For some reason my thread was deleted. So I will repeat it with some sweetening (and I will save my hard work this time ).
Mr AirRabbit: You’re so pathetic for the ardour with which you are defending the indefensible.
Anyone, with no exception, has the right to an advocacy, but in the trial, not from the trial.
We always say pompously: “to know exactly who or what is at fault for this crash before the plane's black boxes are examined and a full, professional investigation is completed. Let's wait for that to happen before we decide who deserves the blame.”
In this case we know exactly what happened thanks to the NTSB investigation.
All my Quotes (
http://www.pprune.org/7151865-post357.html) have been extracted from the NTSB Aicraft Accident Report in spite you ascribe them to me (
http://www.pprune.org/7152158-post362.html)
I urge all those who have not yet done so to read the report:
Volo Air Florida 90 - Wikipedia http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR82-08.pdf
and:
http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR82-08.pdf
As I indicated to you in my earlier response ... the F/O did NOT begin the rotation “well before Vr. The computed V-speeds (again, for your information) were V1 = 138 knots; Vr = 140 knots; and V2 = 144 knots. The CVR clearly shows the Captain calling out “Vee One.” It was 2 seconds later that the Captain said “Easy!”
NTSB Report, page 5 line 25: “Eight seconds after the captain called “Vee one” and 2 seconds after he called “Vee two,” the sound of the stickshaker 91 was recorded.”
1) Did anybody call “Vr”? (Or rotate as US Pilots use to say?)
2) V2 was only 2 knots higher then Vr. And in spite of that they were already airborne (stickshaker activated).
Usually it takes 5 to10 seconds (6”: normal rate beeing 3° per second) to achieve a normal take off attitude of 20°
And as I said the airplane immediately preceding and the airplane immediately following
were both subjected to the same inclement weather that affected the accident airplane.
Yet it was only the accident airplane that crashed.
In science the interpretation of a phenomenon is recognized as a law only if its experience is replicable, otherwise it’s a chimera.
We, therefore, must learn from the mistakes of others in order not to repeat them, and must ignore their fortunes, unrepeatable.
I say in a choir with warmkiter: make it clean and keep it clean
and Rabski: Contamination = no go.
And many others.
You should too shout with me: “HOW CAN YOU KNOW IF ANY KIND OF SNOW IS ‘ADHERING’ TO THE SURFACES OF YOUR AIRPLANE, AND NO ICE IS BENEATH IT, IF YOU DON'T REMOVE IT?”
“No clean aircraft? No Fly!”