Posts by user "BrogulT" [Posts: 24 Total up-votes: 67 Pages: 2]

I think that even if the DEL-AMD leg were flown totally empty for repositioning that it still would have been over MLW if it carried enough fuel for AMD-LGW. And we know from witnesses that the DEL-AMD leg was not empty. AMD is a regular stop for AI and has fuel, why would they tanker it in?

I don't want to refute your theory, but given your 30 years of experience---presuming it is relevant--I'd ask you to clarify a few things.

First, water in fuel is not a novel concept and I would presume that the designers of the 787 knew about it. You've simply stated that water might collect and settle out, but how much water might you expect under those conditions (57% humidity doesn't seem terribly high to me) and what features and procedures are already there to mitigage water contamination issues? Your theory would imply that there basically aren't any. IDK how the tank venting system works, but the idea that some huge amount of water could have condensed in the tank from the outside seems preposterous.

Second, how much water do you think it would take to cause a sustained flameout in one of those engines? Remember that they have automatic continous relight, so you're going to have to sustain your flame suppression long enough for them to wind down completely. I think those engines were probably using something like 2 gallons per second of fuel along with 250lbs of air heated to over 1100F. Any fuel in the mix would burn and the water would be converted to steam so you'd need mostly water for a long time. So if you think a hundred gallons of water could have gotten into each tank then perhaps I'd buy your theory--which, btw, does fit the known facts pretty well. But I think that short of some woeful neglect, Boeing and AI already know about and have methods of dealing with water contamination. At least I hope so.

What is "economy fuel"?

What boggles my mind (if my understanding is correct) is that you have redundant systems that use that redundancy not to make sure that they never accidentally shut down an engine improperly but rather to make sure they never fail to shut down an engine if even one channel thinks it should. AFAIK engines not returning to idle have not killed anyone yet (the engine can typically be just turned off or the fire handle pulled once the crew decides they want the engine to die) but engines shutting off at a bad time are an obvious hazard.