Diamond Bob
"Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyman
The troubling, no disturbing thing is that the load failed to re distribute, and the a/c was without designed power, causing an emergency landing.."
Let's be clear. The initial report had the genesis of the emergency in the aft EE bay. That would be the second time this location has caused an immediate landing, the first time in Laredo.
No following Internal Press have disabused this as the cause here, the EE bay.
With six generators available, the loss of one should never cause a forced landing. Yet we see that the reporting is targeting a "mechanical issue". Mechanical includes electrical. If the load had been re distributed to solve the electrical issue, why not continue? What is the systems reversion that follows the loss of a generator? Evidently one that did not work?
A precautionary landing? That is absurd. There is no such animal in overwater operations. The landing was immediate and unavoidable, that is the conclusion.
I pray the problem is not as serious as it seems. Far from solving an "appearance problem" with the public, a lack of information and even misdirection only makes perception more murky.
Have you found the original thread here on PPRuNe? The discussion about the fire on the flight test that caused the program to stop for a time?
There was professional concern about safety v/v burning resin, and the lack of a sacrificial airframe in fire tests.
Last edited by Lyman; 7th Dec 2012 at 18:05.