C4 - The Plane Crash
Discussion
Otispunkmeyer said:
Just wondering actually.... the chase plane isn't quite fast enough. What if, once the pilots had bailed, the speed of the 727 crept up a little? then flew slightly out of the poor range of the radio controllers? What was their contingency for that? Lol an aircraft full of dummies flying in a straight line over america... would of been interesting!
The flight plan was in line of a mountain if that happened.Zad said:
In theory they should detach on contact and be left behind as the rest of the plane continues on. In reality though, they rarely seem to do that. You can see why early jetliners favoured tail-mounted engines. They have their problems, but in this instance it seems they were a pretty good choice.
In a water landing they seem like they would act like massive buckets! Hopefully they would rip off but I remember that one crash were they were taken over by terrorists and the pilot ditched it in the sea near an island, one engine clipped into the water before the other and the whole plane seemed to just turn to confetti.Eric Mc said:
I can think of very few accidents - even accidents that happened during the landing phase - that were caused by an exceessive rate of decent AND with the undercarriage lowered at the same time.
Then you don't think enough.British Midland Kegworth, Turkish Schipol, Eastern Airlines JFK, FedEx Narita, PIA Kathmandu, Delta DFW, United Sioux City and those are just the ones I can recall from memory & just in the past twenty years. In other words, p
s off Eric.
miniman said:
The remote control setup seemed extraordinarily crude - surely they would have had cameras giving a pilots eye view along with some telemetry? And frankly the lack of a chase plane that could keep up made this look more like a drama than a documentary.
I posted a reply to this earlier, but it doesn't seem to be showing up. I read some answers the pilot operating the remote control gave about it, and he said that the reason for the simple system was mainly due to limitations in getting it certified to fly.Otispunkmeyer said:
I remember that one crash were they were taken over by terrorists and the pilot ditched it in the sea near an island, one engine clipped into the water before the other and the whole plane seemed to just turn to confetti.
Comoros Islands hijack - it was port wingtip IIRC. Due to dumbass hijackers trying to take control from the pilot at the last moment (as well as thinking it had enough fuel to fly to Australia). DOH!An interesting programme but survivability is still frankly a crapshoot.
The 727 has a nice smooth underbelly unlike more modern airliners with low slung engines, the desert sand probably snuffed out sparks which would create a fire had they come down on concrete and a pilot at the controls would have not landed nose first, possibly keeping the hull intact. Too many factors, too many variables to reach a conclusion methinks.
The 727 has a nice smooth underbelly unlike more modern airliners with low slung engines, the desert sand probably snuffed out sparks which would create a fire had they come down on concrete and a pilot at the controls would have not landed nose first, possibly keeping the hull intact. Too many factors, too many variables to reach a conclusion methinks.
Simpo Two said:
Comoros Islands hijack - it was port wingtip IIRC. Due to dumbass hijackers trying to take control from the pilot at the last moment (as well as thinking it had enough fuel to fly to Australia). DOH!
Ethiopian 767http://youtu.be/AvtYtvd5x60
Didn't quite get details of distances but...
They landed a bit short, 1/2 mile or so maybe, if they had lost connection between the plane the
distance off target could have been more. The emergency crews/ fire tenders/ TV vans/ support
vehicles etc looked to be parked up as one large mass...... or Bullseye as it could have been..
They landed a bit short, 1/2 mile or so maybe, if they had lost connection between the plane the
distance off target could have been more. The emergency crews/ fire tenders/ TV vans/ support
vehicles etc looked to be parked up as one large mass...... or Bullseye as it could have been..
Justin Cyder said:
Eric Mc said:
I can think of very few accidents - even accidents that happened during the landing phase - that were caused by an exceessive rate of decent AND with the undercarriage lowered at the same time.
Then you don't think enough.British Midland Kegworth, Turkish Schipol, Eastern Airlines JFK, FedEx Narita, PIA Kathmandu, Delta DFW, United Sioux City and those are just the ones I can recall from memory & just in the past twenty years. In other words, p
s off Eric.20 years you say -
Sioux City 1989 - 23 years
Kegworth - 1988 - 24 years
Delta Fort Worth - 1985 - 27 years
And I'm pretty sure the Eastern Airlines 727 accidnt must at least 30 years old
All very different accidents.
Watched part of it last night and there were a few relevant points about the 727 and chase plane. Firstly the 727 is pretty much how airliners are built still. Getting a 787 or A380 just might prove difficult. It also is relatively small so would not make that big a mess to clear up. It's also easy to get out of due to the rear stairwell that was built in as part of the brief of going into small lightly manned airports. The downsides are obviously that it's engine configuration is only used on small airliners these days so the effect of the engines hitting is not recorded. On the upside they do get "clean" info on the impact. I have to say that even counting the number of them in service the number of accidents involving 737's isn't comforting. Perhaps it's done to the era they were designed in. L1011's and MD-10's seem to be equally vulnerable. The chase plane used was a backup as the Machetti they were intending to use developed a fault in the fuel pump. With a Max speed of 230ish knots that would have been ok to keep up the Cessna 337 was struggling at 170 Knots.
Edited by telecat on Friday 12th October 08:57
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff