DC-4 Crash in Fairbanks

Skåning

Well-Known Member
Operated by Alaska Air Fuel



The crew of a doomed cargo plane reported an in-flight fire and requested a return to the Fairbanks airport before the plane crashed into the Tanana River on Tuesday, an official from the National Transportation Safety Board said.
 
Last edited:
Well that is absolutely terrifying.

This is going to sound silly, I know, but I'm very clear eyed about this- If I found myself flying a DC-4 carrying 35,000lbs of fuel and no passengers, I would have a parachute handy. This is not an indictment of these two souls at all. I would have no problem doing this job, but there would be more safeguards in place than just my life insurance.
 
Well that is absolutely terrifying.

This is going to sound silly, I know, but I'm very clear eyed about this- If I found myself flying a DC-4 carrying 35,000lbs of fuel and no passengers, I would have a parachute handy. This is not an indictment of these two souls at all. I would have no problem doing this job, but there would be more safeguards in place than just my life insurance.

Question is, could you get to the rear cargo door to even bailout? Or even open the door inflight? The forward door won’t work.
 
Bummer. Honestly given the age of the planes and the reliability of radials that this stuff doesn’t happen every year is surprising and a testament to the crews that work these things
 
Bummer. Honestly given the age of the planes and the reliability of radials that this stuff doesn’t happen every year is surprising and a testament to the crews that work these things
I think it happens fairly often. Remember the DC-3 that *barely* made Merrill Feild a few years ago? I hear Everett’s shuts one down semi regularly too.
 
While it’s very cool to see these classic planes still flying and working; I do wonder how cost efficient it is to still use these planes such as DC-4s and DC-6s, as opposed to a similar turboprop twin such as a CV-580/640/5800?
 
While it’s very cool to see these classic planes still flying and working; I do wonder how cost efficient it is to still use these planes such as DC-4s and DC-6s, as opposed to a similar turboprop twin such as a CV-580/640/5800?
Think about how many DC-4 and -6s were built during and after WWII. There are still warehouses with NOS parts for them around if you know where to look. I think the main reason is turbines use a lot of fuel compared to a piston and the acquisition cost is pretty high. These folks are probably running on a shoestring budget and a turbine powered airplane would make their accountants head explode so they just keep doing what has worked for almost 80 years. It's getting harder but I doubt that was their first flight hauling fuel in that plane.
 
While it’s very cool to see these classic planes still flying and working; I do wonder how cost efficient it is to still use these planes such as DC-4s and DC-6s, as opposed to a similar turboprop twin such as a CV-580/640/5800?
I'm typed in the CV640. I doubt there are any flying anymore. I saw one at PHX maybe 10 years ago that was Mexican registered.
 
These folks are probably running on a shoestring budget and a turbine powered airplane would make their accountants head explode so they just keep doing what has worked for almost 80 years.

What also makes accountants heads explode is when insurance premiums go through the roof

They had an accident in 2020 too

 
I'm typed in the CV640. I doubt there are any flying anymore. I saw one at PHX maybe 10 years ago that was Mexican registered.

Last one I saw was a Kitty Hawk one, I believe, there at PHX back in the day. Cool looking bird.
 
Think about how many DC-4 and -6s were built during and after WWII. There are still warehouses with NOS parts for them around if you know where to look. I think the main reason is turbines use a lot of fuel compared to a piston and the acquisition cost is pretty high. These folks are probably running on a shoestring budget and a turbine powered airplane would make their accountants head explode so they just keep doing what has worked for almost 80 years. It's getting harder but I doubt that was their first flight hauling fuel in that plane.

Interesting, I would’ve thought the radials would be more difficult to maintain and/or be higher cost to operate these days, but maybe not. Wonder how their airframes are holding up age/fatigue wise? You remember when these DC-4/C-54, DC-6/C-118 and DC-7s were primary forest firefighting planes with a good few companies out there in the 1970s through the early 2000s. Mainly because they were pretty solid airframes that weren’t having the same issues that other planes brought into forest firefighting were having, like the C-119 and A-model C-130s.
 
What also makes accountants heads explode is when insurance premiums go through the roof

They had an accident in 2020 too

Yakataga can be challenging, it's way out in the middle of nowhere, there's not a lot of reporting out there, and the weather often sucks. I almost did this exact thing in a caravan in 2014, that flight in particular (later things got weird on the way back) still remains the closest I ever came to wrecking an airplane. I went out to Yakataga, there was no runway report because nobody had been out in weeks, I touched down long to avoid the large standing water pond and I was basically waterskiing over standing water and grass immediately. The runway isn't appreciably short, but without copious reverse I probably would have done the same thing, departing would not have been possible with the water had I been heavy, but it was a drop off.

