Wave

I read that Gimli Glider write-up and was amazed. I knew about the incident
but hadn't seen this detailed (or well written) of an account.

A couple of things jumped out at me:

snip using 1.77 pounds/liter as the specific gravity factor. This was the
factor written on the refueler's slip and used on all of the other planes in
Air Canada's fleet. The factor the refuelers and the crew should have used
on the brand new, all-metric 767 was .8 kg/liter of kerosene. /snip

If my college physics was correct, 1.77 pounds = 0.8 kg. I assume there's a
typo in that paragraph!

snip As Pearson began gliding the big bird, Quintal "got busy" in the
manuals looking for procedures for dealing with the loss of both engines.
There were none.. Neither he nor Pearson nor any other 767 pilot had ever
been trained on this contingency /snip

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read that. The FIRST thing I was taught
in my brief career as a powered flight student was the contingencies of no
engine power from the moment one pushed the throttle forwarded to the moment
one was finished taxiing.

Wow.

2NO


"keithw" wrote in message
...

Another story of a commercial airliner becoming a glider is the Gimli
Glider that occured in Canada . The Boeing 767 ran out of fuel at
41,000 ft and ended up landing at an old abandoned airport that had
been converted to a drag strip/race track ..While a race was going on
!!!!

IF you have never read this story before take a few minutes and click
on the link below ....its an incredible story !! The Pilot was also
glider pilot and used a side slip on a 767 on final !!


http://www.silhouet.com/motorsport/tracks/gimli.html


--
keithw
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au ]
- A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when, why, or what they
fly -

Ted Wagner wrote:

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read that. The FIRST thing I was taught
in my brief career as a powered flight student was the contingencies of no
engine power from the moment one pushed the throttle forwarded to the moment
one was finished taxiing.

Well, that's a single engine recip approach. With multiple turbines,
multiple simultaneous engine failure is pretty difficult to achieve I
guess - unless you screw up the fuel situation.

Perhaps the reliability stats are reflected in the fact that
transoceanic scheduled flight used to be done with 4 engines (707), then
3 (L1011), now 2 (767). That's a pretty strong statement.

Maule Driver writes:

Ted Wagner wrote:

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read that. The FIRST thing I
was taught in my brief career as a powered flight student was the
contingencies of no engine power from the moment one pushed the
throttle forwarded to the moment one was finished taxiing.

Well, that's a single engine recip approach. With multiple
turbines, multiple simultaneous engine failure is pretty difficult
to achieve I guess - unless you screw up the fuel situation.

It has been done with 767s, Airbusteds, P3s and C-130s. It only
takes a small error and then to not check properly. IE, report
fuel loaded in lbs and have the number close to what the crew
expect in Kgs.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.

I have heard that the Gimli Glider landing sequence was loaded into the
airlines flight simulators for training purposes and that almost no one
could successfully land the plane the way the pilot did. Can anyone confirm
this story?


wrote in message
...
Maule Driver writes:

Ted Wagner wrote:

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read that. The FIRST thing I
was taught in my brief career as a powered flight student was the
contingencies of no engine power from the moment one pushed the
throttle forwarded to the moment one was finished taxiing.

Well, that's a single engine recip approach. With multiple
turbines, multiple simultaneous engine failure is pretty difficult
to achieve I guess - unless you screw up the fuel situation.

It has been done with 767s, Airbusteds, P3s and C-130s. It only
takes a small error and then to not check properly. IE, report
fuel loaded in lbs and have the number close to what the crew
expect in Kgs.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.

Haven't heard that one, but know someone to ask. The DFW downburst is flown
frequently with the occassional lucky save.

Frank Whiteley

"Gary Boggs" wrote in message
...
I have heard that the Gimli Glider landing sequence was loaded into the
airlines flight simulators for training purposes and that almost no one
could successfully land the plane the way the pilot did. Can anyone
confirm
this story?


wrote in message
...
Maule Driver writes:

Ted Wagner wrote:

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read that. The FIRST thing I
was taught in my brief career as a powered flight student was the
contingencies of no engine power from the moment one pushed the
throttle forwarded to the moment one was finished taxiing.

Well, that's a single engine recip approach. With multiple
turbines, multiple simultaneous engine failure is pretty difficult
to achieve I guess - unless you screw up the fuel situation.

It has been done with 767s, Airbusteds, P3s and C-130s. It only
takes a small error and then to not check properly. IE, report
fuel loaded in lbs and have the number close to what the crew
expect in Kgs.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.

D2 (UAL 777 instructor) says "We don't really do the Gimli Glider scenario,
we do have a dual engine failure in the syllabus. I let the students take
all the way to touch down sometimes. Most of them make it."

Frank

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Haven't heard that one, but know someone to ask. The DFW downburst is
flown
frequently with the occassional lucky save.

Frank Whiteley

"Gary Boggs" wrote in message
...
I have heard that the Gimli Glider landing sequence was loaded into the
airlines flight simulators for training purposes and that almost no one
could successfully land the plane the way the pilot did. Can anyone
confirm
this story?


wrote in message
...
Maule Driver writes:

Ted Wagner wrote:

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read that. The FIRST thing I
was taught in my brief career as a powered flight student was the
contingencies of no engine power from the moment one pushed the
throttle forwarded to the moment one was finished taxiing.

Well, that's a single engine recip approach. With multiple
turbines, multiple simultaneous engine failure is pretty difficult
to achieve I guess - unless you screw up the fuel situation.

It has been done with 767s, Airbusteds, P3s and C-130s. It only
takes a small error and then to not check properly. IE, report
fuel loaded in lbs and have the number close to what the crew
expect in Kgs.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.