Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
De havilland comet failure
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: De havilland comet failure
de Havilland’s Falling Comet—Case Study In 1952, the first production commercial jet airliner, the de Havilland Comet, began service for the British Overseas Airways Company (BOAC) (Pinto, 2015). More similar to todays modern jets than the Comet’s propeller-based contemporaries, the de Havilland Comet had four turbo-jet styled engines, back-facing wings, and a four wheel “bogie” style undercarriage (Wanhill, 2002). Initially, the de Havilland jets seemed to be sound aeronautics (Pinto, 2015). However, within the first few years of service, the fleet experienced multiple catastrophic failures within the first 30 minutes of flight, resulting in the deaths of 56 airline passengers (Wanhill, 2002). Following the second catastrophic event, the …show more content…
Within two weeks the second crash occurred, and it became clear the modifications made would not suffice (Pinto, 2015). After the grounding of the fleet, a number of rigorous investigations followed (Swift,1987). Ultimately, internal pressurization tests revealed two weak points in the plane’s body design (Swift,1987). Both of the discovered weak points were the interaction points of right angles, one in the frame, the other the shape of the viewing window(s) (Swift,1987). These high stress-concentration areas were found to be highly susceptible to cracking (Swift,1987). At the time, the majority of the airspace design philosophy was SAFE-LIFE, meaning the structures were tested before any cracking of damage had occurred (Wanhill, …show more content…
SAFE-LIFE measures ensured the “structure was designed to sustain the required fatigue life with no initial damage and no accumulation of damage during service e.g. cracking” (Swift,1987). Whereas with a SAFE-LIFE measure “All materials are assumed to contain a finite initial defect size before entering service that may grow due to fatigue loading in-service” (Swift,1987). Therefore, if SAFE-LIFE risk assessment had commenced prior to SAFE-LIFE assessments the aircraft’s design and safety teams would have recognized the risks before the damage had already
The Avro Arrow was Canada’s broken dream and it could have been one of Canada’s greatest aeronautical achievements. The cancelation of the Avro Arrow was a huge mistake that set Canada’s aviation industry back, which resulted in a Brain Drain to USA and was an act of Canada bowing to USA pressure. The Avro Arrow, an advanced, supersonic, twin-engine, all-weather interceptor jet aircraft developed by A.V. Roe of Canada in 1949, could have been many things. It might have become the fastest plane in the world, our best defense against Soviet bombers, the catalyst to propel Canada to the forefront of the aviation industry. Instead, it became a $400-million pile of scrap metal, and the stuff of legends. If A.V. Roe Ltd. remained and the Arrow flew today, Canada’s aircraft industry would be a very different thing indeed.
In this paper I plan to analyze and compare the Shaklefords in Hard Living on Clay Street and my immediate family. The comparisons include the structre of each family as far as marital arrangements, household arrangements, and kinship arrangments. The comparisons also include the culture of each family. In culture this includes ideas, norms, language and artifacts.The last and most important aspect of my family and the Shalkelforsd that I will analyze is the historical and socail forcs that most influenced both families. This is very important because historical and social forces shape and affects the way the family function as within and outside the family. Sice social forces are things we usually can not control families have no choice but to adapt to that social force, and include it as part of their lives. collecting information from personal interviews from my mother and father I was able to look at my family in depth and I was enlightened to a lot of new information which I plan to reveal through...
Williamson, K. S. (1996). The 'Secondary The golden age of aviation. New York, N.Y.: Smithmark Books, Inc.
McNeely, Gina. "Legacy of Flight." Aviation History. Mar. 1998: Academic Search Premier. 8 Nov. 2003.
After World War II there was an excess of aircraft and trained pilots in the United States, which significantly increase in private and commercial flights. An increase in the use of private aircraft and large passenger planes meant an increase in the possibly of aircraft safety incidents. Even though safety measures had been put in place to tend to large number of aircraft in the skies, in late 1950’s there were two unfortunate accidents that finally led to legislation that would be a major change to the world of aviation that affects us even today. The introduction of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 spurred several changes in aviation that eventually led to the creation of the Federal Aviation Administration.
