Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Crash at Sharjah airport

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Crash at Sharjah airport

Old 31st Oct 2009, 18:18
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I seem to recall the DC-8 would pretty much allow the pilot to deploy any device at almost any time, which led to a nasty crash in Toronto when the spoilers deployed too early - in the flare. This led to the FAA mandating a placard above the spoiler lever saying "Do not deploy in flight". Then as now, some pilots responded sarcastically, saying that it might as well say "It is forbidden to crash this airplane".

I have no idea whether the age of the aircraft has anything to do with this incident, but those designs require a lot of respect and careful handling by today's standards.
DozyWannabe is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2009, 18:40
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DozyWannabe -
I seem to recall the DC-8 would pretty much allow the pilot to deploy any device at almost any time, which led to a nasty crash in Toronto when the spoilers deployed too early - in the flare. This led to the FAA mandating a placard above the spoiler lever saying "Do not deploy in flight". Then as now, some pilots responded sarcastically, saying that it might as well say "It is forbidden to crash this airplane".
I have no idea whether the age of the aircraft has anything to do with this incident, but those designs require a lot of respect and careful handling by today's standards.
Well, I suppose you can do just about anything you want with any airplane if you try hard enough. The point is knowing what will happen if you do. While it was possible to extend the spoilers in flight, it was strickly a no, no [on the DC-8s]. Age of the aircraft had nothing to do with it.
ALL aircraft desreve respect!
DC-ATE is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 16:43
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Clipperton island
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Arrow

Old 707 virtually not flying anywhere else.
Crew from a poor, distant and unfriendly country, all dead....
No casualty or any damage on the ground (right in a square of sand)

Do you think anybody is going to waste a lot of time on the crash recorders ?
recceguy is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 17:08
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not to sound too unfriendly myself, but what does that have anything to do with it? The crew were pilots, trying to make a living - same as many on this board. The country of their birth should have nothing to do with it.

It may turn out to be an old aircraft coming apart and just rotten luck - but the powers that be should make an effort to find out, if only for the sake of improving knowledge of how things can go pear-shaped - to say nothing of the crew's families.
DozyWannabe is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 19:19
  #125 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dozywannabe;

Not unfriendly at all and nothing to apologize for or "clarify". Thank you for saying it.

Just as are portrayed in the media and in politics, there are "worthy victims" and "unworthy victims".

How in good conscience the separation can be made and then acted upon is anything but clear or straightforward.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 19:44
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: hampshire
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Old 707 virtually not flying anywhere else"

What about the 500 odd derivatives flying with the USAF, most of which are older than this one.
timraper is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2009, 22:36
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: France
Age: 42
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just concerning the inflight deployment of reverser in flight on the 707. Some guys used to fly Vref+10 during the approach and open the reverser during flare. In the mean time it retracts the LE flaps and prevent the plane from floating. So it is possible...
oligoe is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2009, 00:18
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 58
Posts: 578
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not strictly a 707 derivative

I don't really want to split hairs but the USAF RC-135 is NOT a 707 derivative.

More accurately the U.S. Air Force's C-135 Stratolifter is not a 707 variant, but was developed in parallel to the 707 from the original Boeing 367-80. As such there are a lot a similarities, and lots of differences. Specifically it has a narrower fuselage and was fitted with different engines from the get go (J57s originally, with virtually all now running CFM-56s).

More importantly perhaps is the fact they have the loving maintenance care of the Air Force, which tends to get rather upset if any of their planes break or fall apart. (Not that it doesn't happen, but all sorts of questions tend to get asked when they do...).

- GY
GarageYears is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2009, 09:39
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: hampshire
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You don't want to split hairs, but then you go and do.
timraper is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2009, 15:06
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chedburgh, Bury St.Edmunds
Age: 81
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Without looking in the relevant books, I think the KC.135 was originally designated the B.717???? [Not to be confused, of course, with the 'modern'717]
JEM60 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2009, 15:50
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: EGSS
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Last time I looked the RC-135 (Rivet Joint?) had a 707 airframe?
Flightmech is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2009, 16:50
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Republic of Tejas
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
More accurately the U.S. Air Force's C-135 Stratolifter is not a 707 variant
It has the same FAA type rating as the B707, i.e. B-707/B-720.
Bluestar51 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2009, 16:56
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 58
Posts: 578
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No it doesn't!!!

Last time I looked the RC-135 (Rivet Joint?) had a 707 airframe?
Er, no it doesn't. It's more like a second cousin. Same roots (Boeing 367-80), but different from there out.

