| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
TramwayGuy 
Orange Level Access
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Location: Northern NY
Points: 11299
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Topic: A 727 carrying 300 passengers!
Posted: 05 May 2023 at 1:44pm |
|
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
plummerscarin
Orange Level Access
Joined: 22 Jun 2015
Location: ia
Points: 3205
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2023 at 3:29pm |
|
Desperate times….
Should be glad only just ran off the runway
|
|
jaybmiller
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: Greensville,Ont
Points: 21689
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2023 at 7:28pm |
300 people x 185# is 55,500 and probably over max payload ( I didn't include pilots..) also wonder about seats ?? The twinBeech on floats I once flew had 4 canvas 'jump' seats for the passengers....
|
|
3 D-14s,A-C forklift, B-112
Kubota BX23S lil' TOOT( The Other Orange Tractor)
Never burn your bridges, unless you can walk on water
|
|
DaveKamp
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 5651
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2023 at 9:40pm |
185 is a fair average for us, but last time I was in the Sudan, their average weight was significantly less than mine... even the taller ones were lucky to break 100lbs.
But I'm not surprised. In Bangladesh, people ride on the roof, hang on the sides, and ride on the couplers of trains...
Edited by DaveKamp - 05 May 2023 at 9:43pm
|
|
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
|
|
DaveKamp
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 5651
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2023 at 10:24pm |
But, let's not jump to ignorant conclusions about loading here- to be totally fair in the comparison:
The cargo jet's lack of interior reduced it's running weight significantly, hence, it's payload capacity is greater. but in this circumstance, it doesn't NEED to be.
Let's presume that US passenger transport loading standards assume an average flying passenger weighs 185lb... and they're usually configured for around 150 to 180 passengers. That's 33300lbs of humanity.
Now, for each one of those humans, there's about 50lbs of additional luggage... so there's another 9000lbs.
The 727-200's fuel capacity is about 8000gal, at 7.1lbs/gal, that's 56800lbs of fuel load... and that yields a typical operating range for the later (727-200 Advanced) of 2500 miles or so.
So, 33,300lbs of humans, plus a (very conservative estimate) of 9000lbs of luggage, and 56800lbs of fuel, you've got 99100lbs.
Configured for PASSENGER service, the aircraft's operating weight is around 98400lbs, with a max takeoff weight of 184800lbs... that's a transport capacity of 86400lbs.
So, we can tell by comparing the math of estimates, vs. the math of ratings, that we're well within the aircraft's load chart for a 'rated passenger flight'.
Now, the flight distance from Sudan to Ankara,
Turkey is around 1600 miles. Since this is an evacuation flight, they
won't be going full distance, they'll simply hop them out to some other
'safe' point, and then move them on using some other mode or method.
They're probably shuttling them out to a variety of mustering points, so
for sake of simple math, let's say they're airlifting them out of
Sudan, and doing a drop-off at Sana'a in Yemen... that's 750ish miles.
SO... nix all the luggage, they're not carrying laptops and toiletries. Nix 20,000lbs of interior, seating, etc., and cut the fuel load down to 1/4, as you're making a climb to 36K, then coasting back down. That's only a fuel weight of 14,200lbs, so you've gained 20,000+ 42600lbs, you've just increased your load shuttle capacity by 62,600lbs...
That's 230 people of 185lb average weight. If they only weigh 100lbs, you could get 626 MORE on that plane load of 185lb'ers.
Does it sound overloaded NOW? Not a chance.
What was MOST LIKELY... was that the aircraft's loading was imbalanced such that it could not rotate properly for the takeoff. Aircraft without seats do not load balance well, and if you have too much weight aft, the nose will climb prematurely and you'll stall as soon as the wing surface clears ground-effect. Too much weight forward, and you won't be able to lift the nose.
Now, I'm not a jet pilot... but I've logged several dozen hours over the last 5 years, so I'm no stranger to the load calc process, especially in the Mooney (they're very sensitive).
