Hudson River Opportunity

His name was Arland D. Williams, Jr. Here's a Wiki write-up about
him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arland_D._Williams_Jr. It mentions
that the Time article was written before Arland's identity was known.

-John


On Jan 18, 12:05 am, brtlmj wrote:

Another hero, "the man in the water":http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...925257,00.html

B.

That accident was attributed to Pilot error as I remember.

Tried to take off with snow or frost or ice on wings.

Big John

************************************************** ****************



On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 05:40:05 -0800 (PST), jcarlyle
wrote:

His name was Arland D. Williams, Jr. Here's a Wiki write-up about
him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arland_D._Williams_Jr. It mentions
that the Time article was written before Arland's identity was known.

-John


On Jan 18, 12:05 am, brtlmj wrote:

Another hero, "the man in the water":http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...925257,00.html

B.

On Jan 18, 1:16*pm, Tech Support wrote:
That accident was attributed to Pilot error as I remember.
Tried to take off with snow or frost or ice on wings.

Icing in the engines disabled some sensors, and the pilots thought
they were developing much higher power than they really did. I recall
reading that the accident was avoidable - had they recognized what was
wrong and pushed the throttles forward...

B.

brtlmj wrote:
On Jan 18, 1:16 pm, Tech Support wrote:
That accident was attributed to Pilot error as I remember.
Tried to take off with snow or frost or ice on wings.

Icing in the engines disabled some sensors, and the pilots thought
they were developing much higher power than they really did. I recall
reading that the accident was avoidable - had they recognized what was
wrong and pushed the throttles forward...

Shouldn't they have fire-walled the throttles regardless? I remember
reading about a Shorts driver, caught in a micro-burst, who did just
that - mandating an expensive engine hot section teardown. At the
"inquest" he was asked why he run his engines up to 120% of their rated
power. His answer was "I couldn't get any more".

Getting back to the Air Florida crash, the NTSB, when listening to the
cockpit voice recorder, immediately knew that the engines were not
producing enough power simply by the sound.

Tony V.

Tony

You are probably right. Was a long time ago.

Think there was some discussion about snow or something on wing (long
time holding after de-ice) and power setting pilot used and
combination caused bird to not fly off normally in the snow storm on
R/W length available?

Is it just the American way for someone to risk his life to save
individuals involved in any kind of a catastrophe?

Big John
Big John



On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 10:51:31 -0500, TonyV
wrote:

brtlmj wrote:
On Jan 18, 1:16 pm, Tech Support wrote:
That accident was attributed to Pilot error as I remember.
Tried to take off with snow or frost or ice on wings.

Icing in the engines disabled some sensors, and the pilots thought
they were developing much higher power than they really did. I recall
reading that the accident was avoidable - had they recognized what was
wrong and pushed the throttles forward...

Shouldn't they have fire-walled the throttles regardless? I remember
reading about a Shorts driver, caught in a micro-burst, who did just
that - mandating an expensive engine hot section teardown. At the
"inquest" he was asked why he run his engines up to 120% of their rated
power. His answer was "I couldn't get any more".

Getting back to the Air Florida crash, the NTSB, when listening to the
cockpit voice recorder, immediately knew that the engines were not
producing enough power simply by the sound.

Tony V.

TonyV wrote:

(Air Florida accident)
Icing in the engines disabled some sensors, and the pilots thought
they were developing much higher power than they really did. I recall
reading that the accident was avoidable - had they recognized what was
wrong and pushed the throttles forward...

I read that report not long ago, so I happen to remember the details:

Mistake 1: They used reverse thrust for push-back on ground. This was
against a clear company policy. Doing so, they sucked a lot of snow into
the engines.

Mistake 2: They forgot to engage the de-ice system of the engines. This
resulted in clogged probes, resulting in wrong power readings. (The
instruments showed much more power than the engines actually delivered.)

Mistake 3: The copilot realized during the take-off run that there was
not enough power. The captain ignored his warnings and continued the
take-off. He also ignored the fact that the take-off run needed 800
meters more than expected.