From: pab@po.CWRU.Edu (Pete Babic) Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Date: 10 Dec 92 16:07:11 PST References: 1 2 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
In a previous article, firstname.lastname@example.org (Robert Dorsett) says: > >The slat retraction DID affect the wing: it then became both a control and >aerodynamic problem. Exercising established control practices in an >unknown aerodynamic regime crashed the airplane (I'd love to know whether >this went into Airbus's "pilot error" database :-)). Had the slats remained >down, the airplane would have survived the engine failure, even with the >failure of the stall warning system. Other airframe manufacturers have >manual locking mechanisms for their slat jackscrews. McDonnell Douglas >relied on hydraulic pressure to hold it all together. > >Incidentally, this problem wasn't corrected: the SUX DC-10 also experienced >extension of its slats after it lost all its hydraulics. Does anyone know if the MD-11 has a proper locking mechanism for the slats? I'm a layman when it comes to aircraft design, but the DC-10 really looks like a substandard design that has killed a bunch of people due to cost cutting short cuts. -- Pete Babic - email@example.com /// LIVE TO PARTY, SKI TO DIE!!! /// /\ Member of ACE \\\ /// /--\MIGA (American Coaster Enthusiasts) \\\/// MS-DOS or a Mac? What's that?