By the way, the propeller up front isn't there to provide thrust, it's there to keep the pilot cool. Wanna know how to prove this? Shut it off during a takeoff, and watch how quickly the pilot starts to sweat.
|
|
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
|
|
captaindana
Orange Level
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Location: Fort Plain, NY
Points: 2382
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 May 2023 at 4:27am |
|
Dave and all. I am a jet pilot. And you are absolutely correct in that weight is one factor and BALANCE is the other.😁
|
|
Blue Skies and Tail Winds
Dana
|
|
DaveKamp
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 5651
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 May 2023 at 9:55pm |
Some years ago, the Russian Navy lost a significant majority of their top brass when a planeload of them departed on a flight where some 'cargo' shifted rearward, and caused the aircraft to rotate prematurely, and the pilots were not able to recover. A long time ago, I rode right seat two days a week with a buddy flying mail into Chicago Midway, either in a Cherokee, an Apache, or a Cessna twin (a 310, I think). Nowdays, my right-seat time is either in one of the company Embraers, or in a buddy's Mooney. Company policies changed about two years ago, so I don't get to take controls of the Embraers, but plenty of hands-on in the little bugger... and it is VERY sensitive to balance... and the trimming (bending the tail) is really wild.
I'm amazed at what the big heavies get away with in terms of humans wandering about the cabin, but I suspect you guys may have gadgets that do some automatic trim management?
|
|
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
|
|
jaybmiller
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: Greensville,Ont
Points: 21689
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 May 2023 at 6:11am |
In today's 'fly-by-wire' planes the pilots are for 'show', as the 'computers' do 99.44% of all the flying. Wife watches 'Mayday' and it's obvious that ,at least for some pilots, they rely so much on the 'computer' they forget how to fly the plane. hen something does goes wrong, it usually goes wrong very fast and ends up very bad. One disaster was a 747 cargo hauling 4 big 'hummer' style vehicles. each weighed 20ton, so cargo master paperwork said 20, 1ton straps is the rigging..... ONE strap failed, all on board died after load shifted,blew out the rear pressure wall.....
|
|
3 D-14s,A-C forklift, B-112
Kubota BX23S lil' TOOT( The Other Orange Tractor)
Never burn your bridges, unless you can walk on water
|
|
DiyDave
Orange Level Access
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Gambrills, MD
Points: 50769
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 May 2023 at 4:59pm |
Was watching Mayday, yesterday. 767 in canada runs outta gas, eh? Episode was called the Gimli glider. Pilot landed, no power, like a glider that weighs 160 tons! Sully Sullenberger had nothing on him! All survived, no serious injuries... 
|
|
Source: Babylon Bee. Sponsored by BRAWNDO, its got what you need!
|
|
DaveKamp
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 5651
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 May 2023 at 11:19pm |
 jaybmiller wrote:
In today's 'fly-by-wire' planes the pilots are for 'show', as the 'computers' do 99.44% of all the flying. Wife watches 'Mayday' and it's obvious that ,at least for some pilots, they rely so much on the 'computer' they forget how to fly the plane.... |
To identify pilots as 'for show', is a considerable insult. While computers and instrumentation do a considerable amount of work, the pilot is significantly more important than you advertise. You misunderstand 'fly-by-wire' if you construe it as being controlled by something other than the pilot. FBW simply means that the mechanical connection between flight controls and control surfaces is secondary to powered servo drives. It is similar in echelon to manual steering, vs. power assist steering (like a road car or truck) and full hydraulic steering (like an articulated tractor).
There's specific reasons for differences, and there's reasons why 'power assist' exists in place of 'full power'... and the reasons it appears in aircraft are exactly the same as why it appears in automobiles and road trucks- when power goes out, you still have SOMETHING.
jaybmiller wrote:
a 747 cargo hauling 4 big 'hummer' style vehicles. each weighed 20ton, so cargo master paperwork said 20, 1ton straps is the rigging..... ONE strap failed, all on board died after load shifted,blew out the rear pressure wall.....
|
They were MRAPS, that was N949CA, flying out of Bagram. NTSB and Afghan Civil Aviation both identified it as a load shift which damaged the horizontal stabilizer jackscrew, and the combination of rearward balance shift, and damage to flight control resulted in a loss of control. All the computer/pilot dispositions you stated above are irrelevant in the context of this incident, the moment the load shifted, it was out of the pilot's hands. The fact that a 'pressure wall' was struck, is also irrelevant, the aircraft was well below pressurization circumstance. Just like the TU-104A crashing just off the end of Pushink Leningrad in 'Feb '81, load shift caused uncontrolled rotation and stall. If you can't force the nose back down, and get more throttle on, you'll become a frizbee, and wind up in vertical approach vector.
