On February 24, 1989, United Airlines flight 811 was en route to Sydney, Australia from Honolulu, Hawaii. They later experienced decompression due to the cargo door failure in front aft during flight. Flight 811 made successful emergency landing at Honolulu with nine passengers missing out of 337 passenger aboard. The cargo door that was ejected on Flight 811 damaged engines 3 and 4, which led to crew to turn back to Honolulu.
According the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Aircraft Accident Report, determines that the probable cause of the Flight 811 was sudden opening of the forward lower lobe cargo door in flight and subsequent explosive decompression, (NTSB,1989). In figure 1, depicted the damage of Flight 811 when it landed.
Figure 1 of Flight 811
Source: National Transportation Safety Board
Furthermore, investigators discovered that faulty switch attributed electrical actuation for the door to open. This means that the cargo door had a design flawed, which allow the door open during flight. Despite the nine fatalities, United Airlines flight 811 had landed Honolulu with 328 passengers. With that in mind, the survivals of Flight 811 was grateful for the flight crew landed safely with their cripple plane.
In regards to cargo door, on October 26, 1990 the U.S Navy recovered the cargo doors from the Pacific Ocean floors. In fact, after the NTSB examining the door, they discovered the latch cams had been back-driven from the closed position. This means that latch cam did not fully closed and locked properly when the cargo door was closed. In figure 2, illustrated the mechanical procedure of latch cam locking into position.
Figure 2 Latch cam system
Source: National Transportation Safety Board
If the FAA had ad...
... middle of paper ...
...y damage, the flight crews were able to land their crippled plane safely. In this case, the Flight 811 did not crash due to malfunction of the cargo door such as, Turkish Airlines Flight 981. Therefore, flight 811 will consider as a crash survivability.
Moreover, after the investigation was conducted, the NTSB had issued safety recommendations for the FAA to consider. The FAA had considered some of NTSB safety recommendations, for example, improving the mechanical procedure of locking and stronger latches for oversized cargo doors. One can agree that survivals of Flight 811 would remember that day.
Works Cited
National Transportation Safety Board, (1989, February 28). Aircraft Accident Report. Explosive Decompression-Loss of Cargo Door in Flight. Retrieved from http://www.ntsb.org/Wiringcargodoorlite/Additional%20Aircraft%20Accident%20Reports_files/AAR92-3.pdf
On the morning of the 25th of September an employee with Big Island Air who said they had seen the pilot that morning when he arrived at the airport, mentioned that he appeared to look rested and very alert. There were two flights that were scheduled for the pilot on that day. The first of his flights was a sightseeing tour that was scheduled to depart at 7am followed by the second flight also a sightseeing tour that was scheduled to depart at around 4:20pm. The second flight ultimately ended in the deaths of ten people that day.
...e ultimately saved that flight. Before getting back into the plane, he could have taken a moment to walk around and look at how the snow was affecting the wings. He would have seen that snow was collecting on the surface and could have made a decision to have the plane de-iced and had a coat of anti-ice on. They could have been more patient with the plow truck. Gave the plow truck more time to clear the runway then get off. Then he would have never had to turn off the engine bleeds to obtain a shorter take off distance. The pilot could have made a decision to hold off on the departure till the weather got better. With the ceiling at 900 feet and visibility at 1 ¼ doesn’t offer much room for error. I feel as if the pilots had made a decision to change at least one of these things, the plane would have never crashed. It is a good learning experience for other pilots.
During the first air raid, Pan American’s facilities were destroyed, and ten civilian employees of the airline were killed. When the assault on the island was first launched, the Americans had twelve aircraft. By December 21, they were down to two planes and by the 22nd of December, none was left in the fleet.
This tragic accident was preventable by not only the flight crew, but maintenance and air traffic control personnel as well. On December 29, 1972, ninety-nine of the one hundred and seventy-six people onboard lost their lives needlessly. As is the case with most accidents, this one was certainly preventable. This accident is unique because of the different people that could have prevented it from happening. The NTSB determined that “the probable cause of this accident was the failure of the flightcrew.” This is true; the flight crew did fail, however, others share the responsibility for this accident. Equally responsible where maintenance personnel, an Air Traffic Controllers, the system, and a twenty cent light bulb. What continues is a discussion on, what happened, why it happened, what to do about it and what was done about it.
