CRJ elevators are fully hydraulic, multiple actuators per surface, no manual reversion at all. So yes, "manual control" in this context means "hands on the controls". What are the chances of a scenario like UA232? |
possibly any water at the bottom of the crater mixed with residual jet fuel. Thus they had to pump out the mixture before working to retrieve important bits. Nothing significant about this
|
Can we assume that a problem with cargo e.g. Fire..... cf: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias |
Although the flight surfaces on the CRJ are hydraulically actuated, there is no computer in between the pedals and the control column deciding weather the crew are flying safely or not and maybe just making matters worse such as on other FBW aircraft I know. So the flight surfaces should have done exactly as commanded. |
Originally Posted by Machinbird
(Post 9235634)
Assuming that the linkage was not jammed by a foreign object such as a tool or frozen water/deicing fluid.
Or the AP was not engaged, as thats a 'computer' with a degree of authority over the flight controls. Or the stall protection COMPUTER didnt decide to do something. Or the Horizontal STabilizer Control Unit, likewise. The number of aircraft where there isnt a computer of some kind involved nowadays is pretty small .... |
Swedish AIBN wil have to wait for summer for any further recovery attempts.
NRK: Will have to wait until the ground thaws (Google translate) |
It think the crash site is about at right distance for descent initiation.
Is it possible cargo shifted forward once aircraft pitched down? |
Originally Posted by _Phoenix
(Post 9235920)
It think the crash site is about at right distance for descent initiation.
Is it possible cargo shifted forward once aircraft pitched down? |
in the cruise the elevator will have dramatically more authority (forces proportional to square of speed, subject to actuator/structural limits and altitude density effects) |
If the V/S reports are close to accurate then it seems inconsistent with a prolonged stall condition similar to other recent mishaps. The V/S seems just a bit too high... if we have 9000fpm then thats around 79kts and assuming a 45 degree path vector with forward speed of 9000 as well that gives us an aircraft speed of 111 knots. Now the IAS at higher altitude may be in stall territory but as they got down to lower levels then there should have been enough speed to give enough control authority to correct without losing more than a few thousand feet or less.
That is until you start considering other factors such as spatial disorientation and other human factors that have led to loss of control in other accidents. One other CRJ crash I'm thinking about is the one where a couple of pilots on repositioning flight decided to try their hand at being test pilots and flew themselves right off the backside of the power curve, stalled the wing, cooked the turbines, and were never able to restart, and then ran out of altitude to make a runway. Yet there are still more differences than similarities here as the final impact in this crash seems much different as well the crew seeming to have a more catastrophic problem since they didn't have time to get more than a single mayday off. Considering the location, there is a lot riding on getting the recovered memory modules to reveal their secrets. |
That hole is not a stalled aircraft hole.
That is a very high speed near vertical hole. |
The contents of the mayday call they reportedly made should have given the investigation team some early clues. On Jan 12th 2016 the SHK told The Aviation Herald that the distress call just contained the repeated words "Mayday", there was no further information in the call. |
Originally Posted by pattern_is_full
(Post 9236514)
AH reports today:
|
Originally Posted by darkbarly
(Post 9236156)
In other words you mean less elevator authority ika? Low IAS at cruise level methinks.:ooh:
|
Since they haven't located separate debris suggesting elevator detachment/damage it suggests to me that a c of g issue alone is unlikely. I'd think that since they were able make a Mayday call, crew incapacitation would be unlikely, but as pattern_is_full noted, never 'assume' anything. |
Having flown this type for many, many years, I can say a HS failure/runaway was probably my biggest concern.
This is a quality-made airframe and engine combination, but the electronics/trim switch/elevator feel system left a lot to be desired. |
"The electronics/trim switch/elevator feel system left a lot to be desired."
Thanks, FIRESYSOK. Good to hear from someone with experience in the type. |
There is also the Hoot Gibson maneuver that can be used to shave off unwanted speed. (Dropping the Gear) I'm glad you clarified ... In my earlier days, the term was code for "erase the tapes" :suspect: |
Likely Stab Trim Runaway
Having flown both CRJ's and SE-DUX in its post cargo mod, I have to agree with the Stab Trim Runaway hypothesis. I haven't flown a 200 since 2011 but I know there was an SB or AW published after a couple of runaways in the U.S. a few years back. Whether DUX ever had it done will soon be revealed.
If I recall correctly the loads from OSL to TOS cubed out before they weighted out and were very well secured with a very simple system. In level flight or even in a normal 3 degree descent, the chance of trolleys coming loose was next to zero. |
Re: post 78. Sometimes, someone posts something really good here. This is one of those times. Thank you.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:37. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.