|
|
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
|
|
DaveKamp
Orange Level Access
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Location: LeClaire, Ia
Points: 5651
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 May 2023 at 11:43pm |
DiyDave wrote:
... 767 in canada runs outta gas, eh? Episode was called the Gimli glider. Pilot landed, no power, like a glider that weighs 160 tons! Sully Sullenberger had nothing on him! All survived, no serious injuries... |
That's an inaccurate comparison- Sully actually had a much more difficult task at hand- he didn't run out of fuel, he ran out of thrust. Had Sully been out of fuel, his glide ratio would have been significantly better, as he would have had a whole lot LESS weight, and consequently, significantly less wing loading. His circumstances would also have been much more apparent at the time, so his time to solution would have been basically immediate, he would have made the left turn and return to his departure point. Instead, he had a full load of fuel, and only one 'soft' landing option. Had he NOT chosen the Hudson, he would have lost everyone on the aircraft, and hundreds, if not thousands, on the ground.
AC143's fuel incident was, like most incidents, the result of several things going wrong all at once... fuel measurement, failed instrumentation, failed assumption of measuring units (on the dipstick), errant action by ground crews, and another miscalculation from the dipstick unit-of-measure.
Loss of fuel at 41,000 feet means you have an aircraft that has plenty of airspeed and altitude, and very low flying weight (in compared to full tanks). The ram-air turbine provided enough for them to manage gear and controls. In ANY event, the pilot's capacity to manage the workload is key in rapidly responding to a problem. In the case of Gimli, they had to 1) estimate and attain best glide speed, so that their flight energy could be used most effectively to GET to a safe landing point 2) FIND a safe landing point 3) Get the gear down at the RIGHT time (too early, and you loose too much energy, too late, and you're a sled)...
And finally... land without flaps and reverse thrust, which meant losing altitude, and scrubbing off speed, which happened as the result of excellent aviation skills of the pilot... he scrubbed off altitude and speed by skidding, and in doing so, prevented overrunning his landing point.
BOTH pilots performed in exemplary fashion, within the context of their situations. The only difference is, Sully's circumstance was from bird strikes which really could not have been avoided. AC143's pilot made an assumption that the fueling issue was satisfactory, and trusted it, when it actually was not. Had he been less trusting, he likely would have discovered and corrected at least ONE of the critical failures, hence, avoiding the situation altogether.
In the end, the key factor that determines successful response, is the amount of time available to assess and react correctly.
-- In the case of Pushkin CCP-42332 AND National 102, they were both on departure, at less than 300ft, and stalled as a result of loss of pitch from a load shift. From the time it first started, to the time which pilots lost control, was only a fraction of a second, and within three seconds, both aircraft were flat on the ground, on fire.
-- In the case of Sully and US Airways 1549, the time between strike (3:27:11) and flame-out, and determination of the reason, and the realization that restart would NOT be a success, (3:27:33) was about 22 seconds. It lost thrust from an altitude of 2800 feet... but since it was in a climb, trajectory put it to just over 3000ft before apex, then nosing down. By 3:31pm, the aircraft was wet, and empty of passengers by 3:55. That's four minutes from start to splash, and 23 minutes to safety.
-- In the case of AC143, the first indication of problems occurred at just a few minutes past 8pm, at 41,000ft. At 8:30, the pilots were redirected to Gimli... that's a HALF HOUR of contemplation time. http://data2.collectionscanada.gc.ca/e/e444/e011083519.pdf
So there's no apples-to-apples for the last two, while the first two were virtually identical.
Edited by DaveKamp - 16 May 2023 at 12:12am
|
|
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
|
|
shameless dude
Orange Level
Joined: 10 Apr 2017
Location: east NE
Points: 13611
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 May 2023 at 11:47pm |
|
be lots of estate sales???
|
|
