C-5 Crash animation and CVR

[_BravoWhiskey_]

Can't say that I recall what's on that checklist. That was a loooong time ago. But after running thru the single engine procedure or checklist (whatever your airline calls it), the flying pilot would advance the bad throttle back up to match the good one. As soon as you heard "single engine checklist complete", you squared the throttles (at least at the 4 airlines that operate jets that I've flown for anyway...)

You're just moving a dead lever that doesn't do a dam n thing at that point

Hmm, that would work in a plane with condition levers. CL-65 doesn't have them tho... Not that I remember that clearly, but on the RJ wouldn't the bad one be in the shutoff position until you tried to restart?

 

[Juniority]

Word is the Air Force safety folks jumped in a C-5 simulator to see if anyone could fly out of that situation. No one could.

However, they discovered that there were multiple ways it could have been made to work. By only changing one parameter at a time there were several survivable scenarios (pardon the alliteration). That is to say, they experimented by flying the accident over and over keeping everything the same, except one item at a time.

The simulator crews made it to the runway in each of the following one-item-different scenarios: 1. flying a correct instrument pattern altitude. 2. using partial flaps. 3. using the good throttles (instead of two good and the one shutdown)

I can't remember the rest of the one-item solutions but I think they came up with five that worked.

 

[propjob27]

I had forgotten that the RJ did not have fuel control switches below the throttle quadrant like every other jet I've flown. So i that case, yeah, you would have to leave the dead throttle in its shutoff detent (or whatever it's called)

So I guess I have to re-phrase my previous post. "Every Boeing and airbus operator I have flown for teaches matching the throttle positions after the dead engine is secured."

 

[Hagar17]

Can you provide a link to that? UCMJ actions are all public record. I smell BS, unless the LTC in question had some offical access to the video.

He did, he was the AD safety officer at the time of the accident, since retired, since brought up on charges and convicted. Probably in some stage of appeal. Still smell it?

 

[MalteseX]

He did, he was the AD safety officer at the time of the accident, since retired, since brought up on charges and convicted. Probably in some stage of appeal. Still smell it?

I can't find any info on this. It would be the fastest trial in the history of a trial of a retiree if it were true.

I can't find any info on a UCMJ conviction. Heck, the accident investigation board just released their findings only a few weeks ago.

 

[Oh-ryan]

He did, he was the AD safety officer at the time of the accident, since retired, since brought up on charges and convicted. Probably in some stage of appeal. Still smell it?

Hagar... I'm calling BS on you. You jumped all over some guy for posting a link to a public website. Then when not a single person sided with you, you throw out the "ha ha ha jokes on you guys... just kidding"

Now in your latest post you try to convince us of the validity of the info you posted in your supposed "joke" comment. I am sure in your next post you will tell us that "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

Looks like one slipped through the cracks at Purple.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

yes, as a matter of fact. Just got off the phone with the Dover Safety Office.

Have a nice day.

A joke? O.K., I'll buy it. Too bad this medium is not conducive to these kinds of jokes.

But seriously, whoever did post it, don't get caught.

But, being the deviant I am (and that Hagar17 wants to be but needs more time), I like it getting out. It can only help those who want to learn from the accident. It is privliged to protect the military leadership from bad press. I don't like a secretive government or business world. Get the info out.

It is now public policy for pilots to have their miscues out on the web. The transcripts of the SWA Midway accident are a perfect example. I don't like that part, but apparantly it is the price we pay for the openess we now enjoy.

Be careful what you guys say the cockpit, I mean flight station.

 

[JimNtexas]

He did, he was the AD safety officer at the time of the accident, since retired, since brought up on charges and convicted. Probably in some stage of appeal. Still smell it?

Yes. Your post made it sound like some retired officer was court martialed based because he independently found the link to the video and told someone about it. At best your statement was a Clintonian [SIZE=-1]exaggeration [/SIZE].

I still detect a lingering oder of BS. The accident wasn't that long ago, and the video only leaked about a month ago. I seriously doubt that he was "charged and convicted" in that short amount of time. And since UCMJ actions are public record, I'm sure you can provide a link to a story in the Air Force Times or elsewhere that confirms this story.

Your premise that it is a bad thing thing to release privileged information is valid. Your harm your own argument by getting carried away with hyperbole.

 

[JP4user]

Yes. Your post made it sound like some retired officer was court martialed based because he independently found the link to the video and told someone about it. At best your statement was a Clintonian [SIZE=-1]exaggeration [/SIZE].

I still detect a lingering oder of BS. The accident wasn't that long ago, and the video only leaked about a month ago. I seriously doubt that he was "charged and convicted" in that short amount of time. And since UCMJ actions are public record, I'm sure you can provide a link to a story in the Air Force Times or elsewhere that confirms this story.

Your premise that it is a bad thing thing to release privileged information is valid. Your harm your own argument by getting carried away with hyperbole.

Only one mistake with your post. It isn't a lingering odor...more like a harsh and continued stench of BS everytime he tries to come on here to defend his screwup. Sorry, I mean his post.

 

[Nocturnal1]

Back to the original matter at hand...security issues aside. A good friend of mine, former C-5 stanevil type, said the typical local pro sortie/procedures has a simulated failure approach in the profile. The procedures require the "simulated" engine thrust lever is retarded to idle and the rest of the procedure is completed/flown with the thrust lever in idle. Not being a C-5 guy I can only speculate on previous 4 engine heavies flown (Boeing) that after the engine failure, fire, severe damage checklist is completed the failed engine thrust lever is pushed up and matched to the others. This is done for several reasons including; throttle quadrant switch activation/warnings, and normal thrust lever movement rather than split thrust levers. An old crusty guy in the Army told me a long time ago; "you die the way you train". I don't say this lightly. Having flown in the; Army, Air Force, Part 125 and now Part 121, I've seen many good friends leave this world. The military has a tough job and all things considered, has improved aviation safety tremendiously over the last few decades. Civilian/commercial aviation safety record has improved quite remarkedly as well. Unfortunately, the military does a much better job of getting the word out to the crews about what happened and change procedures/training to prevent future occurances than the civilian world. Our airline rarely speaks of pilot trangressions which makes it very difficult to live and learn.

"Hey guys, be careful out there."