Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 421 to 430 of 430

Thread: Lion Air Flight 610 Crash

  1. #421
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,319
    The FAA needs breaking up clearly. It will require a Congressional enquiry that ends up echoing the Cullen Report into Piper Alpha. Lord Cullen said a major factor that led Piper to becoming so bad was that regulation was schizophrenic. The Department of Energy was responsible for both promoting North Sea exploitation as well as regulating its safety. That had to change so an outcome was the Department of Energy was broken up with the HSE taking over safety while the promotion bit was handed over to some economic/business department that has had more regenerations since then than the Doctor.

  2. #422
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    10,286
    I'm not so sure that breaking up the FAA would preclude a large player from cheating again; it was done recently by Boeing, but it's also been done by GE (they did not do their bird ingestion tests on the CF-6, the engine on the DC-10, but used "similarity" from the engine on the C-5, which had a similar core but a completely different fan). I'm sure that there are other occurrences. The FAA's regulatory model works best with smallish companies run by people who actually believe that human life is more important than the bottom line; it fails when the companies are willing spend more money bribing politicians donating to political campaigns than not killing people.
    Information about American English usage here. Floating point issues? Please read this before posting.

    How do things fly? This explains it all.

    Actually they can't: "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." - Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.



  3. #423
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Very near, yet so far away
    Posts
    294
    Not strictly relevant to the topic but still Boeing.

    The new 777x has folding wingtips, apparently to allow it to use normal gates but still get enough lift from the wings. These wingtips fold up.

    Surely a better failsafe would have been to have the tips fold down as needed. That way if something breaks in flight the plane will still have enough lift to fly, as the air would keep the tips in the up position.

    Thoughts?

  4. #424
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    14,846
    Too close to the ground. Could run into service vehicles, etc. The pilot wouldn't be able to see them.
    Folding wingtips were an option on the 777 when it was first introduced, to allow it to fit into gates used by 767's. Nobody bought it.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  5. #425
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Very near, yet so far away
    Posts
    294
    I can see the potential issues when on the ground. I just hope they have a good plan for a failure. I would imagine they have potential buyers lined up or the plane would not have got this far.

  6. #426
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    8,795
    Maximum lift is at take off, after that a failed folding wing tip would be unlikely to crash the plane. I guess such a failure is less likely than turbine surge during take off, birdstrike or runway debris. As a passenger, it’s best not to know too much! Until this debacle I thought the safety testing of aircraft was exemplary, as a past aircraft apprentice this has shaken my confidence because it was not new materials, new designs or new atmosphere conditions, just suppression of well established safety procedures.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  7. #427
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    14,846
    The Prime Directive:
    No single failure, or combination of failures more probable than one in a billion flight hours, may result in a catastrophic accident.

    I'm pretty sure a wingtip failure on takeoff would be catastrophic, so they'll have been working VERY hard to prevent it.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  8. #428
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    No longer near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    4,962
    Naval aviation has been using folding wings for decades. That includes Boeing-designed aircraft.

    They know how to it right, if they choose to.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  9. #429
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    10,286
    Quote Originally Posted by headrush View Post
    I can see the potential issues when on the ground. I just hope they have a good plan for a failure. I would imagine they have potential buyers lined up or the plane would not have got this far.
    A number of naval aircraft -- most notable the F-8 Crusader -- have taken off and landed with its wings folded. See, for example, https://www.flightjournal.com/f8-wings-folded/
    Information about American English usage here. Floating point issues? Please read this before posting.

    How do things fly? This explains it all.

    Actually they can't: "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." - Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.



  10. #430
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Very near, yet so far away
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by swampyankee View Post
    A number of naval aircraft -- most notable the F-8 Crusader -- have taken off and landed with its wings folded. See, for example, https://www.flightjournal.com/f8-wings-folded/
    Cool story, thanks for the link.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •