Bolivian B727 Crash Lands Short of Runway, All Survive
AlwaysOnFire
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: **** you PPRUNE!
Age: 24
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More pics here, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2...nt_6437532.htm
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NZWN New Zealand
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DC-3 got up to about 4,000-4,500 by war's end didn't it ?
Still lot's of 722s around, but they're being chewed up in boneyards at ever increasing pace. Their fuel burn is about 50% higher than a 733.
I worked out once though that their block hour cost was still lower than a 733 because of it's quicker flight times reducing the maintenance and labour cost.
Sounds like water ingestion flamed out the engines.
Still lot's of 722s around, but they're being chewed up in boneyards at ever increasing pace. Their fuel burn is about 50% higher than a 733.
I worked out once though that their block hour cost was still lower than a 733 because of it's quicker flight times reducing the maintenance and labour cost.
Sounds like water ingestion flamed out the engines.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: AEP
Age: 80
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outstsnding pilots, and lucky ones
Flew the 3 seats in 727-100 and 200s... long ago.
Was definitely a great plane. My first "big airplane". Was like a flying "sports car".
No VMCG (is below V1) - V1 = VR in a 727...
Some are only 160,000 lbs TOGW (JT8D-7) but some can be 205,000 lbs with JT8D-17R power.
But is an airplane that can get you into troubles. Too easy to handle. You get complacent.
xxx
One thing critical about 727 is the tail mounted engines.
In icing conditions, anything on your fuselage or wings may be ingested.
On the 727, when having a big black cloud ahead, you put all anti-ice systems ON.
No de-icing... it is ANTI-ICING, and before entering icing conditions.
In addition, rear mounted engines are subject of inlet upsets at high AofA.
So when in doubt, IGN comes on FIRST, then anti-ice (all of it).
xxx
I remember a few takeoffs, heavy rain, deep water puddles with lots of water ingestion.
Engines probably quit at times, fraction of a second, to relight immediately.
So, the scenario of engines quitting "because of water" is not valid.
They would relight immediately. I said "immediately"... provided IGN is ON.
xxx
Three engines that quit together (no coughs), according to passengers, means "out of fuel"...
Let us not jump to conclusions yet. Will be a few weeks... But I think of "no more fuel"...
xxx
One think is certain, the LAB pilots are highly qualified. I know a few.
Many pilots in these countries, know how to handle high elevations and mountain passes.
LAB, Faucett (now bankrupt), Avianca, Ecuatoriana pilots are among these experts.
I trust them more than "flatland pilots" when it comes to flying in that part of the world.
Got to observe with Avianca guys to Bogota and Cali as a guest of their training department.
They showed me a few local things and techniques this old fart did not know.
xxx
Happy contrails - These guys got lucky indeed.
Was definitely a great plane. My first "big airplane". Was like a flying "sports car".
No VMCG (is below V1) - V1 = VR in a 727...
Some are only 160,000 lbs TOGW (JT8D-7) but some can be 205,000 lbs with JT8D-17R power.
But is an airplane that can get you into troubles. Too easy to handle. You get complacent.
xxx
One thing critical about 727 is the tail mounted engines.
In icing conditions, anything on your fuselage or wings may be ingested.
On the 727, when having a big black cloud ahead, you put all anti-ice systems ON.
No de-icing... it is ANTI-ICING, and before entering icing conditions.
In addition, rear mounted engines are subject of inlet upsets at high AofA.
So when in doubt, IGN comes on FIRST, then anti-ice (all of it).
xxx
I remember a few takeoffs, heavy rain, deep water puddles with lots of water ingestion.
Engines probably quit at times, fraction of a second, to relight immediately.
So, the scenario of engines quitting "because of water" is not valid.
They would relight immediately. I said "immediately"... provided IGN is ON.
xxx
Three engines that quit together (no coughs), according to passengers, means "out of fuel"...
Let us not jump to conclusions yet. Will be a few weeks... But I think of "no more fuel"...
xxx
One think is certain, the LAB pilots are highly qualified. I know a few.
