Thanks again seven for clearing things up.
all the training...would have prevented it because the slats/flaps would have been properly set...see previous posts on killer items and checklist useage.
I was, of course, referring to a takeoff w/o flaps. If we agree that with training this can never happen, because the pilots will always remember to set flaps, then we don't need TOWS checks, training about the relationship of RAT probe heater to possible TOWS failure, better TOWS designs, better engineering, better MELS or even TOWS at all to avoid this type of accidents.
We just need to concentrate on training pilots to lower the flaps correctly.
But I thought we were already doing that.
And yet, sometimes, pilots forget to lower flaps (or landing gears, etc). Like Detroit's Nortwest or Delta's Dallas.
I thought all (sensible) airlines already teached their pilots to correctly follow checklists and make several take off checks of vital systems
The chief of operations for Spanair, Javier Muelas, claimed on TV that they established in their SOPS checks for the flaps 3 times before each take off (i.e. google translated short extract
Versión traducida de http://www.salabriefing.es/nuke/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1975 )
I haven't seen the current checklist at the time, but in old ones, depending how you look at it, they indeed indicate to check them twice, including one right before take off in big letters as the first item.
Can someone post a scan of Spanair's "current" MD-82 checklists before the accident?
So I'll ask again. Do you agree that, in the event of attempting to take off (w/o flaps), all the training recognizing RAT heater relation to ground logic wouldn't have helped in the event of a TOWS failure shortly before takeoff or one that was not related to ground logic (i.e. a blown loudspeaker)?
And do all the pilots here agree that simply firewalling a fully loaded MD-82 and quickly commanding flaps 15 would've almost for certain saved the aircraft from stalling (assuming a short-ish runaway and moderate tail wind) by just about any pilot?
I thought the aircraft would need some 15+ seconds to reach the correct speed on those conditions (fully loaded, tail wind) even if firewalled. That close to the ground, I thought you would need luck on top of good airmanship to keep the craft from crashing against the first thing that was more than a few meters tall (again, in a not grossly-long runaway).
Also, do pilots here think that the Spanair crew over rotated the airplane? How many of you would've done this:
You are taking off and there is no indication of anything wrong. VR is called. You start the rotation. You feel that it's a bit sluggish and the aircraft is not quite climbing as it normally does. Do you:
-Think you may have been too gentle and have a too shallow angle and pull up a little to help out
or
-Don't quite understand what's happening and just assume maybe you are a bit heavier than you thought (or the wind is playing you up, or you understimated your calculations, whatever) and let it run given available runaway until you get close to the end and then pull up more if still no possitive climb.