Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Close Similarities With AA DC-10 Crash!  
User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 688 times:


Hi!

Once again we have another terrible crash, also AA is involved, it's an incredible time for American I presume. I've been screening carefully the latest news and more and more I feel that I've seen this "movie" years ago, in 1979 AA lost a DC-10-10 just after take-off from Chicago, also the engine Nº 3 left the plane and the same plane plumged down killing all on board, now we have something similar, also it's quite interesting to know that yesterday the plane came out from the maintenance, anything wrong happened today that might been caused by the stop of the plane? Could be! Also about communications, if we look to what occured in 1979 the only thing it could ear in the CVR was the word " Damn " said by the pilot, I don't think we will ear much more than that in this one!
regards

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKottan From Switzerland, joined Jan 2000, 66 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 528 times:

Well, that might be one aspect of the similarity. Another one which struck my mind was the following: Both planes with one engine on each of its wing turned uncontrollably to either left or right after losing an engine (if it turns also out to be losing an engine here...). No chance to recover the plane by the flight crew.
How would a four engined aircraft 'react' on losing one engine? Would it be easier in keeping the aircraft on track - as there still is some power on the wing produced by the still working engine?

Can someone answer this question?

Kottan


User currently offlineLZ-TLT From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (12 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 506 times:

I doubt the crew of a four-engined aircraft would have far more chances to recover. Just remember the El Al 747 which crashed in Amsterdam some years ago. They also suffered an engine separation on takeoff, tried to return to the airport and lost control during the final approach(apparently due to damages caused by the initial separation of the engine)

User currently offlineAS737900 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 343 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (12 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 506 times:

It is possible to return after physically losing an engine on takeoff. It happened in ANC in 1993... Click Here

User currently offlinePalebird From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 459 times:

GE CF6 engines have a habit of shedding blades. GE acknowledges that there may be a problem but that is as far as it goes. I often wonder if GE is just so big that the FAA are hampered in their ability to lay any major AD's on them. There have been more than a few uncontained failures of the CF6 and no real 100% action by the FAA.

User currently offlineLax From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2290 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (12 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 438 times:

Yes, I remember 05/25/79 very well. Terrible tragedy in Chicago, with 273 dead.

The parallels between today's A300 crash and AA 191 are certainly there, including nearly the same number of fatalities [looks like 255 today, plus ? on the ground].

Both planes were from American Airlines and each lost an engine shortly after takeoff.

Geez ..... I hope this 11/12/01 disaster is the last one for a LONG time to come!!

-------------------------------------

Chilling pic of AA 191 Heavy going down ........