Ship 741WD is a pilot and he defends a pilot. Bias?
He defends the pilot in question by responding with personal insults.
He does not address the disagreement on the voice recorder about whether the wing engine throttle should be advanced or retarded just prior to impact.
ALPA has always fought the voice recorder (check the record) for this very reason. They don’t want anyone to know what the really did or didn’t do. Please try to refute this assertion with something more substantial than personal insults, “your momma wears combat boots….”
He probably also thinks the Air Transat crew were heroes. And the Air Canada glider crew. And the Delta crew that shut down both engines. And the Southwest crew that was flying around naked.
Next, he will probably start quoting the leadership principles he learned “at the academy.”
Never before or since? How bout the successful flight test program where Douglas flew an MD-11 using engine power alone controlled by autopilot inputs for just such an eventuality? True, it was only a flight test program, but doesn’t that qualify as “since?”
Ship 741Ship 741 wins the memory award of the day…
http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR82-05.pdf
William
Thanks, William, for posting that. I’m kind of an L1011 afficianiado, I used to be a mechanic at a major U. S. airline and spent the first 6 weeks of my career inside the left wing of…..Ship 741, the last long fuselage L1011 ever built.
I’ve got some post incident pictures at home in a file somewhere that are pretty interesting…..engine parts in the aft lavs……a guy standing on the horiz stab inside the tail with various damage all around…i seem to remember a gaping hole in the s duct.
My first thought after the Sioux City incident was how senseless the wreck was….its one thing to say an L1011 would have survived a similar incident, its another when an L1011 actually has survived such an incident.
My second thought was the utterly ridiculous hero worship for Al Haines for doing what anyone would have done. There was no mention in the aviation press of the disagreement on the voice recorder between him and the jumpseater about which way the throttles should be jockyed just prior to impact…..who was right? Doesn’t matter since the public needs that comfy feeling that the pilots are “in control.”
The whole topic of engine failures is fascinating. You end up getting into all kinds of scenarios and discussions. Of course ETOPS gets mentioned at some point, and that is another fascinating discussion. For the record, I will publicly state that I believe the BA Captain departing LAX mad the WRONG decision last year, but that is another topic in itself and has probably been beat to death by posters here already.
One last little memory tickler. Didn’t CAL put a 777 into Midway Island about 18 months ago with an engine failure? Given the small number of 777s that CAL has, and the great reliability of the Trent, they’ve been pretty unlucky.
Joe
Ship 741And the UAL DC-10 crash at Souix City following the rupture of hydraulic lines.
True enough. That accident should never have been allowed to happen, in light of the fact that the FAA is a “tombstone” agency and should have mandated the containment ring after the ONA accident.
At the very least, they could have insisted upon hydraulic fuses, like the L1011 had in C system. In fact, an Eastern L1011 threw a fan (in the late 70’s, I believe, after the ONA accident but before Sioux City) and the airplane was recovered successfully with no injuries. Can’t remember the reason the fan came out of the RB211, may have been lack of lubrication to a bearing?
Ship 741He probably can’t be fired because he probably has tenure….imho a classic case of good intentions gone wrong…intended to allow academic freedom but perverted to allow individuals to avoid responsibility for anything they say or do.
I think the Kevlar/composite containment ring around the fan case is part of the engine design, ie., an engine manufacturer design/part, not a Boeing design feature. I don’t intend to imply that this insulates Boeing from the inevitable lawsuits, only trying to clear up the discussion above about where the protection is for such a scenario. IIRC, GE learned about this the hard way when ONA lost a DC-10 due to an uncontained CF06 failure in the early 70s.
Ship 741In the U.S., compensation trends for working people have been going down since the 80’s. Very few “cushy” union jobs left for folks with only high school educations….the days of 40 years and a gold watch (and a company funded retirement program) are over. On the one hand, jobs have been outsourced to other countries, on the other hand, illegal immigration has provided a huge influx of cheap workers. The average guy’s job gets squeezed in both directions. Meanwhile, mainland Europe (mostly France and Germany) continue with cradle to grave goodies for everyone. I guess they think they can just stick their head in the sand and the global economy will go away. Of course, BAE saw all this and sold their shares. Airbus is in trouble, indeed all of mainland Europe is. The U.S. has a 25 year head start on pay and benefit cuts for the rank and file.
Airbus is only offering to assemble their tanker entry in the U.S. because U.S. labor is cheaper than Europe.
Consider the auto industry. Count the Toyotas on the Champs Elysee, and then count them on mainstreet U.S.A. Mainland Europe is not only socialist, its protectionist too boot. Yes, its true that Toyota and the other Japanese car companies are building plants in the U.S., but their people have to work (a full shift!) and their contracts aren’t nearly as lucrative as the U.S. automakers. And their managers only make 4 times what the workers do while the U.S. companies managers make 10 times what the workers do. One american manager is not worth two and half times more than the harder working, dedicated, Japanese manager.
One last item, more geopolitics. Japanese carriers held off ordering A380 because they know Europe will never protect them from Chinese agression. Hell, France won’t even defend herself, let alone anyone else. Meanwhile, the U.S. Sixth Fleet is still based in Yokosuka. An attack on Japan is an attack on America, and everyone knows it.
Ship 74118.01.91 F-15E 88-1689 coded SJ from 4th TFW, piloted by Major Thomas F. Koritz, WSO Major Donnie R. Holland shot down 16miles SW of Basrah. Both aviators KIA. Combat loss officially confirmed by USAF, reason assumed AAA. Show me one single proof, Sens, that this aircraft was not hit by an Iraqi fighter instead.
20.01.91 F-15E 88-1692 coded SJ from 4th TFW, piloted by Col. David W. Eberly, WSO Major Thomas E. Griffith – shot down near Al Qiam, crew ejected and taken as POW. Combat loss officially confirmed by USAF, reason given SA-2. Show me one single proof, Sens, that this aircraft was not hit by a missile fired by an Iraqi fighter.
