If I recall the story correctly it was an FAA pilot in the left seat and a McD pilot in the right, and they came down a too high a "sink rate". Happened at EDW, IIRC...
Although the aircraft was repaired, I don't think it ever saw revenue service with an airline, and stayed with McD and was their demo aircraft for the unducted fan (UDF) engine... Scrapped in Sherman, Texas some years ago...
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 26632 times:
Quoting United787 (Reply 5): That is scary, did you see the flex that was put on that aircraft after the tail fell off?
Shortly after this happened, I ended up at Air Florida, as did a former McD person, and we shared a crashpad near MIA with some other guys. He told us all about the incident, and that it had been videotaped. (When the video clip hit the net a couple of years ago, I'd been waiting to see it for 20+ years). He said after the pilots got it stopped, they were quite surprised to look back and see daylight out the back end....
Vzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 839 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 23133 times:
I'm impressed that the plane is responsive enough to halt that high a rate of descent in less than 50 feet (as detailed in the NTSB report CitationJet mentioned):
"The analysis of the go-around capability showed that if the go-around had been started at 50 feet it would have been completed successfully. During the engineering analysis, as the aircraft descended through 50 feet, the go-around was initiated with a 13.8' TEU elevator deflection followed 0.5 seconds later by the application of go-around thrust. With the elevators held at the position noted above, the aircraft rotated to a 11.8' noseup pitch attitude. The data showed that the aircraft would have descended 43 feet during the maneuver and cleared the runway by 7 feet.
During the DC-9-80 landing performance tests, a test pilot had made an actual go-around from 50 feet because of an excessive rate of descent (912 fpm) at that height. The aircraft was in the 40' flap landing configuration, its landing weight was 124,030 pounds, Vref was 128 KIAS, and the engine EPR's were 1.28 when the pilot began the go-around. At 50 feet, the pilot applied up-elevator and the elevators were deflected to 10 TEU. About 0.5 seconds after the elevator input, the thrust was increased to the go-around thrust, and the aircraft was rotated to a 8' noseup pitch attitude. Comparison of these data with the data derived in the go-around analysis above showed that the test aircraft's engines' thrust was slightly higher at the beginning of the maneuver. The elevator deflection on the test aircraft was the same as that used for the analysis; however, its noseup pitch attitude was 3.8' lower. During the actual go-around, the test aircraft descended 45 feet and it cleared the runway by about 5 feet. The data derived from the actual maneuver in conjunction with the data derived from the engineering analysis indicated that a successful go-around could have been made on the accident approach if the pilot had begun the maneuver at 50 feet."
"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
: Why was the nose gear sparking? Were the struts flexing so much that they made contact with something they weren't supposed to? It almost appears as i
: The plane seemed to be alright after it had landed even after it had lost the tail e.g. it did not crash or set on fire.
: There also was a buckle on top of the fuselege just behind the pax loading door. Those photos were published in Aviation Week a few days after the inc
: I would love to see those. I am surprised the tail fell off, afterall I have had numerous landings worse than that on my flight stimulator and seemed
: lololol...oh how true. That's the best thing about flight sims. Being able to do things that you know what the outcome is before doing them and then
: Yeah, the ground around KGRR in my edition of FS9 is littered with craters...good times though...
: From the report: "The aircraft landed very hard, and as a result, the nose fell through and the nose wheel tires blew out." /Brian