10 plane crashes that changed aviation

Old Pete

Cockpit Authoritarian
I'm surprised that the Tenerife crash and the Air Florida crash did not make the top ten.
 

USMCmech

Well-Known Member
I'm surprised that the Tenerife crash and the Air Florida crash did not make the top ten.
They were both horrific tragadies. However they were not "game changers" that the article attempts to list. Runway incursions and departing with ice buildup were not unheard of ways to destoy an airplane.

In fact we really haven't found a new way to kill people in airplanes for about the last 50 years. Slight variations of the same handfull of scenerios, that happen over and over.
 

Old Pete

Cockpit Authoritarian
They were both horrific tragadies. However they were not "game changers" that the article attempts to list. Runway incursions and departing with ice buildup were not unheard of ways to destoy an airplane.

In fact we really haven't found a way to kill people in airplanes for about the last 50 years. Slight variations of the same handfull of scenerios, that happen over and over.
While I'm not an airline pilot, I thought there were significant changes in the way airlines handled icing conditions after Air Florida (even more so after the Roselawn crash) and runway incursions seem to be a continual special emphasis area for the FAA.
 

loubetti

Pays to fly
The Pan Am / KLM Tenerife crash was the "Titanic" of aviation disasters, and a good case study in the chain of events that lead up to such disasters, along with the lack of CRM at that time (KLM). If not on the list that is a very serious omission.

Air Florida?

Should not be on the list, in my opinion.

Roselawn?

Should not on the list either.

If you have to pick 10, it is a no-brainer that Tenerife should be on the list.

"Game changers"?

Ya' don't think Tenerife was?

The worst-ever disaster in aviation history had so many links in the chain or holes in the cheese as to not be funny!

Pan Am had the fuel to spare and wanted to hold, but the "brain surgeons" in Spanish ATC wanted him to join the mess on the ground, at an airport that could not handle it.

Let's add to that "Mr Ego" on KLM, who had spent so much recent time in simulators that he had forgotten that he was not calling all the shots.

That's just the start of the chain!

I'll tell ya', there is much to be learned from just about any crash, but Tenerife and Titanic, yes, Titanic, are two to be learned from.

That's right, you can learn from ship disasters too.
 

SmoothLanderJ

Well-Known Member
The Pan Am / KLM Tenerife crash was the "Titanic" of aviation disasters, and a good case study in the chain of events that lead up to such disasters, along with the lack of CRM at that time (KLM). If not on the list that is a very serious omission.

Air Florida?

Should not be on the list, in my opinion.

Roselawn?

Should not on the list either.

If you have to pick 10, it is a no-brainer that Tenerife should be on the list.

"Game changers"?

Ya' don't think Tenerife was?

The worst-ever disaster in aviation history had so many links in the chain or holes in the cheese as to not be funny!

Pan Am had the fuel to spare and wanted to hold, but the "brain surgeons" in Spanish ATC wanted him to join the mess on the ground, at an airport that could not handle it.

Let's add to that "Mr Ego" on KLM, who had spent so much recent time in simulators that he had forgotten that he was not calling all the shots.

That's just the start of the chain!

I'll tell ya', there is much to be learned from just about any crash, but Tenerife and Titanic, yes, Titanic, are two to be learned from.

That's right, you can learn from ship disasters too.
Good points about Tenerife. I 100% agree that it should be on the list.
 

WacoFan

Bigly
The article stated the top 10 that resulted in "technological changes". CRM in my view isn't a technological change as much as a psychological change. That said, the UAL 173 Portland crash was listed as a CRM improvement motivator. I am thinking that the KLM crash was not included because it is possible that the dutch didn't change anything as a result of the crash (not sure) and that the FAA/NTSB may have had a more limited ability to impact things. That is my best guess for its exclusion.
 

TFaudree_ERAU

Mashin' dem buttons
Eastern 401 was one that I thought might make the list. Ever thought about how or why that autopilot disconnect chime got in your cockpit?
 

scramjet

Well-Known Member
USAir 427 definitely sent some shock waves. I still get the shivers whenever I drive over by Green Garden.
 

