Cruzinaltitude From United States of America, joined May 2004, 415 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 13819 times:
You have got to love a story that ends like that! Tearing down the runway. . . eh hem, I mean race track. Throwing up a show of sparks, race spectators diving for the grass. Does anyone besides myself think that this would make for a great movie!!!!
Eric From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 13594 times:
Didn't almost the exactly same happen to AirTrans A330 a couple a years ago with an emergency landing at the Azores? They had a cross-feeder problem and was gliding the plane for quite a long time. When landing it almost fell into the sea because of the short runway. The pilot was named pilot of the year. Saw it on National Geo.
There used to be a site which had several different photos of the AC 767 on the Gimli racetrack, but it doesn't seem to be active anymore.
I worked on Fin 604, when she was still in her red and white colors and have flown on her several times over the last 20 years. Every time I've stepped aboard 604, there is always a feeling that this aircraft is special. She survived disaster by miraculous fate, and still serves AC well today!
MissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 713 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12721 times:
The AC problem with the 767 was due to not taking on enough fuel in the first place. Canada & AC had just switched to metric & everyone involved had trouble converting pounds to kilos & litres to gallons. There was also a problem with the fuel gauges onboard so the figure was programmed into the FMC manually. Unfortunately, it was not correct. With both engines flamed out the only power was provided by the Ram Air Turbine. This only ran essential systems so the landing was made with no flaps & the alternate method was used for landing gear extension. They never got a locked indication on the nose gear, but going around wasn't exactly an option.
With the Transat 330 they had enough fuel but had a severe leak because of a mismatched part on one of the engines. The pilots then decided the problem was a computer malfuntion rather than a fuel leak (there were some strange error messages). But in both cases everyone made it home, unlike United 173.
I'd rather be lucky than good
Squigee From Canada, joined May 2001, 652 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (11 years 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12633 times:
If you are really interested, the Canadian Government held an inquiry into this incident and released a full report. It includes testimony from many involved parties and lots of background information on procedures involving the 767. It's actually very well written and quite an interesting read (for those into the material, of course.)
I read the copy here at the U of C library, but most Canadian universities and government archives (i.e. larger libraries) should have a copy of the official report in their keeping.
Since you're in Germany, I don't think you'll have as much luck, since the online records for reports only extends back to 1990.
This PDF is about as much info as I can find in electronic format, but it's a well written article:
N1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 28528 posts, RR: 74
Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12596 times:
>And I still can't figure out why the whole world can't use the metric system<
Canada does use the metric system, and did then. Boeing also uses the metric system (though both A and B use US Imperial as well). The 767 was actually the first commercial airplane introduced based on the metric system and that is what created the problem in the first place. The pilots were used to using pounds for fuel instead of liters, so they converted pounds to liters as opposed to kilos to liters. Hence, they only had half the fuel they needed.
Most Americans can do the conversion, especially pounds to kilos and liters to gallons (though that is usually too high because they use 4 to 1 as opposed to 3.68 to 1), though I still don't understand how Brits use stone all the time and cannot make the conversion to pounds (14 to 1)
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
MissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 713 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 11661 times:
If you want yet another link for the Air Transat investigation, http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/common/whats_new.asp then scoll down a bit.
Actually Flyabunch, in Canada we use Metric (speed & temperature), imperial (height & weight) & we measure distance in hours...all unofficial of course
David T From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 11589 times:
For Maddy's information: Being that you are not entirely familiar with the Gimli Glider, a humerous side note had the maintenace crew dispatched from YWG running out of gas while driving their crew van to Gimli.
Qblue From Canada, joined Jun 2004, 170 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (11 years 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10791 times:
I see AC C-GAUN and Air Transat C-GITS at YVR all the time. I wish they can be gated next to each other for a great photo of the two gliders. I don't think this will happen as GITS is used for International flights and GAUN in on the domestic run. I wonder if Air Transat station GITS west so not to bring memory of the incident out east.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 10654 times:
Re: I just don't understand why the whole world can't get used to pounds and inches .
I think the rest of the world is wondering why the Americans can't get used to the metric system which EVERYONE IN THE WORLD USES except them. Metric is SO EASY ! You get to divide by 10 not 12, or 14, or 16 - it's virtually idiotproof ! Come on people, catch up with the 21st century ! Switch to metric, maybe some day you'll actually get a spacecraft to land on Mars
Robsawatsky From Canada, joined Dec 2003, 597 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (11 years 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 10443 times:
"I just don't understand why the whole world can't get used to pounds and inches. Hell, even the Brits have abandoned the best system for that crazy metric system!
please excuse this ignorant comment"
Yeh, it is a bit ignorant because the Brits haven't totally abandoned the good 'ol Imperial system. They still use MPH on their roads not km/h. And the yanks can't get onboard with either system, using different sized gallons than the English variant.
But, back on topic - what the Gimli accident shows is what happens when systems of measurement are mixed.
I still can't get a feel for fuel economy expressed in litres/100 km - give me MPG any day (Imperial size please).
Crazyboi From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 155 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (11 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 10357 times:
Question - in the Gimli TV movie, I seem to recall that they really dramatized the lowering of the RAT. It didn't work, it didn't work, it was their only hope, etc. I think that they may have even rolled the aircraft gently (in the way that you'd try to lock the main gear) to try and lock it in place.
Did this RAT problem really happen or is it just another example of Hollywood sensationalism?
This is the time. And this is the record of the time.