Spyderz From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 651 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2857 times:
Was onboard the airline shortly after in came back into service. Never flew on the aircraft though since after taxiing to the runway, one of the engines didn't power -up on the runway and we returned back to the gate. Created a 6-hour delay, but on the positive side it did enable me to fly a L1011-150. Guess they hadn't sorted out all the problems when I was back on it.
Sinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1583 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 2466 times:
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 2): Repaired... back in service. The airplane only suffered from a faulty fuel transfer pump and a landing gear fire during the dead-stick landing.
The Aircraft suffered from a ruptured main fule line. This was caused bu chaffing with a bleed line that was not installed properly. Also the aircraft was not "deadstick" as the RAT provides eletrical and hydraulic power for the basic critical systems.