At the time when Comet development had begun, De Havilland was aware that Boeing and other leading aircraft manufacturers were also considering jet-driven planes. If De Havilland could build the first jetliner, not only the company but Britain itself could be poised to lead the aerospace industry. With 90% of airline passengers everywhere traveling on Boeing aircraft in 1939 according to Pushkar, R.G. (2002), the British government had been anxious for a development such as the Comet and supported the project enthusiastically. Pressure to develop the Comet before other companies could release their own jetliners likely contributed to some testing negligence at De Havilland. The British Overseas Airways Corporation ordered 14 Comet 1s at £450,000 each as soon as the aircraft’s design had been decided upon (History Heads: “The Comet cover-up”), and this was a significant incentive for De Havilland to complete the Comet safely and swiftly. If the BOAC placed so much confidence in De Havilland’s product and other airlines could witness the aircraft’s success, this would garner tremendous support for the Comet and De Havilland overseas.
It’s very hard to say what steps, if any, could have been taken to prevent the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster from occurring. When mankind continues to “push the envelope” in the interest of bettering humanity, there will always be risks. In the manned spaceflight business, we have always had to live with trade-offs. All programs do not carry equal risk nor do they offer the same benefits. The acceptable risk for a given program or operation should be worth the potential benefits to be gained. The goal should be a management system that puts safety first, but not safety at any price. As of Sept 7th, 2003, NASA has ordered extensive factory inspections of wing panels between flights that could add as much as three months to the time it takes to prepare a space shuttle orbiter for launch. NASA does all it can to safely bring its astronauts back to earth, but as stated earlier, risks are expected.
This all iron design made the bridge a lot heavier than it was designed for, which added more stress to the truss. This fact, by itself, wouldn’t cause any alarm. However, the bridge itself, was very poorly constructed. The members of the bridge were all different sizes, and they were not connected together properly. Due to the poor construction and eleven years of use, members of the bridge had started to bend due to the stress. Despite bridge engineers inspecting the bridge for eleven years, no one noticed these faults with the bridge. However, the ultimate cause of this collapse, was so tiny, only one of the investigators, after the collapse, noticed it. A tiny air hole was left during the construction of the bridge, “and grew with repeated stress over eleven years” (Escher, 2009). This hole would develop in a crack, due to the changing temperatures and the trains crossing it for over eleven years. This would weaken the overall strength of the bridge. The cold winter air and the weight of the train would ultimately prove to be too much, and the whole bridge came crashing
Safety in the ethics and industry of aerospace technology is of prime importance for preventing tragic malfunctions and crashes. Opposed to automobiles for example, if an airplane breaks down while in mid-flight, it has nowhere to go but down. And sadly it will often go down “hard” and with a high probability of killing people. The Engineering Code of Ethics states first and foremost that, “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public.” In the aerospace industry, this as well holds very true, both in manufacturing and in air safety itself. Airline safety has recently become a much-debated topic, although arguments over air safety and travel have been going ...
Rodney Rocha is a NASA engineer and co-chair of Debris Assessment Team (DTS). When possibility of wing damage appeared he requested an additional imagery to obtain more information in order to evaluate the damage. This demonstrates that he actually tried to resolve the issue. However, due to absence of clear organizational responsibilities in NASA those images were never received. Since foam issue was there for years and risk for the flights was estimated as low management decided not to proceed with this request. After learning of management decision Rocha wrote an e-mail there he stated that foam damage could carry grave hazard and have to be addressed. At the same time this e-mail was not send to the management team. Organizational culture at NASA could be described as highly bureaucratic with operations under standard procedures only. Low-end employees like Rocha are afraid to bring any safety-related issues to the management due to delay of the mission. They can be punished for bringing “bad news”. This type of relationship makes it impossible for two-way communication between engineers and managers, which are crucial for decision-making in complex env...
"Press release, 16 January 2002 Issue of the final report into the Concorde accident on 25 July 2000." http://www.bea.aero/. BEA, 16 Jan. 2002. Web. 16 Nov. 2013. .
jet services started with the Comet 4 and the Boeing 707. In the mid 1960's all
Introduction Plane crashes occur for a number of reasons. There seems to be a consensus with the general public that flying is dangerous, engines fail and planes crash. That is true sometimes, although the majority of plane crashes occur largely due to a combination of human error and mechanical failure. In many aviation accidents mechanical failure has been a contributing factor. It is impossible, however, to blame plane crashes on one reason, since events leading up to an accident are so varied.
Being involved in an airplane accident is a nightmare scenario for any air travelers, crew and pilots alike. Statistically air travel is among the safest means of transport, but at the same time it is also associated with sporadic accidents that have proven to be extremely terrifying ordeals for all those involved due to a vast array of reasons. The causes of these accidents are of varying nature and depend on some problems that are originated during some stage of the flight process.