The 2020 accident was preventable but not surprising really. Given what they were doing, where they were going, to be honest, their record was prety good IMO. This sort of work is extremely challenging. There's often no instrument approaches, limited landable runway, unreliable runway reports driven by "optimistic" customers who need fuel really bad, and you're loaded to the gills with something that burns. It's a miracle you don't see more of this sort of thing.

Interesting, I would’ve thought the radials would be more difficult to maintain and/or be higher cost to operate these days, but maybe not. Wonder how their airframes are holding up age/fatigue wise? You remember when these DC-4/C-54, DC-6/C-118 and DC-7s were primary forest firefighting planes with a good few companies out there in the 1970s through the early 2000s. Mainly because they were pretty solid airframes that weren’t having the same issues that other planes brought into forest firefighting were having, like the C-119 and A-model C-130s.
The reason that these guys use DC4s and not more modern equipment is partially cost (in the sense that cost dictates everything in aviation) but that's not really the driving motivation for these airplanes when I was adjacent to these operations. Really it's because there is simply nothing that can do what these old airplanes can do in terms gravel operations, reliability, ruggedness, etc. There are a few companies that want to fly bulk fuel around the bush and that's not really practical in more modern equipment typically. You could buy a herc, but at the price point that smaller customers are able to pay, that's not really practical. Random mines on a shoestring and random villages don't have the cash. This is a big part of why Crowley Marine does barge deliveries etc.

Remembering back into my 20s, Alaska Air Fuel was formed as a result of some of acquaintances of mine trying to fill a need that wasn't being met after Brooks Fuel went out of business in 2011 and Everts not being able to keep up with demand. A year later in 2012 a guy running fuel named Pete Iverson crashed on the way to Nixon Fork mine (where I used to go constantly to do crew swaps and deliver freight) and the resulting fall out from that really left a hole in the market. At the time Everts was uncomfortable servicing the mine and a bunch of other things coalesced to lead to Alaska Air Fuel being established in 2013 or 2014 - I can't remember. In defense of Everts there had been multiple accidents at AK40, including a Carvair carrying fuel for Brooks Fuel in 2007 and numerous other accidents. I nearly watched a DC6 slide into the hill at the end of the runway there one winter, it remains one of the craziest things I've ever seen and the crew came within inches of totalling the airplane.

For reference here's a Carvair Landing at Nixon Fork Mine about a year before the accident in 2007 (if you're interested, start at 2:57
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X70VHgCO_FE
).

I wasn't really close with anyone over at Alaska Air Fuel as far as I know. They used to be acquaintances and customers, but yeah, I don't think I knew this crew. I don't see this as strictly a "broke dick" operating sort of thing, however. There's just a certain type of person and organization that seeks to make bulk fuel available in remote regions. Honestly, it's pretty "meaningful" work. You're effectively bringing the ability to industrialize to remote locations. Pete Iverson's crash was just being super aggresive in crappy weather inexplicably, classic human factors and CFIT by all acounts. I didn't get that vibe from the owner of Air Fuel - that guy seemed pretty cool, albeit he probably tried "harder" than I did. I kind of fell out of touch with most of the players around 2020. He'd been a Lynden guy if I remember the oral history correctly (though I may not, I might be accidentally confabulating).
 
Yakataga can be challenging, it's way out in the middle of nowhere, there's not a lot of reporting out there, and the weather often sucks. I almost did this exact thing in a caravan in 2014, that flight in particular (later things got weird on the way back) still remains the closest I ever came to wrecking an airplane. I went out to Yakataga, there was no runway report because nobody had been out in weeks, I touched down long to avoid the large standing water pond and I was basically waterskiing over standing water and grass immediately. The runway isn't appreciably short, but without copious reverse I probably would have done the same thing, departing would not have been possible with the water had I been heavy, but it was a drop off.

The 2020 accident was preventable but not surprising really. Given what they were doing, where they were going, to be honest, their record was prety good IMO. This sort of work is extremely challenging. There's often no instrument approaches, limited landable runway, unreliable runway reports driven by "optimistic" customers who need fuel really bad, and you're loaded to the gills with something that burns. It's a miracle you don't see more of this sort of thing.


