sections, most of them badly crushed or demolished. Both wings were separated from the fuselage. The cockpit area forward of the main junction box was destroyed and the instrument panel and mechanical controls were missing. The nose gear assembly was retracted. All four engines were accounted for, but none of them were found attached to the wing structure. Two of the engines were together at a distance of approximately 200 feet from the right wing, which itself was upside down on the left side of a fuselage section. Three engines were recovered from the ocean floor on January 11, 1973, including Nos. 2 and 3. A review of the engine log books showed that the engines had received 100-hour inspections four and five months earlier and prior to being purchased by Rivera. All spark plugs in engines 3 and 4, and a few cylinders in engines 2, 3 and 4, were replaced. During the previous flight in September, the No. 3 engine was shut down and feathered as a result of spark plug fouling. * The rings were found intact in the cylinders of No. 3 engine, however, spark plugs had repeatedly fouled in the previous months and likely would have fouled before completion of the planned flight. ** The 36 spark plugs were undamaged with normal gaps. ** The 18 cylinders contained no damage. ** The crankshaft was broken and deeply wrinkled and slightly twisted; it was not determined if this was on or prior to impact (under full power on entering the water and when water resistance on the prop caused the crankshaft to twist until breaking). ** The sumps contained a thick black sludge (including pieces from previous engine repairs). * The propeller of the No. 2 engine was feathered, indicating that there was full engine failure at some point before the crash and that the pilot had been able to respond to this. The No. 2 engine was internally destroyed. ** The No. 16 cylinder was destroyed. The two spark plugs were bent and coated in oil. ** All 18 rods connecting the pistons to the crankshaft were broken. ** All the cylinder skirts were bent (indicating the crankshaft was continuing to turn). ** The sumps contained a thick black sludge. * The No. 1 engine showed no damage. ** The spark plugs had no fouling and the electrode gaps were normal. ** The valves and pistons were undamaged. ** The sumps contained a thick black sludge. Part of the fuselage and the tail of the airplane were also found.Causes
The NTSB concluded that after a failure of one engine the plane had inadequate power to maintain altitude during a turn (suggesting that the pilot could not dump fuel fast enough to achieve a weight-to-power ratio that allowed level flight). After a few miles, the plane flew into the ocean on a moonless night. The lack of a horizon possibly prevented the pilot from realizing the altitude loss from only 100 feet over the ocean, which would have indicated a need to prepare for a water landing with reduced engine power on splashdown (the engines appear to have been at full power, and fuselage damage indicated an aircraft at higher speed). An unexplored scenario is that, following an engine loss, the pilot began fuel dumping to lighten the aircraft. The prop wash dispersed the fuel, and given the low elevation, formed a thermobaric weapon that was ignited by the burning engine. The resulting air burst destroyed the aircraft. The DC-7 contained fuel-dumping facilities. A hazard of fuel dumping is ignition of the fuel, and precautions are taken to eliminate all sources of ignition, and also to prevent turbulence that mixes the fuel with air. Aircraft do not typically explode on impact, and in this case the plane would have been more or less in level controlled flight into the water. An air burst explains the explosion heard after an engine fire was seen, as well as the heavy destruction of the fuselage. A scenario considered by investigators but later dismissed involved a load shift on turning, which careened the plane into a wing strike with water, cartwheeling the plane along the surface. Two engines were found several hundred feet directly ahead of the wing, indicating a level entry into the water. The cause of the crash could not be determined precisely because of the difficulties encountered while attempting to recover the wreckage. Probable causes were attributed to lean detonation, poor maintenance, excessive wear in engine components, engine damage from a previous taxiing accident that was not repaired, an uncertified co-pilot, an uncertified flight engineer, a 4,000-pound fuel overload and inadequate crew preparation in correcting these issues. NTSB findings: Complete power loss—complete engine failure/flameout - 1 engine (No. 2) Partial power loss—partial loss of power - 1 engine (No. 3) (presumably because of a lack of adequate power for three engines) Probable Cause: *Power plant (failed because of engine damage from sudden stoppage during a taxiway accident on December 2, 1972) **engine structure: No. 2 master and connecting rods **engine structure: No. 2 cylinder assembly **engine structure: No. 2 piston, piston rings *Miscellaneous acts and conditions, No. 3 excessive-wear/play (unable to develop full power) *Personnel: inadequate maintenance, servicing and inspection *Pilot: inadequate pre-flight preparation and planning Factors: *Operational supervisory personnel: deficiency, company-maintained equipment, services, regulation *Miscellaneous acts **Improperly loaded aircraft weight and/or center of gravity (over maximum weight by 4,193 pounds) **Previous damage **Aircraft contact with the water Remarks: * Flight engineer unqualified (later court proceedings found there was no evidence that Matias was acting as flight engineer, despite sitting in the flight engineer's seat)In popular culture
The crash is referred to in the 2011 film '' The Ides of March''.References
External links
Image: Douglas DC-7C - N756PA - c/n 45130-823 - THF 05.1965 (Archiv Ralf Manteufel) posted o