Hansie Bloeckmann
Senior Airman
Just a SWAG here, but wind shear seems likely- pilot skillset is the only "trump card" you can play in a scenario like you described. Glad you came out of OK.. Hansie
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Just a SWAG here, but wind shear seems likely- pilot skillset is the only "trump card" you can play in a scenario like you described. Glad you came out of OK.. HansieI wish I knew the name of the small commuter jet I flew from LA to Tuscon in. During the landing and still several thousand feet up, the aircraft leaned hard to the right and then all of a sudden it violently went the opposite way, almost standing on the left wing. Personal effects went everywhere, lots of screaming and my first thought was "I've seen enough Mayday episodes to know where this is going.......lawn dart". To you guys that know about this sort of thing, did the aircraft stall out or something similar to wind shear?
Always the case with any Beech freighter, from the Twin Bonanza right up to the 1900. In passenger service we never used them, but if you had to send a mech in the aft baggage to service the outflow valves, you damn well better have it in place.1900's are notoriously tail heavy. Everytime we brought them in the hangar, tail stand was the first thing to go on.
Testing engines to destruction- expensive, yesiree> Almost sounds like the quote from Vietnam - "In order to save the village, we had to destroy it completely"". A real "Catch-22" scenario-Well I read the report and found that the ice slab, hailstone and bird ingestion testing was not performed on the CF6-50 for certification, as the tests done on the CF6-6 were deemed adequate, and the fan designs were similar. (As Swampyankee had said) There was no discussion of the details of the ingestion testing for certification, but lengthy reports on the post mortem testing of the -50 to determine the sequence of the failure. It seems they tested several engines to destruction before they were done, a pretty expensive process, if you ask me.
Cheers,
Wes
If you're over the Rockies where there's some bodacious wave and rotor currents and you forgot to turn Stab Aug on, you could get a ferocious Dutch roll that would feel like you described.Just a SWAG here, but wind shear seems likely- pilot skillset is the only "trump card" you can play in a scenario like you described. Glad you came out of OK.. Hansie
Don't know the Rockies all that well, being a "flat lander" from the Midwest- but those wave and rotor currents you detailed- part of the Chinnook wind vectors in that area?? Year around, or seasonal?? HansieIf you're over the Rockies where there's some bodacious wave and rotor currents and you forgot to turn Stab Aug on, you could get a ferocious Dutch roll that would feel like you described.
Cheers,
Wes
Wave, rotor, Chinook: they're all facets of the foehn wind phenomenon which occurs to a greater or lesser extent whenever wind blows over a terrain obstacle such as a mountain or mountain chain. Ask any glider pilot; wave lift is the Holy Grail of soaring. I've been to 17K in a frumpy old SG 2-33 trainer in the wave off the Green Mountains of Vermont, which are barely 4K tall.Don't know the Rockies all that well, being a "flat lander" from the Midwest- but those wave and rotor currents you detailed- part of the Chinnook wind vectors in that area?? Year around, or seasonal?? Hansie
Thanks XBE- and also for giving me the correct spelling of Chinook- I put an extra "n" in my post. Would wind and wave lift have an effect on the WW11 ETO tower gliders the Airborne units used 1944-1945. I believe the gliders carried about 16 troops plus their weapons and gear-not 100% sure. If that is the case, I wonder how they factored for that in their training flights Stateside??? HansieWave, rotor, Chinook: they're all facets of the foehn wind phenomenon which occurs to a greater or lesser extent whenever wind blows over a terrain obstacle such as a mountain or mountain chain. Ask any glider pilot; wave lift is the Holy Grail of soaring. I've been to 17K in a frumpy old SG 2-33 trainer in the wave off the Green Mountains of Vermont.
Think about where allied glider ops took place in WII. Pretty much all flat country. Not downwind of any major terrain obstacles. Your average assault glider was pretty much an express elevator to the ground floor and probably couldn't have taken advantage of wave even if it could find it. Their pilots weren't taught to soar but to get on the ground as expeditiously and safely as possible. Their release altitudes were generally too low to reach the bottom of any wave that may exist.Thanks XBE- and also for giving me the correct spelling of Chinook- I put an extra "n" in my post. Would wind and wave lift have an effect on the WW11 ETO tower gliders the Airborne units used 1944-1945. I believe the gliders carried about 16 troops plus their weapons and gear-not 100% sure. If that is the case, I wonder how they factored for that in their training flights Stateside??? Hansie
Which is why we are (finally!) seeing the incorporation of such things as cognitive psychology, ergonomic factors, and circadian sleep science into accident investigation.
I hope he does go "Belly-up"!! What a putz!!
