40 Years Ago This weekend - American 191 at O’Hare
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was PIC of a TWA 727 flight LAX-PHX-ICT-ORD. While in the ramp office at ICT I was advised we were on a ground hold because of an accident at ORD. I knew weather wasn't a factor because it was a very clear Spring day.
Before we were released we were advised that Runway 4R was closed because an engine from the DC-10 was on the runway. When we arrived we were assigned Runway 9L, which passes through the threshold of 4R. We were down to taxi speed by that point, and could clearly see the engine on the runway. My first cousin lived in Barrington, IL. Her 16 year old so had a part-time job with UAL catering. He was standing on the loading dock and saw the whole thing. It looked so close he thought he was going to die.
Before we were released we were advised that Runway 4R was closed because an engine from the DC-10 was on the runway. When we arrived we were assigned Runway 9L, which passes through the threshold of 4R. We were down to taxi speed by that point, and could clearly see the engine on the runway. My first cousin lived in Barrington, IL. Her 16 year old so had a part-time job with UAL catering. He was standing on the loading dock and saw the whole thing. It looked so close he thought he was going to die.
Drain Bamaged
Before you get this all wrong I would like to comment.
The inspection being done was to inspect the pylon attachment pins.It saved several hundred man hours to leave the engine attached.
On the number 2 engine a forklift was used to lift a work platform that included the engine,a crew of mechanics and all of their tools. The engine was actually rolled into position on rails and was then lifted with come alongs with dynamometers attached to measure the force.
The reason the airplane crashed is because the slats retracted on the left wing and because these airplanes only had one AOA sensor and a single channel stall warning system that was powered by the number 1 generator which was on the engine that was lost.
The inspection being done was to inspect the pylon attachment pins.It saved several hundred man hours to leave the engine attached.
On the number 2 engine a forklift was used to lift a work platform that included the engine,a crew of mechanics and all of their tools. The engine was actually rolled into position on rails and was then lifted with come alongs with dynamometers attached to measure the force.
The reason the airplane crashed is because the slats retracted on the left wing and because these airplanes only had one AOA sensor and a single channel stall warning system that was powered by the number 1 generator which was on the engine that was lost.
It was the “pole” who lined up all their cheese’s holes.
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Null Island
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I worked at a science lab that year in downstate Illinois, and the lab director was having a house-party that afternoon. I remember CBS "breaking in" on their regular programming with wall-to-wall coverage of AA191 (that was the year before CNN debuted).
At the time none of us had connections to aviation - but many had family or friends in Chi-town. The party became very quiet (and the BBQ was forgotten) as we just sat and watched the reporting.
Should be emphasized (it's in the report, of course) that an improvised engine maintenance procedure with a forklift damaged the aft pylon/wing attachment, which eventually broke under fatigue. When the engine came off, it took out the slat hydraulics - and also took with it Bus 1 power for the "slats disagree" warning and the sole stick-shaker (left seat). Crew simply had no chance of knowing what they were dealing with, flew correct engine-out procedure (climb at V2), and stalled the slatless wing. A particularly ugly coincidence of swiss-cheese holes.
At the time none of us had connections to aviation - but many had family or friends in Chi-town. The party became very quiet (and the BBQ was forgotten) as we just sat and watched the reporting.
Should be emphasized (it's in the report, of course) that an improvised engine maintenance procedure with a forklift damaged the aft pylon/wing attachment, which eventually broke under fatigue. When the engine came off, it took out the slat hydraulics - and also took with it Bus 1 power for the "slats disagree" warning and the sole stick-shaker (left seat). Crew simply had no chance of knowing what they were dealing with, flew correct engine-out procedure (climb at V2), and stalled the slatless wing. A particularly ugly coincidence of swiss-cheese holes.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: sfo
Age: 70
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I worked for UA and transferred to ORD in May of 1980, and worked on a crew with the guys that discovered the UA -10 that caused the grounding of the fleet when it was discovered to have an engine about ready to fall off. Those guys told me that Percy Wood, the CEO of UA came out to the field that night and asked the mechanics whether they thought the fleet should be grounded. Can you imagine an airline CEO doing that these days?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Forklift Joe" Leonard, the father of this unapproved method, was "punished" by later being paid millions to be the CEO of AirTran. Got to love corporate America, kill hundreds, make millions.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas, like a whole other country
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
As to the post that stated there was a flight deck camera viewed by the pax, I've heard that as well. It is a popular rumor, whether it's true I'm not sure.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a frequent flyer in the early 80's American indeed had cockpit cameras available on channel 9 along with cockpit communication audio on most of the DC-10s.
