It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"At approximately 600 feet and two miles from touch down, the Autothrottle demanded an increase in thrust from the two engines but the engines did not respond," the Air Accidents Investigation Branch said in a statement."
Originally posted by weedwhacker
ULTIMA, I tell you what....I will go to L'Enfant Plaza tomorrow to search their archives on NW255
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Did you SEE the photo that HLR kindly provided?!? Please explain to us how that B737 hit FOUR light poles, and landed safely.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Very simple, aircraft that have engines on the wings will have a heavier wing. But that does not mean that it will survive hitting poles or walls.
[edit on 18-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Again, I'm going to guess that the kinetic energies involved would leave only tiny pieces....well, saw somw photos of recognizable shreds, even with the AAL livery painted on them.
That's why I think that a hollow aluminum light pole that is designed to 'break-away' at its base would be like a toothpick to a B757 wing at 500MPH
Originally posted by weedwhacker
That's why I think that a hollow aluminum light pole that is designed to 'break-away' at its base would be like a toothpick to a B757 wing at 500MPH
Originally posted by HLR53K
I just provided two pictures that clearly shows it can and did.
Very simple, aircraft that have engines on the wings will have a heavier wing. But that does not mean that it will survive hitting poles or walls.
As shown at least 1 plane has been brought down by hitting light poles, and can probably find more.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
ULTIMA, which airplane are you claiming was 'brought down' by hitting a light pole? You said you've shown 'at least 1'....which was it again?
The first officer of the Northwest airplane parked on taxiway “A” testified that flight 255 was intact until the left wing struck the light pole in the auto rental car lot. After the wing struck the pole, he saw what appeared to be “a four- to five-foot chunk of the wing section . .‘I fall from the airplane. He did not see any fire on the airplane until after it struck the light pole and then he saw “an orange flame. . . .I’ emanating from the left wing tip section.
Originally posted by Sway33
Ultima....No where in the NTSB report does it say that flight 255 crashed because the wing was seared off from hitting a light pole. Here is what it says regarding damage to the left wing after striking the pole.
Originally posted by HLR53K
Actually, from all the reports I've read on Flight 255, they say that it crashed because of a pilot error in setting the flaps and slats.
The airplane collided with obstacles northeast of the runway when the left wing struck a light pole located 2,760 feet beyond the end of the runway. Thereafter the airplane struck other light poles, the roof of the rental car facility, and then the ground.
Flight 255 took off with its wing's trailing edge flaps and leading edge slats retracted.
The airplane's climb performance was severely limited by the flightcrew's failure to properly configure the wing for takeoff.
The airplane would have cleared the light pole by 500 feet with only its wings slats extended.
The CAWS unit's takeoff warning system was inoperative and, therefore, did not warn the flightcrew that the airplane was not configured properly for takeoff.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the accident was the flightcrew's failure to use the taxi checklist to ensure that the flaps and slats were extended for takeoff. Contributing to the accident was the absence of electrical power to the airplane takeoff warning system which thus did not warn the flightcrew that the airplane was not configured properly for takeoff. The reason for the absence of electrical power could not be determined.
Originally posted by HLR53K
So like I originally stated. The improper configuration of the flaps and slats were what caused the airplane to crash.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by weedwhacker
ULTIMA, which airplane are you claiming was 'brought down' by hitting a light pole? You said you've shown 'at least 1'....which was it again?
It was Flight 255 that was broght donw by hitting a light pole, then it hit other poles and the roof of a building.