![]() |
| 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 |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kingfish wrote:
No stick shaker in a DC-10? I find that hard to believe, I thought all transport category jets built in the last 35 years had that system, but I'm not a jet pilot. Actually, one stick shaker came standard on the aircraft, the other one was an option... AA did not choose to avail themselves of that option though... When Flight 191 lost the left engine, it also lost the generator that provided electrical power to the stick shaker... The loss of the engine also took out both sets of hydraulic lines in the left wing... The slats retracted upon loss of hydraulic fuel in those lines... Procedures at that time were to go to V2, even if they were above V2 at that time... In this incident, they were already above V2... If they had stayed there, they would have most likely been able to land the plane safely... Slowing to V2 caused the left wing to stall, but the right wing did not due to the slats still being extended on it... Of course, it goes into a roll to the left and impacts the ground with significant force... Typical 3 links in the chain of events leading up to the accident... 1 -- Maintenance problems with the AA mechanics who used a procedure to change the engines on the aircraft that was not only not approved by the aircraft manufacturer, but the manufacturer had explicitly told them that they shouldn't be using... 2 -- No stick shaker on the other yoke... If they had known that they were starting to stall as they decreased to V2, they could have increased their speed and kept it from stalling and the roll developing... 3 -- Incorrect emergency procedures... Subsequent revisions to the emergency procedures said that if you are already above V2, don't decrease your speed... I don't know that it IS possible to fly that plane with a missing wing engine considering there was probably a major hydraulic system failure when the engine tore off its mounts. Countering the asymmetric thrust condition without rudder would make that impossible I'd think. Actually, it shouldn't be as bad as some aircraft since it has 3 engines and as such, the dissymmetry of thrust would not be as great... |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 03:26 PM |
| FLIGHT SIMULATOR X DELUXE 2006-2007 (SIMULATION) 1DVD,Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004, and Addons, FLITESTAR V8.51 - JEPPESEN, MapInfo StreetPro U.S.A. [11 CDs], Rand McNally StreetFinder & TripMaker Deluxe 2004 [3 CDs], other | T.E.L. | General Aviation | 0 | October 15th 06 12:38 AM |
| UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 07:58 PM |
| Parachute fails to save SR-22 | Capt.Doug | Piloting | 72 | February 10th 05 06:14 AM |
| FAA Investigates American Flyers | SFM | Instrument Flight Rules | 57 | November 7th 03 10:33 PM |