TiredSoul

Certainly plausible.
No history on the flight trackers though as the owner opted out.
METAR shows calm winds for 2-3 days prior.

rickair7777

Could be, although it's odd that the buckets were stowed on the Houston plane.

rickair7777

Dan is irritating in many ways, but occasionally he has good technical points. I can't watch his whole videos anymore, but I'll skim for salient points.

I like Bancolirio much better, he's measured and doesn't get too far out ahead with speculation although he occasionally makes pointed emphasis on issues which he thinks might save others (such as STOL hanging on the prop to show off).

AirBear

I wondered about that. I know just enough about jet engines to squeak thru an oral so wasn't sure of the significance of white smoke.

I like Dan Gryder, he probably didn't get many "gold stars" for playing well with others in school but he's also not afraid to tell it like he sees it. And if later more info shows him to be incorrect he'll post that and make a correction.

I was an Aircraft Accident Investigator in the military many years ago and was disgusted with the politics and bureaucracy. For example, when the Air Force Thunderbirds had a T-38 4 ship crash back in 1982 the Accident Investigation Team had to stop and see the 4 Star head of the Tactical Air Command before going into the field. He flat told them that those were his best pilots and they would not be finding pilot error as a causal factor. In fact it was the primary reason but they fabricated a story about a flap/stab interconnect failure. Another case where I knew some of the crew was a C-130 accident during a LAPES drop at an airshow. The report was white-washed to save the career of the Squadron CO who was considered a "fast burner". In the Air Force the "real" accident reports are only seen by a handful of high ranking officers. Not in all cases but in many.

There's no way it should take 2-3 years before a final report comes out. Perhaps in a few head scratcher type accidents. Usually they know the cause soon as the CVR and FDR are read out. I think that'll be the case with this MD-87.

Twin Wasp

Looking at the pictures there are three tire tracks from the end of the runway to the burnt out airframe so saying they got airborne is stretch.

AirBear

I just watched Juan Brown's video on that and I think you're right. Also interesting in the video is there are burn marks in the grass behind the #2 engine but nothing behind the #1 engine.

https://youtu.be/du6tgqA9R1Q

AirBear

Dan's got a new video out that's partly about the MD87 crash. A NTSB rep did an interview with media and said something about an aborted takeoff, Dan doesn't think that happened.

The link skips over the first part of the video and picks up when he starts talking about the MD-87 crash:

https://youtu.be/3BmsEA2x1zo?t=96

Brickhut

Skidmarks for the last 1200' of pavement and matching tire marks through the weeds, to the perimeter road, then all the way to the wreckage, over 1700' off the end of the runway, suggest the only thing to get airborne were the pilots' testicles.

AirBear

I would tend to agree but then why weren't the TR's deployed? Once you've departed the paved surface you're not going flying that day except momentarily if you hit a bump.

shroomwell

Because they weren't in a simulator, knowing ahead of time they were about to get an engine failure or something else, and have to reject.