The reason that these guys use DC4s and not more modern equipment is partially cost (in the sense that cost dictates everything in aviation) but that's not really the driving motivation for these airplanes when I was adjacent to these operations. Really it's because there is simply nothing that can do what these old airplanes can do in terms gravel operations, reliability, ruggedness, etc. There are a few companies that want to fly bulk fuel around the bush and that's not really practical in more modern equipment typically. You could buy a herc, but at the price point that smaller customers are able to pay, that's not really practical. Random mines on a shoestring and random villages don't have the cash. This is a big part of why Crowley Marine does barge deliveries etc.

Remembering back into my 20s, Alaska Air Fuel was formed as a result of some of acquaintances of mine trying to fill a need that wasn't being met after Brooks Fuel went out of business in 2011 and Everts not being able to keep up with demand. A year later in 2012 a guy running fuel named Pete Iverson crashed on the way to Nixon Fork mine (where I used to go constantly to do crew swaps and deliver freight) and the resulting fall out from that really left a hole in the market. At the time Everts was uncomfortable servicing the mine and a bunch of other things coalesced to lead to Alaska Air Fuel being established in 2013 or 2014 - I can't remember. In defense of Everts there had been multiple accidents at AK40, including a Carvair carrying fuel for Brooks Fuel in 2007 and numerous other accidents. I nearly watched a DC6 slide into the hill at the end of the runway there one winter, it remains one of the craziest things I've ever seen and the crew came within inches of totalling the airplane.

For reference here's a Carvair Landing at Nixon Fork Mine about a year before the accident in 2007 (if you're interested, start at 2:57
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X70VHgCO_FE
).

I wasn't really close with anyone over at Alaska Air Fuel as far as I know. They used to be acquaintances and customers, but yeah, I don't think I knew this crew. I don't see this as strictly a "broke dick" operating sort of thing, however. There's just a certain type of person and organization that seeks to make bulk fuel available in remote regions. Honestly, it's pretty "meaningful" work. You're effectively bringing the ability to industrialize to remote locations. Pete Iverson's crash was just being super aggresive in crappy weather inexplicably, classic human factors and CFIT by all acounts. I didn't get that vibe from the owner of Air Fuel - that guy seemed pretty cool, albeit he probably tried "harder" than I did. I kind of fell out of touch with most of the players around 2020. He'd been a Lynden guy if I remember the oral history correctly (though I may not, I might be accidentally confabulating).

These operations are definitely filling a critical need out in the many remote areas out there, not question about that. And indeed, it takes a special kind to be flying an airborne fuel tanker that’s not a jet like military tankers, and going into some of the most challenging airports with the many limitations that you cite. Much respect for these crews and what they do. Not glamorous work at all, but righteous and necessary work. Makes sense these old rugged birds do this work. I guess if they are fairly easy to maintain and are affordable, that answers my questions
 
These operations are definitely filling a critical need out in the many remote areas out there, not question about that. And indeed, it takes a special kind to be flying an airborne fuel tanker that’s not a jet like military tankers, and going into some of the most challenging airports with the many limitations that you cite. Much respect for these crews and what they do. Not glamorous work at all, but righteous and necessary work. Makes sense these old rugged birds do this work. I guess if they are fairly easy to maintain and are affordable, that answers my questions

It’s funny when you think these operations are engaged in a daily model today of what was in the 40s the military performing extreme “no fail high risk” mission moving gas to austere places during WWII.

They just didn’t get the memo that the war ended, and continue to operate in that regime. It didn’t stop being a war for them because most of the war was really against the condition and elements. The actual combat risks were just garnish to that kind of operation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
That's terrifying.

Tangentially related note, I'm reading this book right now about the introduction of the B-26 Maruader into Army Air Corps service, the lack of any flight test prior to IOC, and a hasty deployment to Europe and Africa shortly thereafter. Which is to say that the certification process that these planes went through, is probably not what we are used to today. I don't think that is super related to this, but in the case of the Marauder, there were tons of examples of overloaded combat configured aircraft losing an engine on takeoff and just being forced to crash......no hope of flying the thing
 
That's terrifying.

Tangentially related note, I'm reading this book right now about the introduction of the B-26 Maruader into Army Air Corps service, the lack of any flight test prior to IOC, and a hasty deployment to Europe and Africa shortly thereafter. Which is to say that the certification process that these planes went through, is probably not what we are used to today. I don't think that is super related to this, but in the case of the Marauder, there were tons of examples of overloaded combat configured aircraft losing an engine on takeoff and just being forced to crash......no hope of flying the thing
Same with the B-25, no published Vmc. Doubt many made it to 33k flying hours (that DC-4 had been busy).
 
Back
Top