Would it have been possible to detect the cracked or damaged pylon during a pre-flight walk around?
dg
Would it have been possible to detect the cracked or damaged pylon during a pre-flight walk around?
dg
Not to mention that that point is about 3.5m/12 feet above the ground, and a fatigue crack may be just a few mm long - right up until it lets loose completely under stress.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember seeing DC-10s parked in large numbers while the FAA and NTSB were sorting out what to do. The San Diego 727 collision with a C-172 first hit by the nosewheel then hit the leading edge and took out all three hydraulic lines routed next to one another. The Sioux City DC-10 lost hydraulics when a piece of the #2 turbine disk went through the elevator.
Hard lessons.
Hard lessons.
heard those stories about the PSA 727 domiciled in San Diego at the time, however looking at the last photo before she hit the ground, one can clearly see the rudder hard left, ailerons and spoilers commanding left wing down, and the elevators in a nose up position, the damage to the right inboard wing where the Cessna exploded on contact, (pictures and report make no mention of nosewheel ) caused too much damage for that wing to sustain flight...at the safety seminar where Al Haynes was a keynote speaker I had the privilege to attend, he showed us a diagram where the hydraulic lines in the horizontal stabilizer were penetrated, no mention of the elevator
Last edited by ironbutt57; 26th May 2019 at 04:05.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and of course the "good" from all of this, the procedure to pitch up to reduce speed back to V2 (in effect at the time) was disappeared, and most flight director systems will maintain V2+10 if above...when the folk at American played this scenario out in the simulator, they crashed every time, when they left the airspeed where it was instead of pitching to reduce to V2, the airplane flew away, and they were able to return and land safely....so this accident has probably prevented more loss of life...and I think American subsequently refitted all their planes with the optional FO's column stick shaker, and systems mods were made to lock high lift devices "in position" in the event of loss of all hydraulic pressure
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Doonfoot, Ayr
Age: 70
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: MTL
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I worked for UA and transferred to ORD in May of 1980, and worked on a crew with the guys that discovered the UA -10 that caused the grounding of the fleet when it was discovered to have an engine about ready to fall off. Those guys told me that Percy Wood, the CEO of UA came out to the field that night and asked the mechanics whether they thought the fleet should be grounded. Can you imagine an airline CEO doing that these days?
Reading through the accident report, I picked up on one point that I missed (or forgot) from reading the report years ago: only the captain’s control column had a stick shaker motor. A second stick shaker motor was available as an option for the FO’s control column, but AA didn’t select that option for its DC-10s. A post-accident DC-10 AD added the FO stick shaker.
Was a single stick shaker typical for transport category aircraft of that era?
Was a single stick shaker typical for transport category aircraft of that era?
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The related module in the FAA Lessons Learned library has a lot of additional pictorial and narrative material, making it an interesting reading for those less familiar with the details of the correct and incorrect engine removal procedure:
https://lessonslearned.faa.gov/ll_ma...=14&LLTypeID=2
https://lessonslearned.faa.gov/ll_ma...=14&LLTypeID=2
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hawaii
Age: 76
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading through the accident report, I picked up on one point that I missed (or forgot) from reading the report years ago: only the captain’s control column had a stick shaker motor. A second stick shaker motor was available as an option for the FO’s control column, but AA didn’t select that option for its DC-10s. A post-accident DC-10 AD added the FO stick shaker.
Was a single stick shaker typical for transport category aircraft of that era?
Was a single stick shaker typical for transport category aircraft of that era?
Corrections
The engine took out two of the three hydraulic systems not three. There were at least ten cracks found in the world's fleet after the grounding but not all were reported..fact.
the slat disagree light was a small blue one which was out of normal scan and was checked only on extension or retraction.
Souix city.
SR had number 2 go bang out of West Africa which took out two of the three systems before Souix city with one of the big chiefs flying it who was very competent. They were very lucky as the fan blade missed the third system but did take out the apu fuel line.
The undercarriage bay had all three lines around the side as well. On the ER version they put some armour type perforated sheet for protection in case of a tyre going bang.
Douglas were negligent in not having a slat locking system like wot uvva kites I drove.
the slat disagree light was a small blue one which was out of normal scan and was checked only on extension or retraction.
Souix city.
SR had number 2 go bang out of West Africa which took out two of the three systems before Souix city with one of the big chiefs flying it who was very competent. They were very lucky as the fan blade missed the third system but did take out the apu fuel line.
The undercarriage bay had all three lines around the side as well. On the ER version they put some armour type perforated sheet for protection in case of a tyre going bang.
Douglas were negligent in not having a slat locking system like wot uvva kites I drove.
