Page Links: Index Page
| bobbytables
June 12, 2025, 19:33:00 GMT permalink Post: 11899652 |
Condolences to all the people who have lost loved ones:
I have a question about that: As the plane would have been fully fueled (say 50t), a full flight and full luggage etc - and if it didn't have enough speed for - say no flaps, short takeoff, pulled up before V1 - and assuming both engines were 'ok': Aren't aircraft nowadays require only one engine for a takeoff in an emergency (one assumes that would be a in fully loaded configuration)...? If so, then surely two fully good engines should have no problem, particularly when it's taken off already...? Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Condolences V1 |
| bobbytables
June 12, 2025, 23:54:00 GMT permalink Post: 11899845 |
I'm sorry but pilots are taught to recognise lack of acceleration during takeoff. They're also taught about cross checking FMC entries during setup. How are they taught? By me and many others.
Even if the pilots had the wrong FMC performance, it would be noticed in the before takeoff cxl. \x93Would be noticed\x94 is inappropriately strong as even the best sometimes make mistakes, even two people making the same mistake. Look at how many investigations contain a line like \x93and the discrepancy was not noticed in cross-checking\x94. that said, it doesn\x92t smell like incorrect performance data, given that they left the runway at roughly the same place as previous flights on the same type and route. Subjects: None |
| bobbytables
June 13, 2025, 10:01:00 GMT permalink Post: 11900273 |
Hi everyone, 787 driver here, well lets look at the facts we see
very late rotation, but pitch and departure path look like normal up until stalling point. mayday was called but without clarification or purpose, for me this indicates stress in the flight deck, especially low level no smoke or fire from engines, I would rule out severe damage or birdstrikes at this point Flaps 5 departure would be difficult to see as a pixel on a bad video, but they would not have made the rotation at that speed so I assume they used flaps during departure, also you would neglect to ECL's and a config warning no RAT to be seen either, again ruling out dual engine failure, also the climb would not have been so parabolic maybe single engine fuel starvation/Mechanical issue/dirty fuel, but seems unlikely, the flight path is too gentle Gear stays down, and even though the pitch remains the same, they start losing lift and basically stall the aircraft into the ground don't forget, Air India uses 64/67K engines on they're 787's, with temp of 41 degrees (ambient, so even more above tarmac) and a QNH of 1001, those engines will be pushed to "hard work mode" already IMHO, two things I could assume happend - either single engine failure, no pitch adjustment and speed fell below Vstall, OR, most likely - mixup of Flaps moved to up position in stead of Gear moved to up position, that would clarify the gear, would clarify the loss of lift and that the engines have no smoke, and no RAT, very late rotation - stated several times on this thread but zero evidence for it and some analysis suggests the rotation was at roughly the same location as previous departures of the same flight no RAT - others, including one with a lot of experience with the sound of a deployed RAT, insist that it was deployed. The video evidence is unclear. Not saying you\x92re necessarily wrong about anything but I take issue with those that state as fact things that are not (yet) supported by any evidence at all Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Dual Engine Failure Engine Failure (All) MAYDAY RAT (All) RAT (Deployment) |
| bobbytables
June 13, 2025, 11:08:00 GMT permalink Post: 11900361 |
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): MAYDAY |
| bobbytables
June 13, 2025, 20:14:00 GMT permalink Post: 11900863 |
I wouldn\x92t say that it changes anything at all. Pax statements are all over the place with these kinds of events. If there were more survivors there would be a few who said they saw a fireball outside, etc.
Subjects: None |
| bobbytables
June 13, 2025, 20:24:00 GMT permalink Post: 11900871 |
I don\x92t give credence to any of his recollections. I do find the recorded sound of the RAT quite compelling after watching some other videos of a deployed RAT and hearing from the chap who hears them fly over while testing them every day. The photo of the section of wing in the wreckage with flaps still extended also puts paid to the other main theory, in my mind.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): RAT (All) RAT (Deployment) |
| bobbytables
June 13, 2025, 20:48:00 GMT permalink Post: 11900883 |
The recordings are simply of too low quality to draw any conclusions from.
If it was dual engine failure shortly after rotation, that is very bad luck and I doubt any crew could recover from something like that. I could speculate further but I think it\x92s just too hard to say without better quality footage or FDR data. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Dual Engine Failure Engine Failure (All) FDR |
| bobbytables
June 13, 2025, 21:51:00 GMT permalink Post: 11900948 |
Retracting the flaps would put them at the back of the power curve where drag increases with decreasing speed, causing the speed to reduce further!
The trouble seems to start at the exact moment the gear should have been raised, putting the flaps up, iso the gear, would cause the kind of loss of lift you see in the video. From there on, being at the back of the power curve, only firewalling the thrust levers and extending the flaps again could have saved them. Subjects: None |
Page Links: Index Page