April 30, 2012 at 3:45 pm
For a programme about air safety!
http://youtu.be/6mtM8R7KWyY
By: Bmused55 - 21st May 2012 at 12:53
Interesting info chaps. Thanks 🙂
By: Tillerman - 19th May 2012 at 21:47
at what point would one expect the engines to wind down? On impact or once fuel runs out?
Not a jet, I know, but I remember seeing footage from a crashed large propeller plane (C-124, if my memory still works). Aircraft totally wrecked, except for one engine: it kept turning for a full day or so, as the fuel flow to the engine was left intact somehow, and there were no means to cut the engine.
Tillerman.
By: Arabella-Cox - 5th May 2012 at 22:52
Weird question, but as the rear looks virtually undamaged, wings still attached, at what point would one expect the engines to wind down? On impact or once fuel runs out?
Sandy, now I’m thinking a while back, but there are several items (at least 8 IIRC) controlled by the fire handles that would shut off automatically if the cables to them are severed. One of them would be the fuel shutoff. I will have to dig out the flight manual and check to be sure. And yes my heart is broken that they deliberately crashed the plane, it is like crashing a Spitfire or Hurricane or similar.
By: Newforest - 5th May 2012 at 22:09
XB-MNP for those who want to know.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20120427-0
By: Arabella-Cox - 1st May 2012 at 18:26
Well… it depends… in an impact like this one they might be running until fuel gets to them, especially since it is an “older” type without FADEC…
Otherwise…. if the landing goes like this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/27/aeropostal-dc95-hard-landing_n_983781.html
They shut down immediately 😀
By: Bmused55 - 1st May 2012 at 15:47
Weird question, but as the rear looks virtually undamaged, wings still attached, at what point would one expect the engines to wind down? On impact or once fuel runs out?
By: Arabella-Cox - 1st May 2012 at 11:17
Nice testing, looks like they were bored from having always the same 707 crashing in videos! So they crash-tested another one 😉
You can find a whole article about the test here:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/video-boeing-727-deliberately-crashed-in-desert-for-tv-371267/
Looks like they first wanted to crash a 300-seat WB but they opted for the 727 at the end, less expensive I think….
By: Bmused55 - 1st May 2012 at 10:23
It was remote control.
The pilots jumped out of the back and the plane was then remotely flown into the ground froma chase plane, which you can make out in all the videos.
By: cockerhoop - 1st May 2012 at 09:33
it was not remote control, the pilot ejected (or jumped)
and a bit better result on the ground than the 707 that was supposed to show non flamable fuel in the 80s, but landed wrong and burst into flames!!!!
By: Bmused55 - 30th April 2012 at 20:43
too late :diablo:
By: Arabella-Cox - 30th April 2012 at 20:00
Me too. I do not want to waste away in a home when I am old.
By: Bmused55 - 30th April 2012 at 19:30
My point entirely.
It went out like I plan to, with a bang over the finish line.
By: Arabella-Cox - 30th April 2012 at 19:19
Probably better in the circumstances to go out with a bang.
By: Bmused55 - 30th April 2012 at 19:06
It was EOL anyway. It was this or sit and rot in the desert.
By: Garyw - 30th April 2012 at 18:37
What a total waste of an airframe. 😮