Always the case with any Beech freighter, from the Twin Bonanza right up to the 1900. In passenger service we never used them, but if you had to send a mech in the aft baggage to service the outflow valves, you damn well better have it in place.
Cheers,
Wes
Now just imagine, standing on the airstair door, no tail stand, 18 passengers stooping over in the aisle all falling backward when the plane starts to tip, baggage door open, compartment stuffed full and two husky baggage smashers have just hopped up inside. It did a number on the tail skeg and wrecked the baggage door against the top of the bag cart.Anyhow as soon as we were back there, the tail started to fall. Fortunately we had the tail stand on. Still scared the shit out of me!
I spent two years working as a night airline mechanic 1930-0530 four (non consecutive) nights a week. At least those were the official hours. As low man on the totem pole and "permanent nigger" (What's a PILOT doing here??) I had to come in early and tow the planes down from the terminal and stay late to deliver them to the gate in the morning. Add to that a one hour commute each way, into the setting sun in the evening, then rising sun in the morning and I was a permanent zombie. "Ask the mechanics who serviced your plane last night how much sleep they got yesterday!" Thirty five years later my sleep patterns are still screwed up.Working night shift (18:30 to 05:30 hours -
Now just imagine, standing on the airstair door, no tail stand, 18 passengers stooping over in the aisle all falling backward when the plane starts to tip, baggage door open, compartment stuffed full and two husky baggage smashers have just hopped up inside. It did a number on the tail skeg and wrecked the baggage door against the top of the bag cart.
That was deemed "substantial" damage, and there were passengers onboard, so the skipper and I each have an aircraft accident on our records, ending any hope of a job with the biggies. C'est la vie!
Cheers,
Wes
What is the cheapest option? Change the plane design or blame someone else?Damn, how is the aircraft design your fault?
What is the cheapest option? Change the plane design or blame someone else?
Who has more lobbyists? Un-unionized pilots or the ATA and Raytheon?What is the cheapest option? Change the plane design or blame someone else?
It wasn't the fault of aircraft design. It was the fault of 400 pounds of undocumented COMAT in the aftmost section of the baggage compartment, (including an illegal fully inflated F28 mainwheel tire) and an FO (me) who didn't include it in the W&B because he didn't catch it being sneaked onboard. (The old "knew OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN" clause again!) In the eyes of the FAA inspector who tried to violate us, we operated an unairworthy aircraft in air carrier passenger service by means of a deceptive (can you spell "pencil-whipped"?) weight and balance form, thus endangering everyone concerned.Damn, how is the aircraft design your fault?
It wasn't the fault of aircraft design. It was the fault of 400 lbs of unrecorded COMAT in the aftmost section of the baggage compartment, (including an illegal fully inflated F28 mainwheel tire) and an FO (me) who didn't include it in the W&B because he didn't catch it being sneaked onboard. (The old "knew OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN" clause again!) In the eyes of the FAA inspector who tried to violate be us, we operated an unairworthy aircraft in air carrier passenger service by means of a deceptive (can you spell "pencil-whipped"?) weight and balance form, thus endangering everyone concerned.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, his boss quashed the violation once he became aware we were misinformed about the load, as he knew it would go to appeal and his office would lose.
Doesn't change the fact that there were passengers aboard with the intention of flight, there was "substantial" damage, and one of the baggage smashers scraped his hand when he was pitched out of the bag compartment and into the cart (and the inspector bruised his ego), so there were injuries. By the FAA's arcane rules, that's what it took to upgrade an incident to an accident. During my seven years with the commuter, there were five legally defined accidents, all on the ground, none involving passenger or flight crew injuries, and only one that could be called serious. But they all went on the flight crews' FAA records as aircraft accidents. In one case one rampie backed a pickup into another, slamming him against the aircraft and breaking his back, with passengers and crew aboard, and two promising young pilots who already had interviews scheduled with major airlines had their career aspirations scuttled.
Cheers,
Wes
This was at a time when society was becoming rapidly more litigious and liability conscious, the media more aggressively investigative, and airlines more sensitive to the potential legal ramifications of employees with questionable backgrounds. Victims lawyers had become adept at wringing additional millions out of the courts in cases where a pilot or mechanic had a single accident or test failure in their history.Ah, I get the situation now...
Makes me wonder, as a "Monday morning quarterback"-- back in 1903, if Will and Orville had realized all this, if they might have said: "Screw this Kitty Hawk stuff, let's haul ass back to Dayton and build more bicycles instead."This was at a time when society was becoming rapidly more litigious and liability conscious, the media more aggressively investigative, and airlines more sensitive to the potential legal ramifications of employees with questionable backgrounds. Victims lawyers had become adept at wringing additional millions out of the courts in cases where a pilot or mechanic had a single accident or test failure in their history.
Cheers,
Wes