- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Even with a landing gear failure nothing else made sense: landing 2/3rds way up runway, no flaps, excess speed etc
Complete loss of power due to strikes on all engines. The ram air turbine is not enough to move all those parts.
Boeing 737 allows for gravity drop of landing gear which would work even with total power loss
Ram air turbine is sufficient for control surfaces, which is what it’s designed for
Having one thrust reverser deployed on the side of the bird strike was super weird. Both thrust reversers can be controlled by the APU hydraulic system
The APU doesn’t have a hydraulic system. There are three redundant electric pumps however, and these can run off the battery. Regardless, I don’t believe there was any issue with the hydraulics as the plane was well controlled on the final approach.
I see what you mean. It’s not directly connected I see. Only indirectly via electrical pump as you pointed out.
It is curious that no flaps or spoilers were deployed. Maybe the control was not as great as it appeared. The plane did touch down a long way down the runway.
It just gets weirder doesn’t it
There’s no ram air turbine on a 737.
It should be obvious that we don’t know exactly why a plane crashed barely a day ago.
Investigating takes time and since the pilots are dead they’ll have to reconstruct the situation from the wreakage, flight data recorders and whatever other information they can piece together.
Expect a few weeks before getting a rough theory and a year or two for a final report after it’s done bouncing between all the various authorities who will want to be involved and the manufacturers.
It doesn’t matter what caused the plane to crash. The deaths are the fault if the airport and its concrete ILS antennas
