PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - munich incident
Thread: munich incident
View Single Post
Old 9th Jan 2004, 03:04
  #55 (permalink)  
Dagger Dirk
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Bechuanaland
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Saw this on another forum.
Does it sound copacetic? Is there a load control valve that cycles the bleed air loads around the various services - and is it electrically operated (sequenced)? Don't know this airplane at all meself.

<<<IMHO the ice impact trays are a symptom (and not the cause). The cause is more likely to be similar (but not the same) to Air Florida's 737 predicament (false EPR generated by icing-over of the P2 probes in both engines). In Air Florida's case they had the power but a misleading false indication. In the F-70 accident it's likely that:

a. Icing over of P1 or P2 air sensors might have caused a very low idle, and robbed the Tay engines of their acceleration - or more likely

b. the load control valve for the wing/tail anti-ice system stuck (instead of cycling) and allowed too much bleed air to be sucked away - thus robbing the engine inlet intake anti-icing of heat (which in turn would have allowed a build-up/choking of the engine intakes in the severe icing conditions - generated a low idle RPM and denied acceleration to a higher RPM).

Similar to the BAe146 rollback except that here the Tays were being denied intake lip hot air and so were choking up with ice (as well as being excessively robbed of bleed air). If it had been just one engine that got stuck at idle you'd think that a bleed-air valve had stuck open. But with both engines, you have to look at a common fault condition - and that's why I mention the in-fuselage load control valve that apportions air (and cycles it between all the pneumatic services).>>>
Dagger Dirk is offline