borghha,
- what was the impact of the high air humidity during the approach? (intake through vents?)
From P.12 of the interim report:
In addition, it is estimated that a maximum of 0.14 ltr of water could have been drawn in through the fuel tank vent system during the flight to Heathrow.
- could the fuel temperature in some more exposed parts of the pipework (ex. the pylon) be considerably lower than the temp measured by the single main tank probe, where I assume the temps are influenced by the great mass of fuel, even in the coldest areas of the tank. Could this have caused icing or even waxing of the fuel in those cold spots downstream of the boost pumps?
From P.11:
On long flights the temperature of the fuel in the main wing tanks will tend towards the temperature of the boundary layer around the wing, which can be up to 3°C lower than TAT. On the accident flight the minimum TAT was -45°C (-49°F).
I take that to mean that nothing gets colder than TAT-3, though I stand to be corrected...
phil gollin,
1: Why are the restrictions only to apply to Rolls-Royce powered aircraft - there seems no logic or evidence ? There seems no specific reason to restrict the recommendation to Trent powered aircraft other than there have not been the equivalent tests carried out on 777s powered by other engines. Could someone explain ?
See my previous post #1723 for quote of Safety Recommendation 2008-048