Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

At the top of hour...Seconds From Disaster.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

FN FAL

Freight Dawgs Rule
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Posts
8,573
On the National Geographic Channel they will have a one hour episode called the "plane crash in the suburbs" on at the top of the hour.

It's the story of the El Al cargo Jumbo Jet that crashed into an apartment complex back in October of 1992.

Maybe it's aired before, but I have never seen this particular episode.
 
No...It was an El Al cargo 747..The right inside engine seperated and collided with the right outboard motor..Pilot flew for 8 minutes on the 2 left engines before losing control on the attempted emergency landing..In short he stalled, went into a spin and crashed into the apartment building..Root cause was the main strut pin on the right inboard engine that failed due to metal fatigue.
 
Pantherjon said:
No...It was an El Al cargo 747..The right inside engine seperated and collided with the right outboard motor..Pilot flew for 8 minutes on the 2 left engines before losing control on the attempted emergency landing..In short he stalled, went into a spin and crashed into the apartment building..Root cause was the main strut pin on the right inboard engine that failed due to metal fatigue.

I'm with you, they had paint evidence of the nose cone of one engine being planted on the nacell of the other engine. The digital recreation didn't really portray the actual event as they were guessing, but it would be my guess that something passed over the top of the wing to take out that wing section.

So, that's the only consipricy I could see happening here...maybe.
 
As far as the section of leading edge that was torn off the wing, it was just 'conjecture' on their part as they dont know the 'true' trajectory that the first engine took after striking the other engine.My guess is that they surmised that the engine after striking the other one went over the top striking the wing as it passed taking that section of the leading edge. But you do have to agree that it was some pretty good fortune that they were able to locate those peices in that lake..Without that off duty pilot witness I think the crash would still be classified as 'unknown causes'.

Also makes one realize, no matter how big and massive a piece of machinery is, everything is there for a reason and has importance.


FN FAL said:
I'm with you, they had paint evidence of the nose cone of one engine being planted on the nacell of the other engine. The digital recreation didn't really portray the actual event as they were guessing, but it would be my guess that something passed over the top of the wing to take out that wing section.

So, that's the only consipricy I could see happening here...maybe.
 
The show was good, catch it if it airs again.

Once more I am struck at the bulldog determination of the accident inspectors, who simply never let go once on the trail of a causation for an accident of this type.

What chilled me was the fact that those pilots were doomed the instant the separation occurred, but didn't know it. The loss of lift on the right wing would prevent any ability to slow to less than perhaps 250 knots.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top