View Single Post
  #5  
Old November 3rd 06, 06:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jim Macklin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,070
Default American Flight 191 - Recovery Procedure

Yes, a DC-10 at Tulsa had both wing mounted engines fail
after sucking up about 10,000 sparrows. Came around on just
the tail engine.

The problem with flight 191 was that the crew did not know
the slat had retracted. Since lift varies by the sq.root of
the speed, the wing would not be stalled at V2, but with the
slat retracted, the effect was greater than the combined
effect of rudder and aileron anti-roll command. At 300 feet
they just wasn't time to figure it out.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Rick Umali" wrote in message
...
| Last night I watched a fascinating documentary on the
History Channel,
| titled (I think) "Flight 191". This is the American
Airlines DC-10 crash on
| March 25, 1979, in which 270+ were killed, after the No. 1
engine blew off
| its wing. (I was only eleven when this happened.)
|
| In the last part of the program, the subject turned to the
recovery
| procedures used by the pilots. I'm not a pilot, so I'll
have to paraphrase,
| but essentially the plane could have still been flown with
its missing
| engine if the pilots recognized they were in a stall (the
pilot in question
| didn't have a "stick shaker" to warn him of this).
|
| I don't doubt it's possible to still fly a DC-10 with one
engine missing,
| but a lot of things have to go right to turn it around and
land, yes? Can
| anyone recall a commercial aircraft recovery from a blown
engine?
| --
| Rick (www.snipurl.com/rickumali) Umali