|
Originally Posted by RhinoPherret
(Post 1611937)
No. I am not an aircraft accident investigator. “But I slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night!”
Now I understand where some of the musings in this thread came from. ;) And no, I'm not an astrophysicist, but I did watch Cosmos last week, so I think that pretty much makes me an expert. |
Originally Posted by SyGunson
(Post 1611471)
Suddenly the cockpit is a hurricane of escaping cabin air, papers flying everywhere, condensation mist, blow torch like flames, air evacuating from the lungs of pilots who have to force breath, temperature drops to minus 50, no oxygen in their masks which takes God knows how long to don... followed by confusion at not being able to get air and very, very quickly through the fog of their own confusion they become dizzy and faint and then the lights go out in the brains.
That is the reality. Can we check with Tom Cruise's agent? Is he available? Oh, no. Wait! I see it in front of my eyes... two words! Jeremy-Renner! http://knoji.com/images/user/airport...tonkennedy.jpg
Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat
(Post 1611870)
No, the "reality" is that you have no business here. You're way too smart for the rest of us, the NTSB, FAA, FBI, TSA, Boeing...and even Sheldon Cooper.
I do love the explosive decompression part and all the stuff flying around. How big was the hole? Pure genius. Pure Hollywood. Huzzah! You should have your own reality show. Maybe you could co-star with Nancy Grace. You could do the clueless airplane speculation and together share the psychological insights from looking at peoples pictures and descerning their state of mind...their religious fanatical tendencies (PLEASE!! Do Pat Robertson first!!) and then wow us with your technical expertise...maybe you can get Goober to join you from Mayberry. Or...maybe you should stick to your video games and re-runs of "Airplane..." |
When I read the MH370 thread on airlinepilotforums.com I feel like...
http://nextstopnineveh.files.wordpre...conspiracy.jpg |
Originally Posted by Toasty
(Post 1611995)
When I read the MH370 thread on airlinepilotforums.com I feel like...
http://nextstopnineveh.files.wordpre...conspiracy.jpg |
Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat
(Post 1611870)
No, the "reality" is that you have no business here. You're way too smart for the rest of us, the NTSB, FAA, FBI, TSA, Boeing...and even Sheldon Cooper.
I do love the explosive decompression part and all the stuff flying around. How big was the hole? Pure genius. Pure Hollywood. Huzzah! You should have your own reality show. Maybe you could co-star with Nancy Grace. You could do the clueless airplane speculation and together share the psychological insights from looking at peoples pictures and descerning their state of mind...their religious fanatical tendencies (PLEASE!! Do Pat Robertson first!!) and then wow us with your technical expertise...maybe you can get Goober to join you from Mayberry. Or...maybe you should stick to your video games and re-runs of "Airplane..." Speaking of reality, perhaps this is the kickoff of a new reality show, the Malaysians agreed to hide the plane and filming starts later this week. Should be right up there with Honey Boo-Boo. |
The Curious Case of Flight 370 - The Daily Show - Video Clip | Comedy Central
I don't know if this has been posted yet but it's pretty funny. |
Originally Posted by LightAttack
(Post 1610953)
How many eyewitness accounts of "surging engine noise" are reported in small plane crashes when it turns out the plane crashed with empty gas tanks? You know, like how the car engine spurts and sputters as it's gasping for the last few drops of gas in the tank and the car begins slowing and you start looking for a good place to coast over to the shoulder and stop. Eyewitness: "Just before the car coasted to the shoulder and stopped, I heard a 'surging engine noise'." Expert Investigator: "That's not possible. The engine could not have been making a noise because the gas tank was empty." :rolleyes: (The criticism of eyewitness reports is not without basis, but this doesn't serve as a valid example.) . |
Originally Posted by TonyC
(Post 1612057)
I wonder what noise the engine would make as the last few ounces of gas empty out of the tanks, through the carb, through the valves into the cylinders ...
Isn't that effectively the same as running the plane out of gas? |
Originally Posted by jungle
(Post 1612025)
Nailed it, but perhaps we have misjudged him, he would do fine writing comedy, or comic books. Funny those people who would tell us not to judge others are the first to look at photos and tell us all about others.
Speaking of reality, perhaps this is the kickoff of a new reality show, the Malaysians agreed to hide the plane and filming starts later this week. Should be right up there with Honey Boo-Boo. Closer inspection...peach fuzz for a mustache. The wings were kiddie wings...he had epaulets on his blouse (jacket) and the stripes were....swear to God...STAPLED to the blouse...really wanted to burn the kid...he was about 17 or 18 I guess...but as soon as he saw me looking at him, he slid as low as he could in the seat. A couple of F/A's and I were in the terminal end of the jetway when he got off, moving fast. The familia was there with signs and balloons congradulating him. Didn't have the heart... In this guys case? I'd happily make the exception. Wait...any chance he's the instructor dude with the goatee? |
This from, I guess, a BA B777 pilot. It should eliminate any ideas of a survivable ditching after fuel exhaustion. PPRUNE, BTW
As a 777 pilot I, like many others, have wondered how the 777 would perform in the scenario where the pilots were incapacitated and the aircraft ran out of fuel. I had my ideas but there is nothing like seeing it for "real" so we tried this in a 777-2 full motion zero flight time approved simulator. We used a zero fuel weight of 175 tonnes. We let it run out of fuel at FL 250 in track hold and alt capture. However it would not make any difference what mode it was in as everything would drop out. In real life one engine uses fractionally more fuel per hour than the other and there is typically a difference between main tanks of a few hundred kilos, so we had a 300 kg difference between the contents of the left and right tank. When the first engine failed TAC (Thrust asymmetry compensation) automatically applied rudder. The speed reduced from 320 knots indicated to 245 knots indicated. It was able to maintain 245 knots and FL250. When the second engine failed the rudder trim applied by TAC was taken out and the trim went to zero. The autopilot dropped out and the flight controls reverted to direct mode. The speed initially came back to 230 knots but then the nose started to lower. The nose continued to lower and the rate of descent increased to 4,000 feet per minute, the nose kept lowering and the descent rate increased to 7,500 feet per minute with a bank angle that increased to 25 degrees. The speed at this point had increased to 340 knots indicated, above VMO but there was no horn as it was on limited electrics. About this point the RAT (Ram air turbine) chipped in and the CDUs and copilot's PFD (Primary flight display) came alive. The flight controls stayed in direct mode.The eicas screen was full of messages like pitot heat, flight controls, APU fault (The APU had tried to autostart due double engine failure but failed due no fuel to start it) low fuel pressure etc. Then with a max descent rate of almost 8,000 feet per minute the nose started to slowly rise and keep rising. We had dropped to about FL170 but the nose slowly rose up to 6 degrees pitch up and we started climbing at about 3000 feet per minute and the bank angle reduced to only 5 degrees. It climbed back up to FL210 at which point the speed had come back to 220 knots and then the nose dropped down again and we were soon back to descending at 8000 feet per minute. So basically a series of phugoid oscillations with bank angle between 5 and 25 degrees and pitch attitude between about 9 degrees nose down and 6 degrees pitch up. It was losing about 8000 feet and then gaining about 3 or 4000 feet with airspeed fluctuating between 220 and 340 knots. We didn't watch it all the way down due time constraints and stopped the experiment at 10,000 feet but it was consistent all the way down. Having watched it I can say with certainty that if the pilots were incapacitated and it ran out of fuel there is no way it could have landed on the water with anything like a survivable impact. Just passing on the info. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:17 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands