Re: Garuda DC-10 crash, Fukuoka

From:         kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
Date:         15 Jun 96 13:43:27 
References:   1
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>The engines were reported as General Electric CF6.

Garuda had six DC-10s, all DC-10-30 models with CF6-50C engines.  (I
was tempted to say of course they were CF6 engines, forgetting for a
moment that the DC-10-40 has JT9D engines!)

>Similarities with Sioux City?

The later reports that an uncontained failure of #3 caused the failure
of #2 sounds more like the El Al 747-200F at Amsterdam in 1992 or the
China Air 747-200F near Taipei the year before.  In both of those, the
separation of an inboard engine apparently (I'm not sure if official
findings have been released in either case) took out the outboard
engine on the same wing.  Since certification requirements demand that
an airliner be able to complete a takeoff with *one* engine out, I
assume an engine (or pylon) failure on one engine is required not to
cause the failure of a second engine.

Based on the crash of AA 191 at Chicago in 1979, it appears that even
with a compromised hydraulic system, total failure is not immediate.
It seems like this crash happened even quicker than AA 191 so I'd
guess hydraulic failure, a la Sioux City, did not have time to become
a significant factor.

--
Karl Swartz	|Home	kls@chicago.com
		|Work	kls@slac.stanford.edu
		|WWW	http://www.chicago.com/~kls/
Moderator of sci.aeronautics.airliners -- Unix/network work pays the bills