Re: O'Hare Accident

Date:         09 Aug 97 02:28:28 
From:         john@pegase.demon.co.uk (John Wright)
Organization: Me at home with my cat
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

On 05 Aug 97 17:45:51 , in <airliners.1997.1714@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
m@bang.org wrote:
>"jdobyns" <jdobyns@mho.net> wrote:
>> My understanding is that modern jetliners have the ability to take off
>> safely even if one engine fails on takeoff.  If so, did they ever figure
>> out why the one flight leaving Chicago in the late 70's crashed after an
>> engine fell off?
>
>There is a significant difference between an engine failing to produce thrust
>and an engine separating from a wing. Certification requires demonstration
>only of the former. The latter can be expected to do considerable damage to
>the wing during separation. An example follows.

[snip tale of Orion losing an engine or two]

The October 1994 edition of "Pilot" magazine carried an excellently
frightening tale of an ancient Boeing 707-321B (5N-MAS) freighter which
lost both starboard engines in turbulence over the French Alps in 1992.
Having taken off half an hour before at  maximum weight, and with half
the leading edge also gone, they could not maintain altitude, and ended
up landing downwind at Istres on their 4,000 meter runway, built as an
emergency landing strip for the Space Shuttle. When they tried to lower
the flaps, the starboard wing caught fire, but despite this they
executed a downwind landing, 23 tons over maximum landing weight on two
engines  - landing speed about 200 knots.  Despite all this, the crew
all got out and the cargo was recovered undamaged...

Corrosion in the No.3 engine pylon caused that one to fall off, and it
took No.4 with it. Both engines were found in the Alps about 800 meters
apart.  You can probably get a back issue or a reprint from Pilot if you
want to read the full story, ring them on +44 171 498 2506, or email
them at pilotmagazine@compuserve.com

--
John Wright