![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 16, 8:01*am, wrote:
On Feb 15, 4:23*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote: On Feb 15, 11:59*am, Gezellig wrote: On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 06:00:13 -0800 (PST), Dudley Henriques wrote: On Feb 13, 4:44*pm, "Robert11" wrote: Hello, I guess de-icing is going to be a popular subject. Question, please: *On commercial jet airliners like, e.g., a 767 or 757, is there any in-flight deicing system for the wing and tail surfaces, other than a leading edge pneumatic boot ? What about the "main," large upper surfaces ? How in general is wing de-icing accomplished on these new, modern jets ? Thanks, Bob There's a very good chance the Boston crash might have been tailplane icing. DH To explain the erratic flight behavior? It's just a guess, but yes. I viewed a NASA film only this morning on this issue. The key if correct would be that whatever happened happened immediately after they went to 15 degrees of flaps. That would have increased the aoa on the tail surface leading edge. That leading edge is sharper than the wing leading edge and very susceptible to icing. Assuming the boundary layer sep point was moving aft on the stabilizer already, when they lowered the flaps they could have easily exceeded the CLmax for the tail. Even if this theory is correct, I'd be looking for additional factors related to icing coupling to cause the autorotation they seemed to have entered prior to impact. It's all theory anyway. The NTSB will come up with something as they progress with the investigation. DH Maybe a silly notion/question buuuut...if this (pitching/roll -this from new reports as of 2/16) had occurred at a higher altitude, 7000 ft say, would the plane have entered a 'flat' spin? *Was the impact indicative of such? Difficult to say. I'm far from being the expert on transport aircraft. My understanding is that if, and that is still a big IF, tailplane icing was involved in the Buffalo accident, it was the lowering of the flaps and the cfg change to the wing increasing the aoa on the tail that was the factor actually taking them into stall. If that was the cause, the actual breaking of the stall caused by the ice on various leading edges could very well have taken them into uncontrolled auto rotation. For that to happen, yaw had to be present at the stall. The scenario above assumes low altitude due to the flap extension factor. At this stage in any accident investigation, it's always conjecture. Already however, the seldom discussed issue of tailplane icing is getting a lot of attention throughout the entire aviation community and that alone is good for flight safety. The NTSB investigation will provide the answer I'm sure. Dudley Henriques |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wing walk ply question. | Mustardbuilder | Home Built | 20 | January 28th 07 10:16 AM |
Rotor-wing question | D. Andrews | Rotorcraft | 8 | October 2nd 05 11:43 AM |
Folded wing tip question | a425couple | Naval Aviation | 35 | May 12th 05 11:40 PM |
Spitfire Mk XIV Wing Question | [email protected] | Military Aviation | 3 | September 19th 03 09:54 AM |
Discus Wing question | John Galloway | Soaring | 6 | August 23rd 03 07:52 AM |