10 plane crashes that changed aviation

It was an interesting article. I am not sure how they came to choose some of the accidents they did. That said, how about a little thread drift. I am not sure how many read accident reports, but which crash have you studied that you felt was unique and personally learned the most from and why?
 
WacoFan said:
It was an interesting article. I am not sure how they came to choose some of the accidents they did. That said, how about a little thread drift. I am not sure how many read accident reports, but which crash have you studied that you felt was unique and personally learned the most from and why?
Click to expand...

US Air Flight 427 has always conveyed to me that, despite things going so well, you could be gone in an instant.
 
Holocene said:
US Air Flight 427 has always conveyed to me that, despite things going so well, you could be gone in an instant.
Click to expand...

One of my friends' aunt was on that flight. The lawsuit helped pay for my friend's and all of his cousins college, her husband at the time now has a nice place downtown Chicago...as well as some other houses in the area.
 
The crashes that occurred on September 11, 2001 caused some very big changes in aviation. I wonder why they left those out?
 
Boris Badenov said:
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.
Click to expand...

Wasn't one of the changes that came out of that one to maintain V2 or faster if you were already through V2? i.e, you're at V2+30 and flying happy so you just stay there.

It's been a while, but I thought the crew was above V2 and slowed to it when the motor fell off (per the profile at the time) and the lack of slats led to the stall?
 
woutlaw said:
Wasn't one of the changes that came out of that one to maintain V2 or faster if you were already through V2? i.e, you're at V2+30 and flying happy so you just stay there.

It's been a while, but I thought the crew was above V2 and slowed to it when the motor fell off (per the profile at the time) and the lack of slats led to the stall?
Click to expand...

I didn't know about that outcome, but it fits with what I've read. Thanks.
 
TWA514 inbound to Dulles, December 1974, spawned a few changes...

According to http://www.aopa.org/asf/asfarticles/sp9806.html


Several things changed in the aftermath — the FAA directed that all air carrier aircraft be equipped with ground proximity warning systems (GPWS), and the FAA published a change to FAR Part 91, clarifying pilot responsibilities regarding operations on unpublished routes. An incident reporting system was established (NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System), a pilot-controller glossary was published in the AIM, and chart depictions were improved. Procedures regarding ATC responsibilities during approaches were defined.
Click to expand...

The last sentence is why approach clearances became very wordy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top