PILOT SPIN
Pilot Zone => Pilot Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on August 26, 2019, 01:30:53 PM
-
https://kdvr.com/2019/08/25/al-haynes-captain-of-united-flight-232-dies-at-87/
-
Haynes work on that massive problem on the DC-10 made Sullly look like a mere passenger.
Rest In Peace.
-
I had the chance to hear him talk many years ago as a CAP cadet. I always remember how he talked about how the rescuers left the cockpit for last while searching for survivors because it was crushed so bad that they didn't think anybody would have survived.
-
I had the chance to hear him talk many years ago as a CAP cadet. I always remember how he talked about how the rescuers left the cockpit for last while searching for survivors because it was crushed so bad that they didn't think anybody would have survived.
Amazing man. He and his crew (I think the had a flight engineer on the DC-10, but don’t know if they got rid of them by then) had no idea what actually had happened to the aircraft. They had to think things through, using differential thirst to turn the aircraft, etc. Wild ride.
-
The DC 10 did have a flight engineer, they deleted that position with the MD 11. What has amazed me about this mishap is that Capt Dennis Fitch (the Sim Instructor that was deadheading) had read of the Japan Airlines 123 crash in 1985 with loss of hydraulic fluid and wondered if an airliner could be controlled with power levers only without hydraulic power and had experimented with that problem in the simulator and that he was aboard on this flight.
-
I bet those guys would have had no problems dealing with a 737 Max MCAS issue. They understood flying airplanes and had a true feel for it.
-
I bet those guys would have had no problems dealing with a 737 Max MCAS issue. They understood flying airplanes and had a true feel for it.
An interesting point on the Max and MCAS, no US operator had a problem with the system. Now, in fairness not much was known about MCAS by crew members until the 2 accidents, but, there were some reported problems with activation in the US which turned out to be non events.
-
My thoughts on where Boeing really went wrong is designing a plane for first world pilots with first world skill sets and then selling the plane to the third world. Not a popular belief and I'm sure I'll get flamed for it.
-
My thoughts on where Boeing really went wrong is designing a plane for first world pilots with first world skill sets and then selling the plane to the third world. Not a popular belief and I'm sure I'll get flamed for it.
In what venues do you expect to get flamed?
It’s a good point, and one I’ve never thought of before. Certainly, good business practices would dictate suiting the product to the potential customer.
-
My thoughts on where Boeing really went wrong is designing a plane for first world pilots with first world skill sets and then selling the plane to the third world. Not a popular belief and I'm sure I'll get flamed for it.
The 737 Max is a “franken boeing” that was demanded by SWA so they could maintain one type concept. Boeing actually wanted a clean sheet design, but SWA and a few other airlines wouldn’t hear it.
There was some engineering slight of hand to certify the Max. Had the FAA done correct oversight, the Max would have been a new type. But Boeing was under pressure to deliver to the customer.