Many pilots in these countries, know how to handle high elevations and mountain passes.
LAB, Faucett (now bankrupt), Avianca, Ecuatoriana pilots are among these experts.
I trust them more than "flatland pilots" when it comes to flying in that part of the world.
Got to observe with Avianca guys to Bogota and Cali as a guest of their training department.
They showed me a few local things and techniques this old fart did not know.
xxx
Happy contrails - These guys got lucky indeed.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fedex still operates 107 of them. I believe all the -100's are gone though.
Hell of a freighter. Mach .85, legs as long as from Memphis to the west coast, reliable and fun to fly. We are slowly replacing them with 757's, but the current plan is to have them around through 2012 at least.....
Hell of a freighter. Mach .85, legs as long as from Memphis to the west coast, reliable and fun to fly. We are slowly replacing them with 757's, but the current plan is to have them around through 2012 at least.....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chedburgh, Bury St.Edmunds
Age: 81
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
5 Posts
Looks like a lucky year for airline pax. It is worth remembering,perhaps, that even had they screwed up on the aircraft management side, it is ALWAYS good piloting that lets you walk away in the end [combined, of course, with luck]
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
per Kiwiguy:
I believe the total was 10 or 11 thousand commercial & mil. DC-3s, not counting Russian & Japanese copies.
BelArgUSA disputes this hypothesis, but rain & severe turbulence brought down a Southern DC-9 (also JT8D's) in 1977 outside KATL.
The DC-3 got up to about 4,000-4,500 by war's end didn't it ?
Sounds like water ingestion flamed out the engines.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Both Emispheres
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again thank you to BelArgUSA for sharing facts and personal experience without rhetoric.
And a special appreciation for giving credit to the skills of local pilots, that are often put down by some "knowitall".
I'm really happy that they made it!
And a special appreciation for giving credit to the skills of local pilots, that are often put down by some "knowitall".
I'm really happy that they made it!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Slaving away in front of multiple LCDs, somewhere in the USA
Age: 69
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BelArgUSA disputes this hypothesis, but rain & severe turbulence brought down a Southern DC-9 (also JT8D's) in 1977 outside KATL.
In a bit of sad irony, the F/O that was badly burned in that Challenger crash (Colorado, on takeoff, the one that killed the son of NBC's Dick Ebersol and Susan St. James) a few winters back lost both his parents in the Southern 242 crash mentioned above...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Takeoff from a high altitude airport, weight restricted (ie not 'full' tanks), fly to destination, G/A, fly to alternate, and crash one hour(news report) after divert started?
If I was a betting man I'd bet the tanks were empty. (BA 038 was different, it was at completion of a normal flight, so fuel starvation would not be an anticipated problem)
If I was a betting man I'd bet the tanks were empty. (BA 038 was different, it was at completion of a normal flight, so fuel starvation would not be an anticipated problem)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: LHR
Age: 75
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lies, damn lies and statistics!
727 'hull losses' - defined as not repaired and returned to operation following substantial damage.
Including LAB :- 89 operational losses (Annex 13 definition) excluding deliberate acts of violence.
or 94 operational losses including deliberate acts of violence
or 108 operational and non-operational losses including acts of violence - take your pick.
Note a number of these 'hull losses' (as defined) come about because the aircraft are not worth much due to their age and become insurance constructive total losses after suffering relatively little damage but still meeting definition of 'substantial'.
'Hull loss' is not a good measure of safety.
727 'hull losses' - defined as not repaired and returned to operation following substantial damage.
Including LAB :- 89 operational losses (Annex 13 definition) excluding deliberate acts of violence.
or 94 operational losses including deliberate acts of violence
or 108 operational and non-operational losses including acts of violence - take your pick.
Note a number of these 'hull losses' (as defined) come about because the aircraft are not worth much due to their age and become insurance constructive total losses after suffering relatively little damage but still meeting definition of 'substantial'.
'Hull loss' is not a good measure of safety.