Believers believes that the plane was purposely crashed by the four terrorist hijackers, cause of the courageous acts by passengers, who had learned of the crashes that had happened at the World Trade Center, they had crashed the plane in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. It has been believed that the passengers tried to save many lives by fighting back and crashed the plane into the field. “Some believe that Flight 93 landed safely, while a substitute plane was shot out of the sky” Griffin. Others believe that the passengers were killed or relocated to another part of the world and will
Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - The Planes - Popularmechanics.com. (n.d.). Automotive Care, Home Improvement, Tools, DIY Tips - Popularmechanics.com. Retrieved April 26, 2010, from http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-planes
Not a lot of people survived, 31.6% was the percent of people who survived. A lot of people could've survived because of the extra lifeboat room, 53.4%. 2 dogs survived because of the people who brought dogs aboard.
For instance, the multiple calls made to family members as well as 911 from the frantic passengers. Mark Bingham for instance called 911, as well as his mom telling her he loved her and that the plane was being hijacked. Another man called 911 screaming that they were being hijacked and that he heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane. Then there was Tom Burnett, who called his wife saying the hijackers had already stabbed to death one passenger and that he intended to do something about it. A Jeremy Glick called his relatives saying the same, that he and some other passengers were intending to fight the hijackers. These calls brought up the thought that perhaps some passengers on board had fought the hijackers, keeping them from controlling the plane, and sending it crashing to the ground.
Although the flight was scheduled to depart from JFK Airport at about 7:00 p.m., it was delayed due to a disabled piece of ground equipment and concerns about a suspected passenger mismatch with baggage. The airplane took off at 8:18 p.m., shortly at 8:25 p.m., Boston air route traffic control center (ARTCC) instructed the pilots to climb and maintain an altitude of 19,000 feet and then lower down to 15,000 feet. However, at 8:26 p.m., Boston ARTCC amended TWA flight 800's altitude clearance, advising the pilots to maintain an altitude of 13,000 feet. At 8:29 p.m., the captain stated, "Look at that crazy fuel flow indicator there on number four... see that?" One minute later Boston ARTCC advised them to climb and maintain 15,000 feet to which the pilot replied: “Climb thrust”. After an extremely loud and quick sound, the cockpit voice recorder stopped recording at 8:31 p.m. At that moment, the crew of an Eastwind Airlines Boeing 737 flying nearby reported an explosion in the sky. TWA Flight 800 aircraft had broken up and crashed into the sea, 8 miles south of East Moriches, killing all on board. (1,2)
...t occurred because there were many mistakes. Eight results were found on how the oil well exploded, and one example is the “Well control response actions failed to regain control of the well” (BP Internal Investigation 5). This is just one example of how BP made a mistake, and seven more were found. BP already had a bad name because of their past, and this major disaster was just one more on the list.
In conclusion, many contribution factors led to the Crossair flight 3597 crash but is mainly triggered by Crossair’s incapability of assessment, pilot error and lastly the air traffic controller. Analysis of a flight crash is important so that we will know the causes, thus being able tackle it, making sure that there are no other flight crashes like Crossair flight 3597.
The above mentioned airplane was a planned commercial passenger flight that took off from LaGuardia Airport, New York destined for Charlotte Douglas Airport in North Carolina on January 15, 2009. Six minutes after takeoff, the airplane was successfully abandoned in Hudson River after striking multiple birds during its initial climb out. The crew reported by radio two minutes after takeoff at an altitude of 3,200 feet, the Airbus experienced multiple bird strikes. The result of this multiple bird strikes, which occurred in northeast of George Washington Bridge was compressor stalls as well as loss of thrust in both engines. The Airbus was ditched in Hudson River after the aircrew discovered that they would not reach any airfield and turned southward. Fortunately, all the 155 passengers on board survived the accident though the Airbus was partly submerged and sinking slowly.
After the accident, a full-scale investigation was launched by the United States National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). It concluded that the accident was caused by metal fatigue exacerbated by crevice corrosion, the corrosion is exacerbated by the salt water and the age of the aircraft was already 19 years old as the plane operated in a salt water environment.
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 ...
Simmon, David A. (1998). Boeing 757 CFIT Accident at Cali, Columbia, Becomes Focus of Lessons Learned. Flight Safety Digest.