The A300 uses Flaps 1 which extends the leading edge devices. Leading edge devices are huge stall speed reduction factor. 50% - 66% of the stall reduction comes from Flaps 1 which, depending upon aircraft type, might be only LED extension with no trailing edge flap extension.

 

The 787's thrust to weight ratio is approx. .285:1. The 767 was approx. 757 was .34-35:1. 737-800 is .30:1.

You need to get to approx V2+10 (15), to fly. Stay in ground effect and eek out of knot you can with the softest hands on the pitch (AOA). Lowest necessary climb rate, to keep AOA as low as possible, acceleration providing very slightly less than 1 G, and to provide the quickest acceleration available, is your friend.

DL's DFW 727 crash and NW's DTW DC-9 crash both lifted off and flew to the crash sight.

Extra time at the end of a sim period? "Anything you want to do?" No flap takeoffs, dual engine failures after takeoff and immediate 180 turn to land on departure runway, dead stick arrivals from 40 nm/10,000'/250 kts (we hit that energy key a lot of arrivals) and 20nm/5000'/250 kts (another energy key we hit a lot on arrivals). All survivable. Dual engine failure after takeoff requires achieving 'green dot' and clean (Airbus) or flaps UP bug and clean (Boeing). Depending upon the airport you can roll to the gate. Just don't forget the after landing checklist and arrival PA (if your company still does those). Act like you've been there before. ;-)

 

Post 10 in this thread. Turn up the volume, it's unmistakably a prop sound. There is also an example screencap posted in post 52 which is exactly where there RAT is located (and not an antenna)

 

FWIW, this is from a post on FB in one of the widget pilot groups. No idea if the very hot conditions in India for this event were comparable to whatever this 'recreation' did.

"Report from one of my friends at AAL: They recreated the T/O at MTOW in the 787 sim. Retracted flaps before gear and aircraft climbed out no problem. Retracted flaps before gear on a V1 cut and the aircraft also climbed no problem.
Likely neither motor producing power."

IF there is truth in that, it would seem to greatly diminish the idea that the flap setting/retraction had anything to do with what happened. Many, many folks are commenting on how imperceptible the very clean 787 wing is in authorized TO configs. I think that has 'fooled' a lot of folks initially. I'm 100% convinced slats were out when the jet enters the frame. And to me, the best video footage seems to show a slight shadow right where you would expect with TO flap extension.



Additionally, another report says the Captain radios before impact: "Mayday... no thrust, losing power, unable to lift."

Not vouching for either of these points, but found it interesting enough to add to the discourse here.

Absolutely no-one knows jack yet. But we also can't help but scratching our heads and grasp at what scenario could possibly account for what happened. Hopefully, the prelim report will put many of these speculations to rest. That shouldn't take too long.

 

I know Airbus has A-lock to prevent slat retraction at low speed/high AoA. Does the 787 or other Boeings have a similar system?

 

Question for 787 guys and gals:

The landing gear bogeys normally tilt aft in the fully extended position. To me it looks like they're tilting forward in the accident videos, like in a 767. That's usually the first step in the gear retraction sequence, but then in all the gear swing videos I watched the doors start opening almost immediately afterwards. In the accident sequence I don't see any hint of gear door operation. Would it be possible that they did indeed select the gear up but some system failure, maybe hydraulic or electrical, stopped the sequence from completing after the bogey de-tilt step and before the doors?

 

Has anyone mentioned or posted a comparison to the United 777 departure out Maui, regarding the flap movement theory going around? Didn’t the FO move the flaps more than commanded?

And the power reduction part, on the 747-400, you can select Flaps 5 for power reduction versus an altitude…so back to the FO retracting flaps theory, the reduction in thrust may have been partially that…?
Thoughts?

 

I posted a video over in the safety thread of a 787 that had a tire failure and hydraulic failure. The gear retraction begins but the doors on the main gear do not open. Only the nose gear retracts. But the main gear do tilt forward. In addition, I’ve seen many pictures now of the wreckage and the slats are deployed and the flaps look to be extended. Also, I believe that if the smoking gun isn’t in the FDR I’m not sure if we will ever know what happened. There are videos of fire trucks driving over the wings, heavy equipment picking up landing gear parts, hundreds of people picking up parts and walking all over everything. Also videos of people moving and touching body parts. It’s just a terrible situation and very graphic… it seems like with a major post crash fire and the amount of disruption to the wreckage it may be impossible to trace things down. In addition, India is not known for their transportation safety and I am unaware but will the military be conducting the investigation or does India have a transportation investigation team? I do not believe the NTSB will be involved. Only Boeing who could be incentivized to blame everything else than themselves in similar fashion to the Air Lauda crash.

 

It's hard to tell, but it does almost look like they might be tilted forward on the accident aircraft?

A quick YouTube search shows they do tilt forward at retraction, right at :13 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bwYfp38uU8

 

I may be wrong, but I believe the NTSB has to be involved because the airplane was manufactured in the US.