Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

EGT

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Sep 4, 2003
1,605
1
Jay42 said:
Well, I didn't use to have a fear of flying...

Don't worry, there is no explosive discharges in the doors on the final builds to the airlines. They'll all be removed. Obviously.

You probably have more chance of keeling over from a heart attack ending up in the aircraft's morgue than die in it's crashed wreckage.


:eek:
 

jdechko

macrumors 601
Jul 1, 2004
4,230
325
EGT said:
You probably have more chance of keeling over from a heart attack ending up in the aircraft's morgue than die in it's crashed wreckage.

That reminds me of the Ron White quote... "Hey man, if one engine fails, how far will the other one take us"... "All the way to the scene of the crash, which is pretty convenient, cause thats where were going. Heck, I bet we beat the paramedics there by a half-hour...":p
 

ksz

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2003
1,677
111
USA
jdechko said:
That reminds me of the Ron White quote... "Hey man, if one engine fails, how far will the other one take us"... "All the way to the scene of the crash, which is pretty convenient, cause thats where were going. Heck, I bet we beat the paramedics there by a half-hour...":p
There was a story a year or two ago about a Malaysian aircraft, iirc, whose two jet engines quit in heavy turbulence. As the plane descended, the pilot managed to maintain the aircraft's attitude, circled around for a suitable landing site, and landed safely on a waterway. Everyone survived.

I could not find a link to the story, but found a FAQ on what happens when all engines quit in flight.

http://www.geocities.com/khlim777_my/questionsviaemail.htm
 

ksz

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2003
1,677
111
USA
From: http://www.geocities.com/khlim777_my/asditchingissues.htm

A Boeing 737-300 ditched successfully

On the 16th of January 2002, a Boeing 737-300 belonging to an Indonesian Airline had both its engines flamed out - a term to describe that the jet engines had failed. It happened as it commenced its descend to 9000 feet through thunderous clouds that were filled with rain.

The crew then tried to relight the engines but it failed to revive. Compared to a Boeing 777 where the relighting process is automatic, the Boeing 737 did not appear to have this advanced facility. In addition to this, on a Boeing 777, the APU will automatically light up as well when it senses both engine failures. The APU or the auxiliary power unit is a small jet engine that is located in the tail section and powers the electricity and air-conditioning of the airplane.

When the engine failed, the Captain maneuvered the airplane so that it could glide at an optimum speed of around 240 knots. This would cause the airplane to lose height rapidly at about 3000 feet per minute. He then attempted to make a forced landing, but preferred to ditch into water if only he could locate the sea. As the sea was out of reach, he decided to ditch on a river instead.

During the forced landing process, the Captain tried to decelerate from 240 to 150 knots by use of the flaps, but the hydraulics were not available to power the action. (In a Boeing 777, there is an emergency device known as a RAT or Ram Air Turbine, which is powered by free airflow as the airplane glide down with dead engines. The RAT would provide some hydraulics as well as electrical power during this critical phase of the emergency.) Luckily, the ditching was very well executed and the Boeing 737 came to a stop, floating near the side of the river.

This was one of the very rare situations where a commercial airplane lost both engines and was able to ditch successfully. So Murphy Law is right! Engineers were unable to determine the exact cause of the failure yet but it was speculated that engine icing was one of the possible cause of the flame out. (In this accident, 23 people were injured in the plane carrying 54 passengers and a crew of 6. One stewardess died when she was drowned in the river.)

b737ditch.jpg
 

hopejr

macrumors 6502
Nov 10, 2005
310
0
New South Wales, Australia
jdechko said:
It's interesting to see the Mega-transport vs. super efficient debate making some advances. I remeber that one of the problems with the super-big airbus (whatever model it was) is that very few airports were actually able to handle the plane because of its size.

That mega-transport happens to be what this thread is about (A380). Most airports can accomodate it now. Didn't know about the A350. Looks nice.
 

ksz

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2003
1,677
111
USA
EGT said:
That's unbelievable. I never heard about this incident!

Well done crew.
The captain of that flight became a national hero. Recorded ATC conversation revealed that he was calm as a cucumber throughout the ordeal, remaining focused and objective. He knew what to do and he did it.
 

EGT

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Sep 4, 2003
1,605
1
Lacero said:
Wow. I'd thought they at least use a custom embedded OS. BSOD at 40,000 feet is not my idea of fun.

Errr ....

Oh oh.
 

Attachments

  • WindowsPanel.jpg
    WindowsPanel.jpg
    27.1 KB · Views: 85
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.