For Jan Erik
TDG Aerospace manufactures the NOFOD anti-ice system for MD80 series aircraft. The system was designed to prevent ice from forming on the upper wing surface in above freezing temperatures where high humidity exists due to cold-soaked fuel in the wing tanks. SAS experienced a crash of an MD80 in 1991 that was caused by the ice on the upper wing surface being ingested by the rear engines. In the later part of the 90's, Reno Air fodded both engines on a flight out of Detroit_with the same problem. The Reno Air incident caused the NTSB to recommend_that the_FAA issue an AD on the problem. AD2002-21-06 was the final result.
_
The NOFOD system is called out in the AD. There are two of these systems installed on West Caribbean MD81's. The MD82 that crashed was an ex Continental that had the Honeywell system which, when you read the AD, had been removed due to technical difficulties. This system has had many problems over the past 10 years. I believe Honeywell applied for and was granted_AMOC with the problems supposedly fixed._In April 2005 Boeing had issued a letter to all MD80 operators stating that the Honeywell system was not safe to operate based on experience with one operator.
_
I know that the weather in Panama is quite warm this time of the year, but it is also very humid. According to what I've read, the plane flew in from Columbia and was dispatched once the passengers were boarded around 1:00 AM DST. The articles say that both engines failed, originally they suspected contaminated fuel but this was ruled out when it was established that a DHL plane that used the same fuel solurce flew safely to its destination.
_
My question is do you think it could have been ice FOD from cold-soaked fuel that damaged both the engines? I talked with an ex US Air engineer that told me that they had ice FOD on an MD80 from cold-soaked fuel_on_a flight out of_Milwaukee and it was mid-August?
Has this scenario any merit?