• Welcome to the E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial RAF Rumour Network.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Aircraft crash at Heathrow

MAINJAFAD

Warrant Officer
2,485
0
0
OK the opinion of a Rigger, (and therefore worthless :pDT_Xtremez_26: ).

As far as I know, engines use less fuel at high altitude.

So apart from take off the whole journey was Hi alt until the descent.

So maybe the filters could have blocked over a long period but the flow was enough for hi level flight, and only becoming a factor at low level where the fuel demand was higher.

As the A/C dropped the wheels and flaps the drag increased and the power requirement was higher, therefore fuel demand was higher than the filters would allow. (Although I would have thought that there would be a bypass valve. ie dodgy fuel is better than no fuel).

Whaddya think sooties?

Correct, Fuel / Air Ratio, incorrect ratio = engine makes horrible noise and stops working. (know a bit about it from research into old piece of kit I worked on).
 
R

Rich_P

Guest
I dread to think what planesailing's reactions would be to all the GA incidents that take place monthly.... :pDT_Xtremez_17:

Like last month.... A Cherokee 140 had a bit of a bump upon landing (after clipping a hanger and cabin of a loader), pilot cut his forehead and the aircraft was rather bent afterwards. Does this mean you wouldn't step on another 140? :pDT_Xtremez_14:
 
I

Irritant

Guest
Correct me if I`m wrong but would`nt fuel pumps show cavitation damage if the fuel flow was restricted in some way?

Preliminary reports seem to suggest that there was some debris in the fuel tank supplying the Engines.

The facts are that the engines were not getting the fuel required, hence the crash.

AAIB will get to the bottom of it, `till then 777`s are off limits for me.

Hang on a mo.

You will not fly on 777s cos the engines may cut out. Yet your name and avatar clearly suggest that you are keen on gliding!!!!!!!!!!

At least the 777 has engines. Or am I missing something here.
 

Tashy_Man

Tashied Goatee
5,457
0
0
Hang on a mo.

You will not fly on 777s cos the engines may cut out. Yet your name and avatar clearly suggest that you are keen on gliding!!!!!!!!!!

At least the 777 has engines. Or am I missing something here.

Sight difference in the fact that Gliders are designed to do that without an engine....as far as i'm aware 777's don't glide very well !

Crack on............:pDT_Xtremez_09:
 

MrMasher

Somewhere else now!
Subscriber
5,053
0
0
I wouldnt have thought that fuel icing was an issue here. It was coming in to land and would have been working hard, producing heat and if it had frozen slightly would have affected flight at altitude.

What if fuel levels were miscalculated? Gauging incorrect? This leads to running out of fuel and cavitation just as well as a restriction would.

Even if the LP pumps the HP pumps will suck fuel out the tanks. So theory would say that there was a lack of fuel from the tank to the HP pumps as the report says.

Luckily the plane isnt totally trashed so you'd expect them to find the cause easily...........................
 

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
I wouldnt have thought that fuel icing was an issue here. It was coming in to land and would have been working hard, producing heat and if it had frozen slightly would have affected flight at altitude.

What if fuel levels were miscalculated? Gauging incorrect? This leads to running out of fuel and cavitation just as well as a restriction would.

Even if the LP pumps the HP pumps will suck fuel out the tanks. So theory would say that there was a lack of fuel from the tank to the HP pumps as the report says.

Luckily the plane isnt totally trashed so you'd expect them to find the cause easily...........................

Icing of the fuel filter was purely speculative and as I said propably was complete tosh anyway. No fuel in the tanks however would be questionable, but not unknown, but I'm sure the AAIB would have highlighted "no fuel", not being the hardest thing to check.
 

MrMasher

Somewhere else now!
Subscriber
5,053
0
0
Icing of the fuel filter was purely speculative and as I said propably was complete tosh anyway. No fuel in the tanks however would be questionable, but not unknown, but I'm sure the AAIB would have highlighted "no fuel", not being the hardest thing to check.

But it does make you wonder doesnt it?
Would they have jettisoned fuel on a non powered approach thereby leaving no evidence of low fuel?
I'd have thought that a simple restriction that was common to feeding both ecus would have been found by now.
 

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
I wouldnt have thought that fuel icing was an issue here. It was coming in to land and would have been working hard, producing heat and if it had frozen slightly would have affected flight at altitude.

What if fuel levels were miscalculated? Gauging incorrect? This leads to running out of fuel and cavitation just as well as a restriction would.

Even if the LP pumps the HP pumps will suck fuel out the tanks. So theory would say that there was a lack of fuel from the tank to the HP pumps as the report says.

Luckily the plane isnt totally trashed so you'd expect them to find the cause easily...........................

However the AAIB report states that they and Boeing are looking into cold soak aspects of the flight as still a possiblity to have affected the fuel system.
It will be interesting to see.
 

firestorm

Warrant Officer
5,028
0
0
But it does make you wonder doesnt it?
Would they have jettisoned fuel on a non powered approach thereby leaving no evidence of low fuel?
I'd have thought that a simple restriction that was common to feeding both ecus would have been found by now.


There was plenty of fuel on board.
 

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
Ice with JET A1, shaken not stirred.

Unless it was failure of the seat/stick interface, common component breakdown or Kimwipe/PRC contamination, can anybody think of any other reason not concerning FADEC's

Off Topic Look foward to your list TW. Basrah was a treat for the modules, didn't touch 3, but got all the other planned stuff done!
 
Last edited:

MrMasher

Somewhere else now!
Subscriber
5,053
0
0
So how come firestorm and talk wrench both know there was plenty of fuel on board?
You both on the investigation or something to be able to pooh pooh a suggestion so quickly?
 

Rikster

Sergeant
507
0
0
The word on the street here at LHR is "Ice"................too much water in the fuel, nobody sumped the tanks for awhile.............just the rumour here at the mo!
 

I Look Like Kevin Costner

Grand Prix fanatic..
3,847
44
48
The word on the street here at LHR is "Ice"................too much water in the fuel, nobody sumped the tanks for awhile.............just the rumour here at the mo!

And lumps of the stuff were drawn into the LP fuel pump inlets and restricted fuel flow??? Dr Waston would be impressed!!
 

Talk Wrench

E-Goat addict
Administrator
Subscriber
1000+ Posts
6,807
437
82
So how come firestorm and talk wrench both know there was plenty of fuel on board?
You both on the investigation or something to be able to pooh pooh a suggestion so quickly?


I know nothing, (not)

he he he he.

Try looking between the inside of the lines , then you may find a liney.


TW





TW
 
Top