On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 10:20:35 -0800 (PST), George
wrote:

On Jan 18, 12:46*pm, "Scott M. Kozel" wrote:
§ñühw¤£f wrote:

I propose a technological solution to the problem of bird strikes:
turboprops.
Lets return to the good old days pre-jet engines.

Well ... while the L-188 Lockheed Electra example is a turboprop, the
above poster apparently didn't realize that a turboprop engine has a jet
engine.

Discuss.

I wonder in this example why did the Electra stall and spin?
From my very first lessons it was drilled into my head by all my
instructors "WHEN THE ENGINE FAILS GET THE NOSE DOWN AND FLY THE
AIRPLANE!" I wonder why the Electra didn't remain in a (somewhat)
straight & level attitude? Was the crew too busy, confused, alarmed,
to fly/glide the airplane?


ISTR from reading Air Disasters by Macarthur Jobs, that the Electra crashed
because the birds took out both engines on one side and the asymmetric
thrust of the remaining engines could not be corrected by the available
rudder authority. I may be wrong. It was a long time ago that I read about
it.


How about the hijacked jet that crashed off the Atlantic? The video of
that crash shows it hitting at a wing-first, crooked angle. Again, why
didn't the crew have the thing in a landing configuration which may
have saved more, if not all, lives?
Was this crew scared? Did they have guns pointed at their temples?


There was a hijacker in the cockpit. Apparently he upset the controls at
the last minute.

--
Shill #2

Great Tarverisms #5

The pitot tube was added to the first American jets to prevent the
kind of failures that killed an entire squadron off Florida. Without
P1 and T0 a jet will stall in fog.

Thanks to both of you for playing.

John

rec.aviation.military
11 August 2002