Re: Lauda Crash

From:         greg@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory R. TRAVIS)
Organization: Indiana University
Date:         22 Oct 93 01:05:15 PDT
References:   1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In <airliners.1993.652@ohare.Chicago.COM> kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) writes:

>Robert Dorsett writes:
>>look at the Lauda 767 crash near Thailand.  In that case, the
>>automatic interlocks failed, and ripped the engine off the airplane

>Are you sure that the engine was ripped off?  I never saw anything
>about that in any of the reports, and I think I would have remembered
>something that dramatic.  I also don't entirely see why an in-flight
>reverser deployment would necessarily cause an engine separation, and
>if it did, the aircraft should still be flyable.  (Unless its a DC-10.)

I'll second Karl's skepticism.  After all, a number of aircraft ARE
certified for in-flight use of thrust reversers - specifically the
DC-8.

I'll grant that the engines on 767 are substantially more powerful
than those on a DC-8, but I still find it hard to believe that
in-flight deployment of the cascade doors on a 767 would result in
engine separation!  If so, why aren't there 767 engines littering
runways all over the place?  The margin between power available
in-flight vs. that on the ground can't be that great, or am I
mistaken?

greg
-- 
Gregory Reed Travis					D P S I
	
Data Parallel Systems Incorporated	greg@cica.indiana.edu