onetrack

The Chairman of TATA Sons/Air India, N. Chandrasekaran, has stated he expects to hear some preliminary crash findings within a month.

Yes, my apologies, I was going on my faulty memory, thinking FADEC instead of ADIRU, and I should've checked the official incident summary before posting. The Incident Summary for VH-QPA, 07/10/2008: "The official investigation into the incident concluded that the accident 'occurred due to the combination of a design limitation in the flight control primary computer (FCPC) software of the Airbus A330/Airbus A340, and a failure mode affecting one of the aircraft’s three air data inertial reference units (ADIRUs). The design limitation meant that, in a very rare and specific situation, multiple spikes in angle of attack (AOA) data from one of the ADIRUs could result in the FCPCs commanding the aircraft to pitch down'." Yes, no conclusive proof of the cause was ever derived - from the available evidence. That evidence was lacking, because the U.S. Navy refused to reveal what type of radio transmissions are generated from the Holt VLF station. They merely state their transmissions don't affect aircraft systems. But what are the chances of TWO separate incidents, involving TWO different makes of aircraft, BOTH happening in the vicinity of the Holt VLF station? And what exactly is that "very rare and specific situation"? "On 27 December 2008, a Qantas A330-300 aircraft operating from Perth to Singapore was involved in an (uncommanded control) occurrence, 350 nautical miles (650 km) south of Learmonth Airport while flying at 36,000 feet. At this time, the autopilot disconnected. The crew actioned the revised procedure released by Airbus after the earlier accident, and returned to Perth uneventfully."

......the outrage caused by his wilful destruction of a couple of Australia's finest aviation products, which led to a campaign calling on AUF members to tar and feather him and.............

That's sad to hear about, I'm surprised at the number of people who pass on early. Maybe if she had lived with someone, there might have been a different result. RIP.

Well, the final report is out on this one, and it only reinforces the preliminary report, and it's pretty damning of the aircraft operators procedures. I can see lawyers rubbing their hands over the liability claims here. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/atsb-final-report-fatal-plane-crash-outback-qld-2023/105435330

It looks like an aerobridge driver will be looking for a new job that suits his skills - "Would you like fries with that?". On a par with driving under low bridges and overpasses, and being unaware of your vehicle height.

Age doesn't mean a thing to the TSA, they will jail old grannies if they're considered suspicious. Just hope you don't see the four letters "SSSS" on your airline ticket. Australia is probably regarded as a source of anti-American feeling under the current administration. 😞 They'll go through the entire contents of your phone, and even look for your stated opinions on social media sites - let alone search you and your luggage intensively. And they won't put anything back, that's your job. And locks on things mean nothing to them. https://www.travelandleisure.com/ssss-on-boarding-pass-7547257

You'd have to have handfuls of anti-seize applied, before any of it migrated to brake pads. A dab of nickel-based anti-seize is the cure to any corrosion/sticking problems.

......Cappy, Turbo, and others. Only OT's contributions are stimulating and interesting, just like Cappy's long delirious nights, down at the..........

Good luck with getting through the TSA without a body orifice inspection!! 😄 Always remember in America, it's, "Yes, Sir!", "No, Sir!", when anyone has some kind of authority over you! https://www.mensjournal.com/travel/tsa-sends-clear-warning-to-all-airport-travelers

Qatar Airways is basically an arm of the Qatari Govt, it is wholly-owned by them, so limitless petro-dollars go into ensuring they're a "premium flying experience". I flew business class from Doha to Perth on a Qatar B777 about 12 yrs ago, it was the best airline experience I've ever experienced. Meals are cooked on board to your order, and the fully-reclining seats that lay flat for sleeping, have inbuilt massagers! Even better, there were 34 seats in business class on the Qatar B777 flight, and there were only 9 occupied!

If you run a Wasp R-985 for a power plant, you'd better have an Arab Sheik for an uncle! I can remember talking to Bill Charney about his "Red Rockette" Staggerwing fuel burn, it was an eye-watering figure, around 25-30 U.S. gallons/hour!

The electrical system of the Dreamliner is staggering in its complexity, as compared to earlier models. It uses six generators along with miniature "substations" to provide electrical power. Its design relies a lot more on electrical componentry, and a lot less on pneumatics, with the design aim of reducing weight and increasing efficiency. Even the hydraulics are electrically controlled on the Dreamline, a major design change from earlier Boeings. However, I harbour a feeling that the investigators will find a cause for the thrust and power failures that will come from out of left field - a reason, that no-one, especially the Boeing designers and testers, ever imagined could happen. Remember the FADEC blips on the Qantas Airbus that flew near the U.S. Navy communications base at Exmouth in 2008? The aircraft did an uncommanded descent of 650 feet before the crew intervened and corrected the flight path deviation. It was found after extensive investigation, that the U.S. Navy low frequency radio wave generation overwhelmed the FADEC protection systems and more FADEC shielding had to be installed in the Airbus. I'm wondering if some unexpected powerful radio signal generation in the Ahmedabad airport area, produced EMI interference with the Dreamliners electrical power systems? GaryBPilot on YooTube points out an interesting thing about Flight 171 after takeoff. Everyone is trying to figure why the undercarriage didn't retract - which it should have, as soon as positive climb rate was established (normally only seconds after liftoff). GaryBPilot outlines how the Dreamliner MLG bogies are electrically canted forward, prior to being retracted into the wheel wells. Conversely, the bogies are electrically canted backwards prior to landing. This bogie canting process assists in improved undercarriage stowage when retracted, and assists in softer runway contact when landing. Gary says he can see the undercarriage bogies commence their canting, which indicates the undercarriage retraction lever was selected. But then, the undercarriage goes no further in the retraction process. That would seemingly indicate a major power failure to the undercarriage retraction mechanism. This could be an indicator to further electrical failures that led to loss of thrust. Another point is that India is the home of some pretty destructive critters, such as rats. If a rat got aboard undetected and chewed up important electrical componentry or wiring, and thus damaged redundancy features as well, that would go a long way to explain how "foolproof" aircraft systems could be damaged to the point where redundancy failed. http://787updates.newairplane.com/787-Electrical-Systems/787-Electrical-System#

It's amazing the uses to which you can put a hair dryer. A good one is using them to remove decals that are otherwise difficult to remove, without damaging the underlying paint. Warm them up, and they will come off a lot easier.