One of my co-workers was an avionics technician in the 4th TFW in Gulf War 1. He told me that one of these aircraft was lost due to crew error. Here is the scenario:
A hot shot pilot needed combat experience to continue his rapid ascent up the ziggurat, he had flown F-15A/C’s earlier in his career but was now stateside in a non-deployed unit. There was apparently insufficient political pull to get him assigned to an F-15A/C squadron, but strings were pulled to get him a seat in an E model. The HOTAS configuration was slightly different in the E than the A/C, and the button that previously turned on and off the formation lights was now the flare ejector switch. Low and fast on ingress over the desert to a target, he attempted to communicate with his wingman via flashing the formation lights. This is apparently a common practice when radio silence must be maintained. Unfortunately, he forgot about the different HOTAS controls and ejected a flare. His backseater saw the reflection from the flare and assumed a missile had them locked up. He panicked and ejected them both. They safely ejected and the airplane crashed, and of course the hot shot’s career continued unaffected by crashing a 100 million dollar airplane in the middle of a war on a combat mission for nothing.
At least thats the story. I haven’t been able to find a sufficiently detailed graphic of the HOTAS controls showing any difference between the A/C and the E. If anyone can provide that, it might lead credence to the story. Another thing that leads credence to the story, from my perspective at least, is that it gives an explanation why the true story of the loss will never be known: pilots protecting each others behind, especially since no one got hurt.
Ship 741FWIW, I received my 2007 Source Book from Av. Week yesterday, and on page 249 it states that, “The USAF F-22 is equipped with the Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control advanced infrared search and track system.”
I haven’t been able to locate the system in the charts in the issue though, so don’t know what the designation they are referring to is.
Ship 741If you want to argue safety, well: ETOPS qualified twins have a longer fire surpression capability. Meaning, they have better supression than Quads, as part of ETOPS requirements. So, I’d say Twins are safer, on that aspect.
….
I believe this is one of the inadequecies (sp?) that was addressed in the new rule. Now, all ETOPS airplanes (airplanes more than 60 minutes from a suitable airport regardless of the number of engines) will have to have increased fire suppression capabilities. Many holes were “closed up” like that, the rules are now more standard, and as a result there is some increased cost for some of the 3 and 4 engine operators. But, I would argue safety has been increased by this rule by closing up those gaps.
Ship 741So this means the future of the B747 is now in question as well,Strange that the FAA changes the rules just as Boeing starts to assemble it B787 Dream liner prototype
Coincendance,or am I Just being cyincal :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
This has been in work for several years. The NPRM was originally issued 3-4 years ago.
Boeing has been publicly, deeply, committed to twin engine airplanes for a long time, and the 787 is a continuation of their philosophy, so it is related in a way, but not in the way you allege.
Ship 741IIRC, Richard Branson had a similar problem 10-12 yrs ago when I was working TDY in France. He wanted to have his store open on Sunday afternoon, most of his staff was young/single/students who wanted to work, but the French Government said no. Store couldn’t open on Sunday as that was family time. Now France is 20% Muslim, the government and upper class are essentially agnostic/atheistic, and no one recalls that the history of Sunday off has it’s roots in Christian culture.
Its interesting to hear Europeans complain that the French are sheltering Air France from competition, as if BA, Lufthansa, and Alitalia aren’t similarly shielded (though often in different or hidden ways).
Once one starts down the protectionist line, where do you stop? We are all free-market capitalists when we’re customers, but socialists at work (“dont come after my job.”)
I’m a U. S. citizen, and illegal immigrants from Mexico now outnumber African-Americans in our country. At the same time, major corporations continue outsourcing at alarming rates. The middle class is getting squeezed to a frightening extent from both sides.
And I haven’t even addressed the A versus B controversy. To my mind A is an arm of the government, protected from failure, who builds airplanes so they can hire people. B only hires people because they must build airplanes. Not content to obtain government support from European governments, A now almost demands the KC-X contract, with their lawsuit against Canada for not buying another of their products as a backdrop. Meanwhile, they insist they will have huge U.S. content as a statement of largesse, when the reality is that the falling U.S. dollar (due to the previously mentioned squeeze and deficit spending) make it in A’s best interest to manufacture as much as possible in the lower cost (versus western Europe) U.S.
Ship 741Sorry if my message appears redundant to Phil’s wrt to the slot issue….we both posted at 1918z.
Ship 741Not only do the pax demand frequency (hasn’t Boeing made this argument repeatedly in recent years?), but BA needs to keep those slots tied up.
BA won’t allow any additional competitors to enter the market if they can help it.
Ship 741Delta has performed single engine taxi (on twin engine airplanes) for some time now, subject to pilot judgement that it is prudent/safe to do so.
I assume other air carriers utilize this practice also. Given the number of flights at a large airline, it can be a significant fuel saver, to say nothing of the environmental benefits.
With the continually increasing amount of avionics on the airplanes, this procedure does occaisionally cause a delay, because gremlins sometimes rear their ugly heads on “power swap.” This technical problem comes at the worst possible time, when the flight is number 4 or 5 for takeoff.
Ship 741http://www.pownetwork.org/bios/u/u002.htm
Aircraft was apparently piloted by Col. Paul G. Underwood, who did not survive.
Ship 741Yes, T5 is the kind of thing I’m talking about. Billions go to AI, yet little gets done to the airports. Its like Hitler building the Volkswagen and not the autobahn.
I’m sorry. I’ll just shut up now. I don’t intend to be a troll and don’t appear to be able to express myself very well. I just found the forum a few weeks ago and appreciate the level of expertise here.
Sign In
