FDX MD-10 2008 Incident at HOXIE
#22
I have read the report, and I disagree completely.
#23
Eats shoots and leaves...
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Didactic Synthetic Aviation Experience Provider
Posts: 849
If it's no big secret, then why don't you share (in broad terms), what caused this event? You sir, are coming across as a grand champion tool bag.
#24
FF...the FLAP.
#26
I agree completely. As particular as the MD-10 and MD-11 is to fly, I would think any insights FDX was able to have from this rather disturbing incident would have been shared with other MD-10 and MD-11 operators, but doesn't seem to have been.
#27
There are no other MD-10 operators.....we invented it.
#28
Eats shoots and leaves...
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Didactic Synthetic Aviation Experience Provider
Posts: 849
So, is the cause of this COMPLETELY unique to the MD-10, or could it have possible application do the DC-10, MD-11, or even other types? Is this information so sensitive that everyone else needs to be kept in the dark? As an MD-11 pilot, I'd really like to know.
#30
You are allowed to ask ATC to hold at 280kts/.80M (whichever is lower) if you expect or encounter turbulence when using FAA TERPS, Old PANS OPS, or New PANS OPS. Fedex Safety says we can and must ask for this higher speed when above FL250.
bcrosier, there's no secret and hopefully all air carrier now train their pilots that if they are directed to hold above FL250, that they do it at 280kts/.80M (or whatever your aircraft's minimum safe speed at altitude in a 25 degree turn is) and tell ATC that's what they are doing.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post