KC-767 ????

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:
Ron Parsons wrote:

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:

Keith Willshaw wrote:

"David Lesher" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:



Thrust bearing? The only major DC-10 crash I can recall at Chicago was
in
1979 and was due to faulty maintenance procedures.

Turkish Airways....


In France not Chicago and a result of a failed cargo door IRC

Keith

Correct on both counts.

Although why MD chose not to fit pressure blowout valves is a mystery.. The
cargo compartment de-pressurised and brought the pax floor down onto the
control lines. From then on it was uncontrollable.

This happened over Windsor,Ontario as the aircraft climbed out of DTW.
It should have been uncontrollable, but for Capt. McCormick who brought
it back missing only the coffin which had shifted in turbulence and hit
the door enough for it to pop open.

I hadn't heard of that additional one - do you have a cite / flight number ?

There's a short description of the incident (American Airlines flight 96,
near Windsor, Ontario on 12 June 1972) at

http://aviation-safety.net/database/1972/720612-0.htm

Every account I've seen blames this on the cargo door latch mechanism,
not on shifting cargo. It's true that a casket that was in the cargo
compartment went out the rear door as the aircraft depressurized, but
that wasn't the cause.

The cabin floor over the bulk cargo compartment partially collapsed,
damaging the elevator and rudder control cables which ran under the
floor and causing loss of throttle control to the number 2 engine.
The crew had no rudder and only limited elevator control, but managed
to land the aircraft successfully at Detroit Metro.

This is essentially the same thing that happened to the Turkish
Airlines DC-10 near Paris -- the difference was that the seating
density in the Turkish aircraft was higher (the American DC-10 had
a "piano bar" lounge area in the rear of the cabin), and the added
weight on the cabin floor made the collapse worse, leaving the crew
with no elevator control at all.


ljd

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:
Keith Willshaw wrote:

I've heard that was effectively maintenance too. 747s have had problems
with the latching mechanisms on the front cargo door too ( UA811 ).

While there were indeed maintenance problems, specifically adjustmens
to the lock limit warning switches were made incorrectly there
were also a number of design faults. [in the DC-10 cargo door]

But wasn't UA811 very similar ?

In that case IIRC - the over-cam lock didn't work as advertised.

That was the NTSB's original conclusion, but they reopened the
investigation into UA 811 when the missing cargo door was
recovered from the bottom of the Pacific by the U.S. Navy
18 months after the accident.

The revised probable cause was that a faulty switch or a wiring
problem had caused the electrically actuated door latches to move
partway towards the unlatched position after the door was closed
but before takeoff.

The original NTSB report (AAR-90/01) can be found at the Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical University library web site at:

http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/nt.../AAR-90-01.pdf

and the 1992 report which supersedes AAR-90/01 at:

http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/nt.../AAR-92-02.pdf



ljd

In article , John
Mullen writes
Might have been a good idea to fix this issue when the Windsor incident took
place a few months before, hundreds of lives could have been saved...

IIRC the Turkish ship was on the line when the Windsor incident took
place and missed the modification. It was then in line for it but the
accident happened before it was fixed. Or something like that, haven't
the exact details to hand.

--
John

In article , Pooh Bear rabbitsfriendsand
writes
Keith was referring to the British Airtours 737 that 'blew' a combustion
chamber on a JT8D ? on an old 737. Failure to evacuate the a/c quickly
contributed very significantly to the death toll.

It's not as simple as that, the investigation found serious problems
with the layout which hampered a quick evacuation, particularly the
width of the aisle as it passed through the forward galley IIRC.

That and one front door took about a minute to open, which didn't leave
passengers with many doors. The rear two were in the fire and I think
only the port over wing exit and starboard front door were accessible
until very late in the evacuation.

--
John

John Halliwell wrote:

In article , Pooh Bear rabbitsfriendsand
writes
Keith was referring to the British Airtours 737 that 'blew' a combustion
chamber on a JT8D ? on an old 737. Failure to evacuate the a/c quickly
contributed very significantly to the death toll.

It's not as simple as that, the investigation found serious problems
with the layout which hampered a quick evacuation, particularly the
width of the aisle as it passed through the forward galley IIRC.

That and one front door took about a minute to open, which didn't leave
passengers with many doors. The rear two were in the fire and I think
only the port over wing exit and starboard front door were accessible
until very late in the evacuation.

--
John

Been a while since I read it up but certainly the port doors were no good
since that was the side of the fire.

Wasn't implying any negligence regarding evacuation - simply that it took too
long - hence the death toll.

Wasn't it this accident that led to the floor lighting for evacuation ?

Very definitely it raised the question of smoke hoods. To this day the CAA /
FAA insist on flotation collars in the event of downing in water - as if the
a/c would survive intact, yet deny the usefulness of smoke hoods. Curious
priorities.


Graham

Larry Doering wrote:

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:
Ron Parsons wrote:

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:

Keith Willshaw wrote:

"David Lesher" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:



Thrust bearing? The only major DC-10 crash I can recall at Chicago was
in
1979 and was due to faulty maintenance procedures.

Turkish Airways....


In France not Chicago and a result of a failed cargo door IRC

Keith

Correct on both counts.

Although why MD chose not to fit pressure blowout valves is a mystery.. The
cargo compartment de-pressurised and brought the pax floor down onto the
control lines. From then on it was uncontrollable.

This happened over Windsor,Ontario as the aircraft climbed out of DTW.
It should have been uncontrollable, but for Capt. McCormick who brought
it back missing only the coffin which had shifted in turbulence and hit
the door enough for it to pop open.

