American 191

[generaltso]

I was in my mommies womb.

 

[TCAS]

By the way, I always heard that the "forklift" was holding up the engine, with only one bolt holding the pylon on, when the mechs went to lunch. The forklift bled down and the bolt was overstressed, and that was the one they found laying on the runway....

You're right about the forklift bleeding down. That caused a bending moment and fatigue crack on the rear rear pylon to wing attachement fitting. That attachment fitting is what eventually failed. The broken bolt found on the runway was a result of the failure of the attachment, not the cause of the failure.

 

[FlyinT]

Pilot Humor

The day that 191 went down.....

There was a DC-10 model over the desk in Dorm 1 at ERAU (DAB) before the day was out, the plastic model was missing and engine and in a steep nosedown descent.. No one took responsibility for the 'broken' model airplane. As I recall, it stayed hanging for about a week til it disappeared one night.

...that's all I have to say about that.... "forest gump"

 

[NuGuy]

Hi all,

I was talking to dude who knew quite a bit about this accident. Apparently, the captain, who was the pilot flying, did a superb job at flying the airplane, everything on the mark and right on speed.

Problem was that the generator on the lost engine powered the captain's flight instruments, and there was no cross-tie mechanism. To add to the problem, on the DC-10 at the time, a stick shaker on the FOs side was an option, and not installed.

So the captain was flying V2 (as he should), the electrics on his side died. The slats on the affected wing came up as the hydraulics bled down, and at V2 the wing stalled. Because the only stick shaker on the aircraft was powered by the captain's side electrics, he had no stall indication.

Lots of changes were made to the DC-10 after this.

Best,
Nu

 

[PHX767]

The history channel special said that the FO was flying, and had functioning instruments.

The stick shaker controversy:
A stick shaker is indexed to a predetermined AOA to determine the stall threshold. This is obviously based on configuration, as the threshold would be different with slats extended, flap position, etc. Even with an operating shaker on the FO's side, it would be indexed to the slat/flap configuration that existed, or was commanded. So, since the slats were in the EXT position because of the takeoff flap setting, would the shaker onset reset itself to a RET condition after the loss of hyd pressure and the collapse of the slats? So it seems that the shaker onset would be for the wrong configuration. Granted, if the FO's yoke was shaking he could have had additional info about the ship even if it was for the wrong configuration.

What was not discussed is the hydraulically powered flight controls. Did the loss of the #1 hyd system fluid (I believe, it's a long time since KC-10 school) leave the ailerons unpowered? The film of the crash is chilling. Looks like a classic Vmc rollover.

Also the special did not mention the UAL Sioux City DC-10 which suffered a loss of all hydraulics after a turbine failure. The crew did an awseome job of getting it down.

 

[saabcaptain]

I understood that the FO was flying at the time and as others have said the airspeed was held as appropriate flawlessly. I believe the 10 was modified with a slat pin so that loss of hydraulics will no longer cause the slats to retract.

 

[bandit110]

Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground.

James Taylor....

I'll drink to the crew that did everything right. Makes you think about things a bit.

Salute!!

 

[Bandit60]

I was a little boy living in the suburbs when this happened. I remember it well. It was so powerful watching it on the news because they actually had it on tape. It was a sad day

 

[Huck]

So the captain was flying V2 (as he should)

This was also changed after 191 - if you lose an engine between V2 and V2+10, you hold what you got, instead of pitching up to V2.

 

[B190Captain]

I just turned 10 almost 2 weeks before that.

 

[DH106]

You won't find a better, more detailed, and illustrated analysis of AA 191 than in:

Air Disaster, Volume 2
by Macarthur Job
Aerospace Publications Pty Limited
North American distributor: Motorbooks Intl., Osceola, WI

All 4 volumes are available at Amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1875671196/ref=pd_bxgy_text_2_cp/202-9662071-8064652

I remember AA 191... I was 7 years old, camping with my family. I was too young to understand how tragic this was.

I highly recommend the four Air Disaster books, which provide probably some of the best lessons of what to do, and what not to do when it comes to flying.

 

[KCSO780]

I highly recommend the four Air Disaster books, which provide probably some of the best lessons of what to do, and what not to do when it comes to flying. [/B][/QUOTE]


I second the above...............

 

[Swede]

I vaguely remember that they programmed the exact machanical scenario into a sim and had quite a few guys fly the sim. The vast majority crashed. Also IIRC there were a few who flew it away and survived, but I forgot what they did differently.

The only thing I could think of would be to maintain some airspeed at the expense of altitude. Then, as the slats bled retracted and the aircaft began its roll, get the slats up with enough airspeed to avoid the now higher stall speed.

Another problem might have been this: With full aileron, the spoilers would differentially deploy, further adding drag and losing lift in a critical scenario.