Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Michael Chrichton's AA DC10 Crash Analysis  
User currently offlineRooinc From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 123 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1590 times:

Was just rereading Airframe and wondered how accurate the explanation of the AA DC10 crash in Chicago was. He made it sound like the plane was perfectly fly-able after the engine fell off, only AA hadn't ordered an optional redundancy control for the first officer (or engineer?). Any truth to it?

--TJ

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1548 times:

What does the FAA or NTSB say?
I would not believe a novel (however good) or movie to give correct assessments of a situation. The plot is more important than the truth.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineIahcsr From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 3406 posts, RR: 42
Reply 2, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1513 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This is true....more or less. The safety item in question is the stall warning (or lack there of) on the F.O.'s side. AA only had this 'stick shaker' system installed on the Captain's yoke... the side that lost all power when the #1 engine departed the aircraft. Had the crew had this warning of the pending stall of the left wing, they would have known to increse airspeed and ...perhaps.. have survived the event.


Working very hard to Fly Right....
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1501 times:

haven't read the book. At what altitude did this happen? If it was low, the dipping of the opposite wing after loosing counterweight due to the (physical) loss of an engine would have been impossible to correct (as was shown at AMS when an ElAl Cargo 742 lost both engines on one wing).


I wish I were flying
User currently offlineJunior From Switzerland, joined Apr 2001, 43 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1497 times:

It happened right after take-off. The aircraft rolled over the left wing (the one without an engine), as the departing powerplant took away a great deal of slats aswell, resulting in a loss of lift on that wing.

User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1484 times:

Then they would not have made it. Applying more power to the remaining engine would only have caused the right wing to accellerate more, thus causing an even greater difference in lift (as well as asymetrical power, which might have been uncorrectable given the loss of controlsurfaces on the opposite wing).


I wish I were flying
User currently offlineBLACK BOX From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1482 times:

Last I heard DC10s had 3 engines, Iahcsr is spot on, had the crew been given enough warning the situation was recoverable.



User currently offlineLuckySevens From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1476 times:

3 engines? 4 engines? 2 engines? BLACK BOX, in order to do commercial service, an airliner MUST be able to fly AND lift off from V1 with one engine out. It doesn't matter the number of total engines on the craft.

The problem was that when the engine left the wing, it severed hydraulics lines on that wing. That caused all the slats/flaps on that wing ONLY to retract. The left wing entered a stall and the plane began to roll. The crew then found themselves in a unique situation that they had never trained for; this event even suprised MDC, as they did not design slat/flap locks into the DC10 until after this accident. Giving more power to the engines would only have compounded this problem.

If this occurred at cruise AND the wings were clean AND it did not take all three hydraulics systems with it, this should have been survivable.


User currently offlineBLACK BOX From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1426 times:

OK LuckySevens - you are correct, I was over-simplistic and too broad in my reply.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
ID Plane In '79 AA DC10 Crash posted Sat May 26 2001 18:32:47 by Jtb106
AA A300 Crash On National Geographic Tonight. posted Thu Sep 7 2006 02:38:48 by JAM747
Arrow Cargo DC10 Crash In June. posted Wed Aug 9 2006 00:35:33 by Bennett123
Sioux DC10 Crash Not Due To Hydraulic Failure? posted Mon Jan 9 2006 14:48:30 by Cedarjet
AA 587 Crash 3 Years Ago posted Thu Nov 11 2004 22:27:25 by Ltbewr
TV Documentary On AA 1420 Crash @ Little Rock posted Thu Jun 10 2004 04:56:24 by MCOtoATL
25 Years Ago Today AA 191 Crash posted Tue May 25 2004 22:48:15 by ArmitageShanks
Centurion DC10 Crash posted Thu Apr 29 2004 06:12:25 by Komododx
New Theory In AA 587 Crash? posted Tue Dec 9 2003 21:05:39 by Galvanair777
AA #587 Crash, Any Update Info On This Crash Yet? posted Thu Sep 12 2002 04:07:37 by Bobcat