Civil Aviation Ministry of Information thread


#425

Something you don’t see every day…


#426

That’s really cool. I’ll bet the maintenance department was keeping their fingers crossed that they didn’t have some grounding maintenance item crop up down there…


#427

Pretty sure I would hand in my walking papers the minute I was told I was going to Antarctica.

Wheels


#428

Mechanics would jump on it though, how cool would that be?! Swap some LRU, walk a bit on Antarctica, meet cool people and get a ton of overtime plus stories to tell!

like, 90% of why we fix aircraft is so that we got weird stories to tell, just put some mechanics in a bar with an unlimited supply of alcohol and let it flow! :wink:


#429

#430

Ugh. I hate that kind of odd failure. No real chance there unless it had happened like 10 or 15’ off the ground.


#431

Wow…


#432

I mean, to me this feels like failure on part of maintenance. What factors exactly played into that(tired, pressured, stressed, bad conditions[lights, etc]), I wouldn’t know but… yeah…


#433

Oh my. A tailrotor failure is one thing. Maybe…maybe even survivable if you dump the collective and get some forward airflow. But a tailrotor that goes full pitch on its own is simply unrecoverable. Nothing could be done behind the stick. I am not even sure a good mechanic could have prevented it. A pin and castellated nut? They tend took just like they always do until they don’t. Terrifying.


#434

I wonder if a device could be made that would sense that condition and given other parameters, like rotation speed, descent rate, and tail rotor blade angle, that there could be some sort of auto-centering force applied? I suppose that it would need to be completely redundant to the original control mechanism.


#435

What needs to be done is immediately obvious to a pilot (I would guess). So no automated system would help. In this case, it was a simple but catastrophic mechanical failure. The computer would be just as helpless as the human.

After rereading I see what you were getting at. Still, I think layers of protection bring further layers of risk as each layer is itself a system subject to failure.


#436

Yeah, that’s why I said completely redundant, but I’m probably looking past some other mechanical limitations of the design. What got me thinking about this is back when I began skydiving, there were AADs (automatic activation device) that would sense certain parameters and fire your reserve automatically. They had been out for decades, including those in ejection seats, but because they were analog and mechanical, a lot of jumpers, including myself didn’t use one. The last thing that you needed was to have your reserve deploy into a good canopy.

Then a Swiss company named Cypress invented one that used a digital processor and more reliable way of releasing a reserve canopy (small pyrotechnic cutter), and the damned thing was nearly flawless. It took a little while, but they are pretty much default equipment now.

A rethinking of the device along with some recent technical innovation made it reliable enough to be widely accepted.


#437

The simplest, but extremest option would be a way to mechanically stop/seperate the drive linkage on the tail rotor. It would really only be of use in situations like this, but it could certainly be a life saver.


#438

Yesterday afternoon. We had a Quito to Bogotá flight. Doing an intersection take off from Alpha 1 for RWY 36 at Quito, the taxi onto the runway appeared to be a bit bumpy. Then Tower called us up and stopped us, halfway onto the runway. We were instructed to wait, and were informed what was going on. I eavesdropped on ground and approach on the other two radios to improve our situational awareness, as we had been told to stop in a bit of a precarious position. A Martin Air was being put onto hold over QIT.

Listen to this as from 21:30 for about a minute…

We looked at each other and burst out laughing. It was very funny, at that particular moment.


#439

Haha…probably wasn’t in the NOTAMs… :rofl: Now, in addition to a RAIM prediction page, we also need an earthquake probability page…


#440

Allegedly:

“According to a report I saw online this guy put on a larger, heavier engine without adding additional engine mounts. In fact the aircraft manufacture told him specifically not to put that engine on. The extra weight combined with the hard impact resulted in what you see here.”


#441

Or in other words…

(yes I’m just looking for excuses to repost this).


#442

An electric engine converted Cri Cri…what is the wing loading on that thing? It seems like it would be very high and not very engine-out friendly…

https://gfycat.com/PastExhaustedFox

Wiki says: Wing loading: 55 kg/m2 (11 lb/sq ft)

Which is not all that much…Cessnas and Pipers are around 13-15 lb/sq ft I think…


#443

I like it, but that cockpit it’s so cramped that if you sneeze you literally self bird-strike / destruct.


#444

I really love that clip! :laughing: