It's a good radar - does the job just fine. It's not hypersensitive like the 800 (or 717) which I prefer. I'll be interested to read the report on this one, if it's ever released for viewing. Did this happen in ATL or after the divert to GSO?

Agent in GSO told me it happened on approach to GSO, which makes a lot more sense to me than it happening in ATL with a divert to GSO.

06-20-2013 | 11:30 AM

#133182

FmrFreightDog

Line Holder

Joined: Sep 2006

Posts: 868

Likes: 18

From: Starboard Side, weekends & holidays.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead

Agent in GSO told me it happened on approach to GSO, which makes a lot more sense to me than it happening in ATL with a divert to GSO.

06-20-2013 | 12:01 PM

#133183

Check Essential

Works Every Weekend

Joined: Dec 2007

Posts: 3,506

Likes: 0

From: 737 ATL

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

According to our friends at Wiki, Virgin Atlantic has 41 jets.

A333 - 10
A343 - 4
A346 - 15 (I want these)
B744 - 12

On order (and no idea what's a replacement jet or not)

A388 - 6 with options for 6
B789 - 16 with options for 8 to enter service in... ha ha ha ha... it's the 787

Don't worry. You need to learn how to interpret these things.
All those widebodies flown by somebody else is a "Scope Improvement Opportunity".

06-20-2013 | 12:16 PM

#133184

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 12,487

Likes: 0

From: 747-400 Captain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

All the fuel boost pumps from all the tanks of TWA 800 were recovered. The scavenge pump for the center tank was the only one not recovered. The last thing the NTSB deciphered from the CVR was the scavenge pump for the center tank being turned off. Yes, they deciphered this from the CVR.

I don't believe that's correct Denny. Last CVR words were about an erroneous fuel flow indication on one of the engine gauges, and the Captain commanding climb power. I don't recall any CVR reference to the scavenge pump. Since the center wing tank was empty, there would have been no reason to activate the scavenge pump, thus no reason to turn it off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

As finis said, the explosion was an internal one. All the metal was bent as from an internal explosion. Trust me, in this situation, one plus one equals two.

There are members of the investigation board that are coming forward to say just the opposite. It will be very interesting to hear what they have to say and to see their evidence.

Carl

06-20-2013 | 01:23 PM

#133185

TenYearsGone

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Dec 2009

Posts: 2,039

Likes: 0

From: 7ERB

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

49% ownership of Virgin is also the same as saying 49% of their widebodies are ours

The rumor of 10-20 additional widebodies has come true!!!!!!

TEN

06-20-2013 | 01:36 PM

#133186

Bucking Bar

Can't abide NAI

Joined: Jun 2007

Posts: 12,078

Likes: 15

From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

The NTSB determined that deteriorated wiring allowed arcing within wire bundles which sent power to components located in the center tank. Sections of the aircraft's wiring were found to have been cut by sharp edges on terminating blocks and simply worn in other places.

Bolstering this conclusion were two very brief power interruptions which were captured by signal losses to the CVR just prior to the explosion.

A short from a high amp positive source to a lower capacity positive input probably would not trip a breaker, but could easily cause a power surge sufficient to explain the signals received by the CVR. In the following show, static electricity was enough to set off an explosion in an example center tank.

Swissair 111, Apollo 13, Philippine 737.....

Run up to about 30 minutes ...

Last edited by Bucking Bar; 06-20-2013 at 02:13 PM.

06-20-2013 | 02:12 PM

#133187

buzzpat

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Feb 2008

Posts: 6,070

Likes: 1

From: Urban chicken rancher.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

TWA 800 was going from JFK to Paris (CDG), and yes there would have been no need for center tank fuel on that short of a flight. The center tank has a scavenge pump, but even with that you can never get all of the liquid fuel out of that tank.

When you say "ignite", to you mean catch fire - or explode? And was the tank sealed or vented?

Carl

We had a C-141 on the ramp at Travis in 1995 undergoing maintenance. A newbie tech reset a fuel pump CB on an empty tank and it exploded....followed by 9 other tank explosions. Aircraft burned to the ground in about 7 minutes. The mechanics and a couple crew members got off unscathed. It was quite the scene though as rampers scrambled to tow adjacent aircraft out of the way. Looked a little like Pearl Harbor from my office window.

06-20-2013 | 02:48 PM

#133188

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Wasn't there a B-52 that had that happen even further back? Captain was telling me about it and said the mechanic was told to hold the CB and he was subsequently killed in the explosion. But that's just a story I was told.

06-20-2013 | 03:24 PM

#133189

Ferd149

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 3,457

Likes: 0

From: LAX ERA

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzpat

Also, wasn't there a KC-135 (707 for our civilian broz) that blew-up and burned on the ramp in the '80s? I thought they blamed that one on vapors in the center tank too, but I don't recall the ignition source.

Ferd