C-135 Stratolifter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Boeing RC-135 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The KC-135 Stratotanker and C-135 Stratolifter were the first Boeing aircraft produced based on the Dash 80. The first flight of the KC-135A was in August 1956. The production line closed in February 1965 after 808 aircraft had been produced for the USAF and an additional 12 had been built for France. Boeing’s in-house designation for the KC-135 family was the 717.
Boeing allocated the 717 designation to the KC-135 to indicate some substantial differences from the Dash 80. The fuselage was slightly wider to accommodate six abreast seating in anticipation for the 707 airliner. In the end, the 707 was widened even more in response to airline requests. The 707 and KC-135 aircraft could not use common fuselage assembly jigs. There are also major structural differences between the C-135 and 707. The C-135 was built to a “safe life” philosophy to meet the USAF requirements. The 707 was built to Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) that dictated a “fail safe” structure. Both models were manufactured from different aluminum alloys.
The bottom line is that even though the Dash 80, KC-135 and 707 all look similar, they are three distinct aircraft types. From an engineering point of view the only thing in common between the 707 and KC-135 is the wing box. Don’t let anyone tell you that a 707 is a KC-135 with an interior, or a KC-135 is a stripped out 707 with a refueling boom.

- GY

Last edited by GarageYears; 2nd Nov 2009 at 17:03. Reason: More info
GarageYears is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2009, 17:17
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Romeo 14
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Everything GarageYears said is exactly correct. I wrenched the KC-135 A,E, and R for a long, long time before I flew the E-3/707.
The military versions of the 707 are several and can be confusing, but anything with -135 in the name is not a 707.
The -137, E-3, E-6, E-8 etc are.
As a note of trivia, the same fuselage cross section was used in the 707, 727 and early 737's,, "just add sections to length".
Please,,thread drift over,, back to the subject. I'd love to hear any facts or ramp rumours anyone in the DXB region has heard.
-- Heracles
Heracles is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2009, 07:33
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Deep South, UK
Age: 69
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Loss of Engine Cowling

I understand that the falling object may have been an Engine Cowling? There have been numurous incidents caused by aircraft taking off with the engine cowlings unlatched after maintenance. More recently this has been a problem with the A320 (V2500) where the unlatched catches are difficult to see as the engines are so low down. I do not know the cowling arrangements on a B707 and whether an unlatched cowl is easily spotted. But the results can be dramatic - severe pylon damage; tailplane damage, fusalage damage (I recall a passenger window being broken on an A320); the engine itself severly damaged e.g. fuel pipe rupture, engine controls jammed etc; and flap damage.

How easy is it to leave the cowlings unlatched and undetected on a B707 - I suspect someone out there will know! But I am not aware of such an incident causing an aircraft to crash.

Just a thought.

bizdev
bizdev is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2009, 12:20
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
as I recall the cowl latches were on the very bottom centerline of the cowl. Not real visable but none the less something the FE would certainly look for on a walkaround.
Spooky 2 is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2009, 14:00
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just curious. (maybe it's already been asked)

How does the loss of an engine cowling (or other similar sized appendage) on a 4-engine aeroplane (regardless of its age) cause such a dramatic (watched the video) Loss of Control?

I'm guessing it doesn't.
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2009, 14:32
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It would depend on whether or not the cowl struck something like the horizontal stab as it departed the aircraft. I know that cowls have come off the 707/720 before, but not with this type of catastrophic result so maybe this was not the case in this accident.
Spooky 2 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 03:46
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: .
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am aware of an incident in which a DC10 cowl came apart in cruise flight and the debri struck the horizontal stab causing significant damage. It did not result in control problems but if you were relatively slow, as in initial climb, coupled with the loss of one or more engines, then I can easily imagine a scenario that could result in loss of control.
WW
WrldWide is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 04:46
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Regarding the horizontal tailplane on 707 aircraft, PanAmerican lost a freighter approaching Lusaka many years ago...upon selecting flaps 50 for landing one of the horizontal stabs detatched (due to severe corrosion to the attach fittings), and the airplane impacted vertically.
An Airworthiness Directive was issued in short order, to inspect these tailplanes, and many were found with corrosion and attach fittings fractures.
So, if an engine cowl detatched, struck the horizontal stab, which had not been inspected properly...well, this would clearly not be good.
Just a thought.

Horizontal tailplanes, and their operation (especially jammed stabs...had one of those personally) on 707 aircraft...many problems over the years, without a doubt.
With a jammed stab, Boeing provided a superb alternate method of pitch control...split spoilers....known technically as, spoiler bypass.
L1011...same/same.
411A is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.