Posted on 12/21/2005 5:07:00 AM PST by saganite
Great author, fascinating man.
Mebbe the 20th passenger never got on the plane? Mebbe the 20th passenger's cheating spouse was on the plane and the 20th passenger left him/her with a little gift in his/her luggage?
Actually, as I watched the footage of the plane hitting the water with the burning wing and engine following, I imagined Crockett & Tubbs watching from rampside as the Columbian drug kingpin, thinking he had made his escape, perishes in a ball of flame thanks to a jilted cocaine-dependant lover.
It is. NDT of major structures ought to be mandated for
Part 135 operations of aircraft this age. Why its not is
a mystery to me.
I wonder if anyone in the company is responsible for inspecting those planes regularly? /sarc
Utter nonsense. First of all, there isn't enough known about what happened to the Mallard to make any comparisons with any other crash of any other airplane. Second, the Mallard is nonpressurized. The Hawaiian Airlines 737 was pressurized. The failure of the Mallard, whatever the cause, clearly was not caused by repeated pressurization and depressurization cycles, as with the HA 737.
If that were the case, the plane would have been so low to the water that it would have crashed immediately. There would be no part falling from the sky after tthe plane. I am guessing that it was metal fatigue compounded by salt water corrosion.
Check out the link in post 18 if you're interested in an intelligent discussion of this crash.
re: NDT of major structures ought to be mandated for
Part 135 operations of aircraft this age
Do you know for a fact that it's not? I have no idea, just curious. I would be concerned not only about the time on the airframe, but the constant exposure to salt water.
Overall, it seems like these aircraft labor in the worst of all worlds, short hops, high hours, tough environment.
I have always been fascinated by the Chalk operation. My heart and prayers go out to the families and loved ones of the victims and to the people responsible for operating the aircraft.
No I do not. My guess (and its only a guess) is that if it
were mandated these aircraft would be uneconomical to
operate. I know that the USN and USAF regularly tear down
aircraft and magnaflux the major structures. Of course
they have much bigger budget.
The spar was aluminum. The aircraft was built in 1947.
Not to mention when that metal spends its life around seawater.
Aircraft are x-rayed all the time to check for cracks/fatigue. This is a science, and is well regulated.
I know that Learjets have 100% teardown inspections with x-ray every 12 years/12000 hours. But it varies based on class of aircraft and the nature of its service.
Crashes like wing seperation are usually compound failures.
(Ex. age + salt + somebody missed some rivets)
I think you misunderstood me. The other poster had theorized about fatigue..I said I there was no way of telling htis early..but that these planes had a great number of evolutions per flight hours..because they do short hops...which puts more stress on the airframe..am I wrong in that statement?
Cycles, not "evolutions".
Thanks for the correction.. I gather an "evolution" is NKT a cycle..what does it refer to in avaiation parlance?..
It was structural failure
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051221/ap_on_re_us/plane_crash
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.