High Speed Abort question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: ASBO Central
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High Speed Abort question
Why is it so dangerous for say a 737 to abort above 80kts when they land so much faster than this and stop very quickly indeed when needed. I know the weight comes into it but does it make that much difference?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reaction time.
It's all about reaction time.
When you're landing, everything is focused on slowing the plane.
When you're taking off, you're thinking about going.
When something abnormal happens on takeoff, you first need to identify it. Then you need to decide to do something about it. Then you need to physically accomplish it. In the meantime, you're airspeed is increasing and the runway is getting shorter.
As they say, the accident investigators will take two years to decide if the decision you made was appropriate. You only get two seconds.
Good luck!
When you're landing, everything is focused on slowing the plane.
When you're taking off, you're thinking about going.
When something abnormal happens on takeoff, you first need to identify it. Then you need to decide to do something about it. Then you need to physically accomplish it. In the meantime, you're airspeed is increasing and the runway is getting shorter.
As they say, the accident investigators will take two years to decide if the decision you made was appropriate. You only get two seconds.
Good luck!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High speed aborts with jet transport aircraft on limiting runways are a very risky maneuver...best avoided if at all possible.
Many things can go wrong...and usually do, whereas, flying away to solve a potential problem is often times the better alternative.
However, there are still a few of the..."I'll never take an engine on fire into the air"...crowd around, even after all these years.
This is generally called the "Comet syndrome' and is total unmitigated BS, and is far outdated thinking, oddly enough, just like the Comet.
Many things can go wrong...and usually do, whereas, flying away to solve a potential problem is often times the better alternative.
However, there are still a few of the..."I'll never take an engine on fire into the air"...crowd around, even after all these years.
This is generally called the "Comet syndrome' and is total unmitigated BS, and is far outdated thinking, oddly enough, just like the Comet.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under the sea
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the stats are in the order of 75% of the airplanes sitting in the dirt after a reject had two functioning engines available...
See the above post if there are any further questions.
See the above post if there are any further questions.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're also using maximum braking which you (hopefully) won't be using during landing. The brakes get very hot especially at high speed and weights and can cause tyres to melt, brake fires etc which in turn could potentially lead to an evacuation in the worst case.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comet
...and almost made it into the realms of success.
Except for its 112VDC starting and non-swept wings, it 'almost' resembles a 707...NOT
