|
Post by gus on Aug 26, 2015 23:17:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Aug 27, 2015 12:10:17 GMT
For those among us, which are too young to remember this horrible crash here a report: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Airlines_Flight_981The captain of this flight Nejat Berköz was a close freind to one of my flight instructors. The above report also refers to the nearly sucessful efforts of the crew to regain control of the airplane which had lost all its flight controls and also the engine controls of no 2 and 3 engines. As parts of the DC-10s body were subcontracted to Convair Dan Applegate who was Director of Product Engineering at Convair at the time had serious reservations about the integrity of the DC-10's cargo latching mechanism. His oberservations and the non-reaction of Douglas are considered a classic case in the field of engineering ethics. Douglas not takeing serious his warnings destroyed the fame of Douglas as an airplane manufacturer providing airplanes with outstanding good structures. Tragic also that oversights of a similar type occured with the MD-80 series regarding the T.O. warning systems, allowing a "NO FLAP" Take off of a Spanair MD-82 from Madrid, as the TOWS warning system did not activate like in another accident or various incidents with the MD-80 series before. My personal relation to that accident: When I worked in Madrid form 2001 to 2006 I choose often the Spanair flight to Vienna and my last flight with Spanair was with Captain Luna who was captain of that fateful flight 2 years after. Kind regards Walter
|
|
|
Post by gus on Aug 27, 2015 13:16:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Aug 27, 2015 13:40:40 GMT
Here´s a video tribute (compiled by someone else) in memory of the THY flight 981 .... DC-10-10, TC-JAV, named "Ankara" .... www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pjPZCgsALIA French aviation photography colleague of mine (Christian LAUGIER) was at Paris, Orly Airport, on that particular March day, during 1974, and actually photographed TC-JAV departing on what was to become its final/fatal flight. I recognize what I believe to be a couple of "his" photographs of this particular aircraft, taken on that day, within the above video tribute. Walter .... more or less adequately covers what happened to this flight .... as well as CONVAIR/GENERAL DYNAMICS early concern/s in regard to the integrety of the port side rear fuselage mail hold door locking mechanism .... which they found, upon independant testing, was liable to fail when subject to less pressure than might be inflicted upon it at crusing altitude .... and forthightly commented their concern per a written warning to McDONNELL-DOUGLAS but which (apparently) went "unheeded". It´s actually been stated .... "professionally" .... that any perceived regain of control during the aircrafts uncontrolled dive, subsequent to its decompression, might have been more the result of the DC-10´s basic flight characteristics rather than any regain of control by crew as, without hydraulics, and normal control, the aircraft probably began to commence a fugoid type motion as it accelerated down .... but .... lacked altitude in order to be able avoid the terrain. Even otherwise .... the end result would likely not have been different anyway and as was hilighted by the much later JAL B747 disaster in Japan also. A really sad fact relating to the 1974 THY crash, at Paris, and one equally as tragic as (if not more so than) the accident itself, is that it need not have occurred .... at all .... becuause it had, less than 2 years previously, already been experienced on an AMERICAN AIRLINES DC-10-10 .... flight 96 .... N103AA .... on June 12th 1972 .... en route between Detroit and Buffalo. The very same port side rear fuselage mail hold door failed on this particular aircraft during its climb toward cruising altitude .... resulting in a catastrophic decompression of the cabin .... and which also caused part of the aft cabin floor to collapse (due to the absence of pressure relief vents) and the severing of several vital control cables and hydraulics lines (routed below the cabin floor) to the aircrafts number 2/tail engine and elevator. Unlike was the case with the THY aircraft which carried "a near full load" of some 346 PAX (in a high density configuration .... exasperated due to a strike by major British airline) at the time of its accident .... the AA aircraft was "very lightly" loaded with less than 100 PAX. It´s been reasoned that had the AA aircraft had been flying with a much higher loading .... THEN .... the end result of this particular might well have been "quite different" .... BUT .... in an absolutely superb show of skill/airmanship the flights captain (Bryce McCORMICK), unaided by hydraulics (or with very little remaining), was able to regain, and maintain, control of the aircraft using asymetric thrust settings .... as he nursed the badly damaged flight back to a rather firm, but successful, landing at Detroit, with little more than a mumber of scratches and bruises among his PAX and crew .... and albeit after "A NASTY FRIGHT". This event .... and the later THY crash also .... may be viewed per the following 3-part dramatization .... "BEHIND UNLOCKING DOORS - AIRCRASH INVESTIGATIONS" PART 1 