Minuteman

“Dongola”
If I'm going to be a blowhard I probably should already know this :))), but why is there a bag on the passengers' emergency oxygen masks if it is not expected to inflate?
 

WacoFan

Bigly
How about American 191 in Chicago? I believe that on that machine (DC-10) a co-pilot side stick shacker was an option...and one that AA didn't take. I believe this had something do to with the crash as the co-pilot was the one flying, and had no shaker. I heard this on TV (History channel) - not sure if anyone else can verify that.
 

jtrain609

Uniting the black vote.
How about American 191 in Chicago? I believe that on that machine (DC-10) a co-pilot side stick shacker was an option...and one that AA didn't take. I believe this had something do to with the crash as the co-pilot was the one flying, and had no shaker. I heard this on TV (History channel) - not sure if anyone else can verify that.
I don't know how much of a factor that would be. In the EMB-145 only the captains side yoke has a pusher, but let me tell you what when you get that thing, both yokes come forward.

You start shaking the crap out of one yoke and the other one should start shaking too eh? In addition to the noise that you get when it happens. I'm assuming most transport category aircraft are built like the EMB-145 was, and if they are then it's really, really, really hard to ignore a stall.
 

Boris Badenov

Just running in to a burning house...
I don't know how much of a factor that would be. In the EMB-145 only the captains side yoke has a pusher, but let me tell you what when you get that thing, both yokes come forward.

You start shaking the crap out of one yoke and the other one should start shaking too eh? In addition to the noise that you get when it happens. I'm assuming most transport category aircraft are built like the EMB-145 was, and if they are then it's really, really, really hard to ignore a stall.
IIRC, in the AA crash, the hydraulics to the captain's shaker were knocked out by the engine falling off, so his shaker didn't activate at all. They knew they had a failure and flew the profile perfectly, but the slats weren't out because their hydraulics were damaged too, so the left wing stalled and over they went. The argument, as I understand it, is that if there were an independent co-pilot's stick shaker/pusher, it would have warned them of the impending stall and they probably would have been able to fly it back around (at very high speed). Someone with more recent and detailed knowledge feel free to correct me.
 

WacoFan

Bigly
I don't know how much of a factor that would be. In the EMB-145 only the captains side yoke has a pusher, but let me tell you what when you get that thing, both yokes come forward.

You start shaking the crap out of one yoke and the other one should start shaking too eh? In addition to the noise that you get when it happens. I'm assuming most transport category aircraft are built like the EMB-145 was, and if they are then it's really, really, really hard to ignore a stall.
Thanks for that explaination - never new really how a stick shaker acted as most Champs, etc don't have them. Interesting to know - thank you.
 

WacoFan

Bigly
IIRC, in the AA crash, the hydraulics to the captain's shaker were knocked out by the engine falling off, so his shaker didn't activate at all. They knew they had a failure and flew the profile perfectly, but the slats weren't out because their hydraulics were damaged too, so the left wing stalled and over they went. The argument, as I understand it, is that if there were an independent co-pilot's stick shaker/pusher, it would have warned them of the impending stall and they probably would have been able to fly it back around (at very high speed). Someone with more recent and detailed knowledge feel free to correct me.
That crash has always fascinated me for some reason. Thanks for the comment.
 

WestIndian425

Well-Known Member
Delta 191....more advanced Doppler radar?
That one made the list. :sitaware: ;)

I'm surprised Comair 5191 (KLEX) didn't make the list, even though the Grand Canyon mid-air collision made the list for ATC changes. I understand that it was more the fault of the crew, but ATC did take some of the blame, especially since there was only one controller working that morning.

I also agree that Eastern 401 should have made the list. Although it probably shouldn't be top-ten, I was also thinking about the Southwest winter accident in MDW (changes in landing distance computations), and PanAm 103 as well as 9/11 (changes in security measures)
 
Top