TSA' Ridiculously low minimums
07-02-2007 | 08:56 AM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 8
From: Bus driver
If you don't know how to follow procedures during an emergency (as previously stated), and subsequently GLIDE FROM 41,000 FT to the ground, which by the way takes a very long time, even at 300 knots, you are either inexperienced or careless.
Now the next person can contest how long it takes to glide from 41,000 or that they didn't glide... let's put it this way, they didn't follow procedure, and had ample time to correct the situation.
The problem was that in the procedures at the time the emergency "profile" did not call to nose it over and GAIN speed, the engines on the -200 are reliable but underpowered and in the event of a flameout they will corelock if you dont get more airflow through them. The 300kts is the newer way, and if they HAD done that they would have had a chance. They were very unprofessional and its unfortunate that it took their lives, but if the flight had a flameout at FL350 with 50 people and everyone was professional they would have had the same issue to contend with (core lock), now if/when it happens the crew will follow the procedures to keep the temps down and give them a chance for the airstart. Someone else's mistakes is everyone's free lesson.
07-02-2007 | 08:58 AM
#62
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 0
From: A-320
07-02-2007 | 09:02 AM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 8
From: Bus driver
Keep in mind each company can have its own limitations, such as at PNCL max operating altitude is FL370, whereas the CRJ is certified to FL410.
A crosswind landing of 35 knots can be done (safely)- seen it first hand- but its not a greaser!
07-02-2007 | 09:16 AM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: CRJ-900 FO, Supra left seat
The problem was that in the procedures at the time the emergency "profile" did not call to nose it over and GAIN speed, the engines on the -200 are reliable but underpowered and in the event of a flameout they will corelock if you dont get more airflow through them. The 300kts is the newer way, and if they HAD done that they would have had a chance. They were very unprofessional and its unfortunate that it took their lives, but if the flight had a flameout at FL350 with 50 people and everyone was professional they would have had the same issue to contend with (core lock), now if/when it happens the crew will follow the procedures to keep the temps down and give them a chance for the airstart. Someone else's mistakes is everyone's free lesson.
07-02-2007 | 12:03 PM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 361
Likes: 1
07-02-2007 | 01:45 PM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
From: A320 Right
The CRJ wont core lock due simply to a flame out and low speed. However any engine will core lock if ran too hot for too long with a high angle of attack and low speed THEN a flame out with mass shock cooling. Hence Pinnacle's relight failures.
07-02-2007 | 02:14 PM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
From: Fifth floor, window
There's two major category terms for errors, particularly as applied in aviation. Comission and omission. The CRJ flameout is essentially a comission error. The KLEX CRJ was omission. Of course, neither category is completely immune from experience levels. Although "messin around" seems to be more common to less experienced, or rather more succinctly, less mature individuals. (Sure, there's some exceptions to comission errors - anyone remember the infamous "Detroit diver" 727?)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