www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZrhC1YKK6APART 2 www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fy8l4WsWNYPART 3 www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zJSIWQX6X8 TO CUT A VERY LONG AND COMPLEX STORY SHORT .... The investigation into what became known as "The Windsor Incident" resulted in a gentlemans (type) agreement then being forumulated between the NTSB (or it might have ben the FAA) and McDONNELL-DOUGLAS rather than what should have been a mandatory airworthiness directive .... and all DC-10´s were supposed to have undergone modification/s to the locking mechanism associated with their port side rear fuselage mail hold doors, however, as the result of "yet another inconceivable blunder" .... DC10-10 L/N 29 .... the aircraft which became THY´s TC-JAV (originally one of a number of DC-10-10´s ordered by Japans MITSUI TRADING BANK in anticipation of an ANA order which embarrassingly collapsed .... as ANA were persuaded to buy L1011´s) .... was overlooked and the aircraft then delivered to THY "unmodified" .... yet .... McDONNELL-DOUGLAS records indicated that the modification/s had, in fact, been performed to this particular aircraft !!!! It was probably "these events" which propagated the otherwise unfounded and unfavourable (media manipulated) public perception of the DC-10 during the 1970´s (and which undoubtedly caused the NTSB/FAA knee-jerk reaction to MDC, and the DC10, grounding the aircraft, in response to the May 1979 AA crash at Chicago) .... and which unjustifiably impacted the aircrafts reputation for long while afterward. Due to corporate carelessness the DC-10 did have something of a bad/bloodied start to life .... BUT .... come whatever followed it "DID" eventually evolve into a "SUPERB JETLINER" .... and one favoured/preferred by many professional aircrew right up until the last civil operated example was withdrawn from service during early last year .... I think it was Mark C BOG/CO
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Aug 27, 2015 16:01:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Aug 27, 2015 19:50:55 GMT
The DC10 hydraulics system modification/s applied "after" the 1979 AA DC10-10 crash at Chicago, Ohare Intl Airport, unfortunately, went only part of the way .... so it was learned a little while later .... because within a few years of that particular accident another airline, flying a DC10-30 (think it might have been PIA) .... and which featured the post 1979 modification/s .... suffered a catastrophic engine failure after T/O and which damaged its hydraulcs (that portion of it which powered the LE slats) and in a manner which the 1979 modification/s were supposed to have prevented from ever happening again .... and "only just" made it back down again safely. Further modifications were then applied. THEN .... there was the UAL DC10-10 crash at Sioux City, Iowa, during 1989 .... as the result of a catastrophic engine failure also and subsequent loss of "ALL" hydraulics leaving the crew to contemplate controlling the aircraft using asymetric and other thrust related adjustments. It´s "a shear bloody miracle" that anyone, at all, managed to walk away from that particular "PRANG".
Mark C BOG/CO
|
|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Aug 28, 2015 3:49:11 GMT
My school athletics teacher John Cooper two times silver medalist at Tokyo 1964 Olympics was one of the victims on that Turkish DC-10 crash, sad day indeed
|
|
|
Post by George Carty - HJG on Sept 4, 2015 22:29:05 GMT
Why was it that when I read about this crash, one thought I couldn't get out of my head was "why wasn't the DC-10 cargo door designer executed as a mass murderer?"
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Sept 5, 2015 10:55:52 GMT
Hi: Why such a case did not happen with the L-1011 or B-747 which had the same or similar cargo doors? Seems the problems where much deeper rooted in the systems philosophy of the DC-10 and the L-1011, B-747 had a more conservative outlay of its systems as no triple hydraulics failure occured even after engine bursts as in the DC-10 happened. Noteworthy also that the first Tu-154 which came down also had a triple hydraulics failure and her desingers did not fully understand, that the system could only power for 3 minutes the all hydraulic flight controls after such failure. For the emergency landing procedure prescribed at that time for such a case they would have needed more time. The more complicated new airplane systems become, more often the desingers will pass over unknown territories, which only by hindsight are discovered.
Kind regards
Walter
P.S.:
Regarding criminal guilt of the designer:
-There was no intention by the desinger to propose an unsafe solution. -The outwards opening cargo door was aplied in various other airplanes. -The airline permitted or oversaw changes (shortening) of the locking bolts by service people which weakened the structure by around 90 %. -Serious misgivings about the design by experts were not comunicated to the designer. -Cargo doors opened in other airplanes without such a catastrofic outcome. -The proposals of avoiding an unlocked cargo door by the NTSB were not made compulsory by the FAA. -Voluntary changes of the cargo door design of the THY airplane were documented as done but not realised.
