Pilots helping pilots
View over 100 airline profilesAdd to Google



Welcome to the Airline Pilot Central Forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. If you're a working pilot, please join our free community and you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you don't want to register (or not a working pilot), you can still use the Google search box in the upper left of this screen to search all forum posts!

Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Technical
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Technical The airliners we fly

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-09-2008, 10:24 AM   #1 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
SmoothOnTop's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: retired
Posts: 475
Default Seatbelt Failure?

NTSB Identification: (deleted)
Injuries: 6 Minor, 136 Uninjured.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.
On (deleted), about (deleted) standard time, a (deleted), encountered severe turbulence during descent for landing at (deleted). The airplane, which was being operated under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 by (deleted), was not damaged. Five passengers and one flight attendant sustained minor injuries.

According to preliminary information, two of the five injured passengers were occupying seats where the seatbelt fittings failed and separated.

The remaining 132 passengers and 4 crewmembers were not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instrument flight rules flight plan was filed for the regularly scheduled domestic passenger flight. The flight departed from (deleted), at (deleted), with an intended destination of (deleted). Following the turbulence encounter, the airplane landed in (deleted) without further incident.

According to information provided by (deleted), the flight was descending into (deleted) at an altitude of 11,400 feet above mean sea level (msl) when it encountered severe turbulence. The captain communicated with (deleted) Operations to arrange for paramedics to meet the airplane at the gate in (deleted). The flight continued and landed without further incident. Medical personnel met the airplane as requested, and the treated the injured passengers and flight attendant, classifying their injuries as minor.

A preliminary review of the flight recorder data provided by (deleted) disclosed that the airplane experienced a vertical acceleration minimum of approximately -0.761 G, followed 2 seconds later by a positive peak of approximately +1.762 G.
SmoothOnTop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2008, 11:17 AM   #2 (permalink)
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: T-38C
Posts: 13
Default

negative 1G with an airliner seat belt, that would be interesting. At what g do passengers get uncomfortable. What are typical airliner g limits?
sean00xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2008, 02:16 PM   #3 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Senior Skipper's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Seat 0A
Posts: 528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sean00xj View Post
negative 1G with an airliner seat belt, that would be interesting. At what g do passengers get uncomfortable. What are typical airliner g limits?
Typically -1>g>2.5, depending on the configuration.
__________________
Intentionally Left Blank
Senior Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2008, 06:12 PM   #4 (permalink)
Prime Minister
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: CRJ
Posts: 6,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sean00xj View Post
negative 1G with an airliner seat belt, that would be interesting. At what g do passengers get uncomfortable. What are typical airliner g limits?
I would guess + 1.5 G would make most pax unhappy. Negative G's of any magnitude would produce mass vomiting for sure. The worst "negative" load factor we see is just slightly less than +1.0 probably + 0.7

We normally bank 15-30 degress, which barely gets you over one G, and try to never do significantly less than +1.0...really only happens on a late hand-flown level off.
rickair7777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2008, 08:04 PM   #5 (permalink)
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 39
Default

This is from the Hawker that collided with the glider in 2006. Very similar.

From NTSB Accident Database

http://tinyurl.com/2oxy4o

Quote:
1.9 SURVIVAL ASPECTS

During the post-accident examination of the Hawker jet, it was noted that the inboard attach points for the #5 and #7 seats were loose and the seatbelts were buckled. Interviews with the passengers revealed that one passenger was in seat #7, with his lap belt buckled, when the midair collision occurred. While the aircraft was in the traffic pattern at Carson City, the first officer informed the passengers that they were going to make a gear-up landing and everyone was to secure their seatbelts. The passenger in seat #7 tightened his lap belt and the inboard attachment end came out from between the seat cushions. He jumped up from seat #7 and sat down in seat #5 and buckled the lap belt. When he went to tighten that belt, the inboard attachment end came out from between the seat cushions. He then grabbed onto the attached portion of the seatbelt, leaned over in the prone position, and held on.

Examination of the belt's attach points revealed that the metal keepers for the hook were distorted, bent, and to some extent, expanded.

Last edited by msh168 : 03-09-2008 at 08:10 PM.
msh168 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2008, 06:01 PM   #6 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
SmoothOnTop's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: retired
Posts: 475
Default

Good find.
SmoothOnTop is offline   Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Computer failure most likely cause of 777 British Airways 38 accident bgmann Foreign 25 01-30-2008 12:26 PM
FAA Written Exam Failure? JJ429PA Pre-Interview 18 10-08-2007 10:17 AM
Service failure O gram rolling thunder Cargo 60 10-05-2007 10:43 AM
Engine Failure question Puckhead Flight Training 16 08-02-2007 08:55 PM
Federal Govt. FAILURE WatchThis! Hangar Talk 16 09-05-2005 01:29 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:15 PM.


Copyright ©2000 - 2007 DreamLaunch Media Ltd

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7