Engine-out procedures and eccentric forces on engine pylons

BDS wrote
Judging by how much it was moving around you would have thought it was
held on with bungee cords.

Nope! Back in my B-707 days, the engine was attached to the pylon
with just three bolts about the size of your forefinger, and each of
these bolts was designed to break-away and release the engine before
it could do damage to the wing.

Bob Moore

Bob Moore writes:

Nope! Back in my B-707 days, the engine was attached to the pylon
with just three bolts about the size of your forefinger, and each of
these bolts was designed to break-away and release the engine before
it could do damage to the wing.

Well, that's certainly reassuring.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On 23 May, 17:04, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob Moore writes:
Nope! Back in my B-707 days, the engine was attached to the pylon
with just three bolts about the size of your forefinger, and each of
these bolts was designed to break-away and release the engine before
it could do damage to the wing.

Well, that's certainly reassuring.


Why, what's it matter to you, you don't fly anyway.


Bertie

On May 23, 12:04 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob Moore writes:
Nope! Back in my B-707 days, the engine was attached to the pylon
with just three bolts about the size of your forefinger, and each of
these bolts was designed to break-away and release the engine before
it could do damage to the wing.

Well, that's certainly reassuring.

Not necessarily. Although it was admittedly caused by maintenance
crew abuse, don't forget the Chicago DC-10 accident, where the engine
came off and caused the deadliest accidental crash in US history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...nes_Flight_191

"Kev" wrote in message
ups.com...
On May 23, 12:04 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob Moore writes:
Nope! Back in my B-707 days, the engine was attached to the pylon
with just three bolts about the size of your forefinger, and each of
these bolts was designed to break-away and release the engine before
it could do damage to the wing.

Well, that's certainly reassuring.

Not necessarily. Although it was admittedly caused by maintenance
crew abuse, don't forget the Chicago DC-10 accident, where the engine
came off and caused the deadliest accidental crash in US history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...nes_Flight_191


Wow! this is spooky! (from the wiki article cited above)................

"The crash in Chicago remains the most deadly single-aircraft accident in
United States history. Another flight with the same number, Delta Air Lines
Flight 191, crashed at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport in 1985. Most
recently, Delta Air Lines Flight 5191, operated by Comair as Flight 191,
crashed in 2006 killing 49 people. All three carriers have since retired the
flight number 191, as is currently customary after major accidents on most
airlines. In addition, Puerto Rican airline Prinair also had a fatal flight
numbered Flight 191. The only fatal X-15 crash was also Flight No. 191."