I hadn't heard of that additional one - do you have a cite / flight number ?

There's a short description of the incident (American Airlines flight 96,
near Windsor, Ontario on 12 June 1972) at

http://aviation-safety.net/database/1972/720612-0.htm

Every account I've seen blames this on the cargo door latch mechanism,
not on shifting cargo. It's true that a casket that was in the cargo
compartment went out the rear door as the aircraft depressurized, but
that wasn't the cause.

The cabin floor over the bulk cargo compartment partially collapsed,
damaging the elevator and rudder control cables which ran under the
floor and causing loss of throttle control to the number 2 engine.
The crew had no rudder and only limited elevator control, but managed
to land the aircraft successfully at Detroit Metro.

This is essentially the same thing that happened to the Turkish
Airlines DC-10 near Paris -- the difference was that the seating
density in the Turkish aircraft was higher (the American DC-10 had
a "piano bar" lounge area in the rear of the cabin), and the added
weight on the cabin floor made the collapse worse, leaving the crew
with no elevator control at all.

ljd

Yes, that makes perfect sense. They must have been damn lucky to land it. The
Turkish a/c was 'in the hands of God' once the cabin floor collapsed.

Still don't understand why pressure vents weren't installed. Anyone got an idea ?


Regds, Graham

Larry Doering wrote:

The original NTSB report (AAR-90/01) can be found at the Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical University library web site at:

http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/nt.../AAR-90-01.pdf

and the 1992 report which supersedes AAR-90/01 at:

http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/nt.../AAR-92-02.pdf

They seem to be dead links. Can you assist ?

Regds, Graham

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:

Ron Parsons wrote:

In article ,
Pooh Bear wrote:

Keith Willshaw wrote:

"David Lesher" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:



Thrust bearing? The only major DC-10 crash I can recall at Chicago was
in
1979 and was due to faulty maintenance procedures.

Turkish Airways....


In France not Chicago and a result of a failed cargo door IRC

Keith

Correct on both counts.

Although why MD chose not to fit pressure blowout valves is a mystery.. The
cargo compartment de-pressurised and brought the pax floor down onto the
control lines. From then on it was uncontrollable.

This happened over Windsor,Ontario as the aircraft climbed out of DTW.
It should have been uncontrollable, but for Capt. McCormick who brought
it back missing only the coffin which had shifted in turbulence and hit
the door enough for it to pop open.
--
Ron

I hadn't heard of that additional one - do you have a cite / flight number ?

Many thanks, PB



Don't recall the flight number, just knew the crew.

--
Ron

In article ,
(Larry Doering) wrote:

Every account I've seen blames this on the cargo door latch mechanism,
not on shifting cargo. It's true that a casket that was in the cargo
compartment went out the rear door as the aircraft depressurized, but
that wasn't the cause.

The latch design and poor quality control were the causes. The slight
bump from the shifting coffin was simply the last straw.


The cabin floor over the bulk cargo compartment partially collapsed,
damaging the elevator and rudder control cables which ran under the
floor and causing loss of throttle control to the number 2 engine.
The crew had no rudder and only limited elevator control, but managed
to land the aircraft successfully at Detroit Metro.

When the floor collapsed, there was on flight attendant left hanging in
the hole until rescued by others.

The aircraft type was new to service and both pilots had less than 50
hrs in type.

However, the captain had been unhappy with the all power, no manual
flight controls all the way through training. He spent many extra hours
in the simulator trying out various flight control and engine power
combinations to see what would work when something else didn't.

They had just departed DTW and elected to return there since they were
familiar with the current conditions which weren't all that good. As I
recall, it was about 300 3/4 with snow and a snow covered runway.

They did a complete flight controlability test while descending to
determine just what they could and couldn't do with the aircraft.

The rudder pedals were jammed with one full in and the other full out.
Only one elevator was working. Stabalizer trim was at half speed. #2
engine was stuck at 80% N1. Their only control of it was to shut it down
after touchdown.

Capt. McCormack went to his grave saying that he had failed because at
the end of the landing roll, the aircraft drifted off the runway and he
got mud on once set of tires.

But the reality is that at the time, there was only one pilot in the
world who could have flown that aircraft and he happened to be sitting
in it.


This is essentially the same thing that happened to the Turkish
Airlines DC-10 near Paris -- the difference was that the seating
density in the Turkish aircraft was higher (the American DC-10 had
a "piano bar" lounge area in the rear of the cabin), and the added
weight on the cabin floor made the collapse worse, leaving the crew
with no elevator control at all.

The Windsor incident had been kept pretty quiet. After the Turkish
aircraft went down, things got serious about the problem.

--
Ron

Ron Parsons writes:


As for AA191, was there not a finding that lack of an interlock
between slats contributed to the crash? Again, from memory, the
other two jumbos had interlocks, and/or redundant hydraulic|pneumatic
systems that the DC10 lacked

You have merged two separate incidents in your memory.

Windsor was cargo door. Chicago was pylon separation which resulted in
one slat retracting.

I have NOT merged them. Windsor & Turkish Airways was the cargo door
& {un}AD. 191 was the pylon/slats/interlock.

Both were lots of dead people and DC-10s. That's my overall point.

And was not 191 found survivable if not for the slats issue?

In case it was not clear from the closing paragraph of my previous
post; it's because of my [casual] relationship{s} with some victims
that I cross the street rather than take a -10.



--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433