All together: the designer would be absolved of any crime.
|
|
|
Post by gus on Sept 5, 2015 12:24:58 GMT
Hello, Even the B-747 suffered a similar problem with a cargo door (one australian passenger was ejected of the plane trough the aperture on the cabin floor) That was a problem with a electric motor for close the hinges of the door) This was found after the door recovery from the ocean !! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_811Regards.
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 5, 2015 13:12:38 GMT
Actually .... he was a "NEW ZEALANDER" .... and was among 8 other PAX lost that night also. They, or at least some of them, apparently went straight through the number 3 engine upon being ejected from the forward cabin during the explosive decompression .... so the evidence confirmed later. A quick .... but .... "ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE" way to "GO". Here´s a dramatized documentary in regard to this event .... UNLOCKING DISASTER - AIR CRASH INVESIGATIONSwww.youtube.com/watch?v=8PvcdL99ZwkIt was the parents of the New Zealansder lost on UA 811 that were responsible for exposing the truth behind the occurrence of this particular incident. Mark C BOG/CO
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Sept 5, 2015 13:30:56 GMT
Hi:
Very sad for the dead passengers, but the rest of the people onboard survived with the help of all their guardian angels. But those who say that in principle a design is safer if it holds a door in place by the pressure differncial have their point.
Walter
|
|
|
Post by George Carty - HJG on Sept 6, 2015 16:24:05 GMT
Regarding criminal guilt of the designer: -There was no intention by the desinger to propose an unsafe solution. -The outwards opening cargo door was aplied in various other airplanes. -The airline permitted or oversaw changes (shortening) of the locking bolts by service people which weakened the structure by around 90 %. -Serious misgivings about the design by experts were not comunicated to the designer. -Cargo doors opened in other airplanes without such a catastrofic outcome. -The proposals of avoiding an unlocked cargo door by the NTSB were not made compulsory by the FAA. -Voluntary changes of the cargo door design of the THY airplane were documented as done but not realised. All together: the designer would be absolved of any crime. Still surprised none of the grieving relatives decided to do a Vitaly Kaloyev on him though... George
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 6, 2015 16:57:36 GMT
I think some sort of "Class Action" was taken .... and McDONNELL-DOUGLAS did, evenrtually, "cough-up" (compensation-wise).
George .... can you get hold of a book entitled "DESTINATION DISASTER" by Paul EDDY ?
Probably long out of print now .... but .... you might be able to score a loan of a copy through your local public libray .... or obtain a personal copy online somewhere.
I think you´ll (anyone who´s interested) might find it "quite interesting reading"
Pau EDDY is also the jounalist intervired throughout my above linked AIRCRAH INVESTIGATIONS documentary about the Paris/THY crash.
Yet another book is entitled "THE RISE AND FALL OF THE DC-10¨by John GODSON .... but .... I think the Paul EDDY publication is more exposoing in regard to what went on behind the scenes and ventually caused both the 1972 AMERICAN AIRLINES incident over Windsor/Ontario and the following 1974 TURKISH AIRLINES accident outside Paris.
Mark C BOG/CO
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Sept 7, 2015 12:11:25 GMT
Hi George: "Still surprised none of the grieving relatives decided to do a Vitaly Kaloyev on him though..." In all respect: Aviation minded people as we all here seem to be should know it better: Accidents in aviation are seldom the guilt of an individual. The cited case of the Swiss controller Peter Nielsen is far from his personal guilt he even was absolved personally in court noteworthy not his bosses. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cberlingen_mid-air_collisionEven in the case of the German-wings copilot there are so many more facts to explain, like giving up the two persons in the cockpit rule, the medical supervision etc... Kind regards Walter P.S.: "Vitaly Konstantinovich Kaloyev (Russian: Виталий Константинович Калоев, born 15 January 1956) is an architect and deputy minister of housing from Vladikavkaz, North Ossetia, Russia. His family died aboard Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937, which collided with DHL Flight 611 over Überlingen, Germany on 1 July 2002. Peter Nielsen, an air traffic controller handling traffic when the collision occurred, was freed from any responsibility in the following inquest and he retired from further air traffic work afterwards. However, Kaloyev held Nielsen responsible, and in 2004 he travelled to the Swiss town of Kloten and stabbed him to death. Kaloyev was released from prison in November 2007 and shortly after was appointed deputy minister of construction of North Ossetia–Alania." for more: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitaly_Kaloyev
|
|