The BBC article below outlines the investigation procedures. The Boeing investigation team are deferring to India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) as the investigation leaders. As the article states, investigators will have a pretty good handle on what happened within a few days, but gaining understanding of WHY it happened, will take a lot longer. The recorders on the Dreamliner are high tech, and record a vast array of inputs, unlike early recorders. Therefore I would presume that they have backup power in the event of total engine failure. I'm not sure that the engines failed completely, but a check of engine component damage will soon reveal whether they were running or stopped. The BBC article is fairly well done, but there's an error where it states the aircraft was carrying 100 tonnes of fuel. The aircraft is capable of carrying 100 tonnes of fuel, but according to my information, 50 tonnes of fuel is adequate (with statutory reserves) for a flight from Ahmedabad to Gatwick, and that's what Flight 171 was carrying. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gkd555jlko

Yes, that information is correct, 8 Culver Dart GW's were built, powered by the 90HP Warner-Scarab Junior 5 cyl radial. https://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Braas/13545.htm https://planeandpilotmag.com/culver-dart-model-g/

Yes, it's O-320 Lycoming powered. The article says, "A round cowling covers the engine to appear like a radial engine installation". This is correct. The name is spelt "Nugget". https://generalaviationnews.com/2022/06/15/25-years-of-fly-in-success/

You can advise "at your own risk" all you like, but if someone crashes on your property, and they're injured or even killed, all it takes is one clever lawyer to advise the injured party or their spouse/close relatives that you failed in your duty of care, and the lawyer for the complainant has found a reason to pursue a claim - then your advice about "at your risk" is worth very little in any ensuing legal action. To protect yourself, you really need to carry out an airstrip Risk Assessment, record the details, and initiate a Safety Plan (and record that, too), thus ensuring that you took satisfactory steps, that met your Duty of Care to your airstrip users. New territory that people have not ventured into previously can contain hazards that they're not aware of. You must make sure all hazards are logged, and the details provided to the airstrip users.

Fama Helicopters no longer exists, it was purchased around 10 years ago by the Chinese Duofo Aviation. The above design has been scrapped, and Duofo have their own designs of helicopter. https://duofu-aviation.com/it

And now, Capt Steeve has changed his opinion, after seeing the clear video evidence of the RAT deployment.

That video and explanation from Capt Steeeve is very good, and it jells with what MenTour Pilot and his mate were discussing - that a brain fart in selecting flaps up instead of gear up is totally on the cards, and there would be no major warning against the error. Even the distinct shape and placement of the different levers still does little towards an inadvertent incorrect choice of levers. The FO on the Yeti Air ATR 72 crash in Nepal selected the prop feather lever inadvertently, instead of flaps, when coming in to land - but on the ATR 72, these two levers are adjacent, so a higher chance of incorrect lever selection.

Do you have a link to that "clear video"? I wouldn't be looking for dead birds on the runway, for evidence the engines ingested them. A few birds in a flying flock would do the damage and be chewed up, and the rest would fly away.

The RAT being deployed is seriously open to question. People are basing their decisions on the RAT being deployed, on grainy, low quality video with pixellation. It's not possible to determine if this was the case. The chances of a double engine failure are very low, but bird ingestion is the main cause. Usually, bird ingestion results in visible smoke and flames from the engine exhausts. I can't see that in any video, but the videos are scarce and of poor quality.

The general technique is the aviation authority of the country where the aircraft crashed collects and analyses the recorders, with the NTSB assisting in the process of opening and studying them.

The story about the aircraft taking off using only half the runway is a furphy, initiated by faulty tracking that only commenced once the aircraft was halfway down the runway. The runway is 3,500 metres long, and a Dreamliner needs 2538M to take off. Add in high local temperature at takeoff, a full aircraft at near MTOW, and it would need all of that 2538M to get airborne. No-one in their right mind would take off at the halfway mark of the runway, with a full commercial flight at MTOW on a stinking hot day. If the aircraft initiated the takeoff at the halfway mark along the runway, it wouldn't have even been anywhere near V1 when the runway ended. The CCTV shows an aircraft climbing satisfactorily for about the first 500 feet, and the questions to be answered is why the undercarriage wasn't retracted as soon as it left the ground, and why the flaps appear to not be set to takeoff position. The flaps may have been extended for takeoff, the video quality is too poor to determine what their position is. It seems impossible that an experienced Captain would takeoff with no flaps extended - that is so basic to aircraft operation, and there are so many warnings if you try to, the chances of that happening is near zero. MenTour pilot has a fairly good discussion about the flight on FB, get past the first few minutes, and they get into the nitty-gritty. It's all speculation anyway, until the FDR and CVR are examined. Both have been recovered. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/air-india-crash-flight-ai-171s-last-takeoff-analysed/articleshow/121811830.cms?from=mdr https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1207383097733798