Air Disasters... and Near Misses

[markjay]

Jet made emergency landing when contaminated fuel affected engines

Investigators found disaster may only have been averted as it was flying light with no passengers and just seven crew, in quiet airspace and in clear conditions on February 26 last year.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Beggars belief....

 

[190]

There have been some almost unbelievable near misses like Air Canada flight 143 or the "Gimli glider" where the plane was only half re-fuelled because of confusion between pounds and kilograms. It ran out of fuel mid flight at 41,000 ft. The plane was landed safely without engines operating not least because the captain was an experienced glider pilot. Gimli Glider - Wikipedia

Many times when engines are lost the differentiator that achieves a successful outcome is experience in gliders.
The other famous glider pilot that brought a plane down safely was of course "Sully" who landed US Airways flight 1549 on the Hudson river. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549

 

[markjay]

...or this one:

Air Transat Flight 236 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[GeeJayW]

I don’t understand how compressor blades can become damaged or coated in deposits from materials in the fuel? Unless the article means turbine blades, in which case I get it. The ‘engineer’ responsible for this is in the wrong job.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

I don’t understand how compressor blades can become damaged or coated in deposits from materials in the fuel? Unless the article means turbine blades, in which case I get it. The ‘engineer’ responsible for this is in the wrong job.

So is the Gatwick engineer who checked the engine using the wrong manual.

It‘s a bit of a worry when you read about these ‘mistakes’. Thank you Covid for not letting me fly at the moment.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

There have been some almost unbelievable near misses like Air Canada flight 143 or the "Gimli glider" where the plane was only half re-fuelled because of confusion between pounds and kilograms. It ran out of fuel mid flight at 41,000 ft. The plane was landed safely without engines operating not least because the captain was an experienced glider pilot. Gimli Glider - Wikipedia

Many times when engines are lost the differentiator that achieves a successful outcome is experience in gliders.
The other famous glider pilot that brought a plane down safely was of course "Sully" who landed US Airways flight 1549 on the Hudson river. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549

I watched the film ‘Sully’ on Netflix just a couple of nights ago. If he was as portrayed by Tom Hanks then he was indeed very impressive. Not just in the air but on the ground too when all the technical evidence was stacking up against him to prove that he could have reached an airport.

(The best line in the film, and hopefully in real life too, was uttered at the end when Sully’s First Officer was asked if there was anything he would have done differently: “I’d have done it in July.” They went into the Hudson in January when it was bitterly cold.)

 

[markjay]

The ‘engineer’ responsible for this is in the wrong job.

It would seem this way.

But this incident also raises serious question marks regarding the recruitment, training, and certification of employees (by whoever was his employer), as well as supervision, quality control, and management of maintenance procedures being carried-out.

In the same way that you have to wonder what else do the Met not know about their firearm officers, given that PC Wayne Couzens, who was charged with the kidnap and murder of Sarah Everard, somehow managed to sail through the various psychological assessments that he would have been subjected to since joining the force in 2018.

'Bad apples' are rarely a simple matter of a random biological process... usually the farmer and greengrocer have a lot to answer for as well.

 

[Big Janner]

Jet fuel has, historically been both dirty and 'wet' (wet being water)
If travellers understood just how bad it could be, most would have walked.
There are hundreds of 'flame outs' during commercial flights every year

Until very recently (4 or 5 years ago), the standard test for jet fuel was; clear and bright.
A gallon of fuel ws dispensed into a glass container and held up to the light.
If it appeared 'clear and bright' to the person doing the test, it was passed as fit for purpose.

Aircraft engines draw fuel from the bottom of the fuel tank
The fuel tank is fitted with a vertical pitot tube at least 3" tall, for delivering fuel to the engines
This allows the engine to draw fuel, which will always sit on top of the water in the tank.
Unless of course, there is more than 3" of fuel in the bottom of the tank.
If there is . . . . . .problems.

Today, the roll out equipment for confirming the cleanliness of the fuel using laser particle counters/water contamination monitors, is underway, but, is not, as far as I am aware, mandatory.

If you plan to fly . . . .good luck

 

[ringway]

I don't how many Aircrash Investigation shows I have left to watch, but I find them intriguing and some of the causes of crashes are unbelieveable.

I once watched a (Panorama I think) documentary about Kapton wiring - a tightly-packed loom that runs inside the fuselage and over time deteriorates and chafes together causing on-board fires in aircraft.

I used to do some work for a large aircraft maintenance company at Manchester airport and would sometimes be allowed on to the hangar floor stood next to the aircraft - they looked after 747 downwards IIRC.
One day, I was talking to two or three of the mechanics and asked if they had seen the documentary about Kapton wiring.

"What's Kapton wiring?" was not the answer I was expecting!