----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Howdy, I'm curious to know what you folks think of this assessment of the Concorde crash of 2000. Supposedly this was written by an airline pilot, but you know how the web is. There is a bunch of stuff floating around that just isn't true. This account did NOT show up on the urban legends site, at least not yet, and that is encouraging. Anyway, whether the following is actually what happened of not, it is a good illustration of how several events can line up to cause an accident. Spook From a Continental Airline Pilot We all also know that the Concorde crashed because it hit a metal strip dropped from a CAL DC10 that departed from the runway just prior to the Concorde's departure. Right? Wrong! I prefer the Swiss cheese theory of accidents where the holes line up in the various barriers to prevent accidents.When they do line up there is an accident, over the Boeing chain of events. Hole number one: The airplane had been in maintenance prior to this flight and maintenance kinda sorta forgot to put a critical spacer in the LMLG (Left Main Landing Gear) truck. ( we will get to this later). Hole number two: The airplane is sitting at the gate. It is a few pounds over gross, roughly 16,000 lbs. and the CG(Center of Gravity)is near the aft limit. Hole number three: The V1 (Velocity 1) speed for the weight is 199 knots. Now we get to the runway and off we go. As the airplane accelerates it begins pulling to the left. Oh yes, the spacer was there to keep the trucks from swiveling. V1 is called Decision Speed. Above this speed it may not be possible to stop the aircraft on the runway in the event of a Rejected Take Off(RTO.) Hole number four: As they barrel down the runway the airplane's LMLG hits a runway edge light stantion. Guess where the stantion goes? You got it...right into the left fuel cell and punctures it and starts a fire. Serious, but salvageable. Now you ask, "Why didn't the captain just abort the takeoff?" Hole number five: Sitting on a taxiway waiting to cross the runway is a 747 with the French president and his wife aboard. The captain now has a choice. He can try to abort and perhaps plow into the 747 or he can try to fly. Hole number six: He decides to fly and rotates at 188 knots, 11 knots below V1. Hole number seven: So now you are having a really bad hair day. You are in a burning, over gross airplane with the CG going farther aft by the second because of the fuel loss, you are behind the power curve big time. What can make the day worse? (By the way, for all intents and purposes, they were already dead before the next, "Ah shit"). Hole number eight: The friendly, helpful flight engineer, on his own, without consulting the captain, decides to shut down an engine he THOUGHT was on fire. Now your bad day really is as bad as it gets: the airplane is on fire, it's behind the power curve anyway and now you have a good engine shut down when you are below VMCGAir (Velocity Minimum Ground). The airplane rolls over on its back and crashes into a hotel. (VMCG, which stands for Minimum Control indicated airspeed - Ground, is the minimum speed (Velocity) at which the pilot can maintain directional control of the aircraft with one engine suddenly becoming inoperative during the takeoff roll, with the use of aerodynamic controls only). Now you know why we don't fall in love with theories or jump to conclusions based on initial assessments. Blaming the accident on the CAL DC-10 was the easy way out. That makes it someone else's fault. ================================================================== TO UNSUBSCRIBE go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
