 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.c
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:19 pm Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
 |
|
Folks,
Anybody interested can download the progressive reports from the UK at http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_news/accident_to_boeing_777_236__g_ymmm__at_heathrow_airport_on_17_january_2008___initial_report_update.cfm
As a matter of interest, the air masses over Russia/CIS/Eastern Europe were particularly cold that morning, aircraft were having to come as low as FL250, and maintain higher than LRC Mach No. to maintain fuel temps. warmer then -37C.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
At 14:13 1/02/2008, you wrote:
[quote] I got this from a friend and thought you would like it.
Jim
Subject: Gastwick B-777 Info
I recently received this from a Retied DL Colleague. I do not know the identity of the author. I have done some small bit of editing for my non pilot friends.
Ken
Heard from a friend regarding the U.K. 777 crash. As I recall this aircraft had Trent engines built by Rolls Royce.
******************************
*********************************
This is part of a message forwarded to me:
Had the pleasure of chatting with a member of the NTSB board last night at dinner. Here is what he shared. Aircraft was at 600 ft agl (Above Ground Level ) when the right engine (RPM) started to roll back to slightly above flight
idle.
The First Officer was flying and auto throttles were engaged. The auto throttles moved the throttles up to catch the deceleration in airspeed. The right engine did not respond to the movement of the auto throttles. The First Officer disengaged the auto throttles and manually moved both throttles to max power as the Captain joined him and they both applied emergency power. Within 8 seconds of the right engine rolling back to just above flight idle the left engine did the exact same thing. The engines never changed RPM from that point till ground contact. The F/O continued flying and kept nibbling on the stick shaker to clear a hill just prior to the impact point. Apparently the crew is being hailed as heroes for their performance.
The two areas under investigation are fuel that was uplifted in China. Ice in the fuel is a consideration and they are running chemical test at this time. The other area is engine software. So far they can confirm that everything from the throttles to the ECC's worked as it should. Its the info from the ECC's to the fuel controller that is in question. This aircraft had just had a software update 2 days earlier
[b]
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
steve2(at)sover.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:21 am Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
Put into terms a piston driver could understand, you kerosene burners monitor enroute fuel temps as a flight parameter? -37c seems like it must be quite common?
Higher Mach number because of lower altitude?
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.c
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:54 pm Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
For the Avgas Burners.
In brief, there are two common civil jet fuels, Jet A and Jet A-1, with different freeze temperatures ( and a host of Mil. fuels, from JP-4 (aka Jet B) though -5,-6.-7 -
The significance of -37C is that it is a 3 degree pad on the freeze temperature of Jet A, so that is where the warning is set on most modern aircraft. At high Mach numbers, there is quite a temperature ram rise, the difference between OAT/SAT and "Total Air temperature" TAT. Very roughly TAT is OAT plus ram rise.
If the fuel gets cold enough, you either have to increase Mach No. (ram rise) or find a warner air mass, generally but not always by descending, depending where the tropopause height happens to be, depending on latitude, season and the particular weather pattern on the day.
The coldest air masses I have consistently found are over Russia/CIS states in winter, even colder than the certification envelope of Boeing aircraft, and significantly colder than any air masses over US/Canada, and colder than the ICAO standard atmosphere/textbooks suggest will be found.
Such very cold temperatures bring with them a whole host of possibilities, not limited to the fuel going solid.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton ( QANTAS Retired)
At 00:18 2/02/2008, you wrote:
[quote] Put into terms a piston driver could understand, you kerosene burners monitor enroute fuel temps as a flight parameter? -37c seems like it must be quite common?
Higher Mach number because of lower altitude?
---
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tylor.hall(at)sbcglobal.n
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:51 pm Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
I have had several experiences with Jet A and ice.The first was in 1966. I worked the summer at Meigs Field, Chicago, (now gone). A new Lear Jet had a dual engine flame out. The got a partial power back by the time they came across the field. As the tried to climb out, the flamed out a second time and put it down in Lake Michigan. It floated since it has a clam shell door. It floated two days unit it was lifted out and put on a truck to go to Midway.
Lear Jet and most small Jet including turbo props Including TC, need Prist as an anti ice that keep the water in solution in the jet fuel.
The other experience was in the mid 1990's during a test of some Jet A pumping one winter day. It was well below 0 the night before and the fuel and tanks was cold soaked. The Jet A fuel we used had lost of water in it. We used the fuel to flush out the new equipment and test the operation of Jet A bulk pumping equipment to fill refueler trucks.
The system slowed down and stopped flowing. We shut down and started taking things apart. We removed the line strainer on Jet Single point nozzle and found the screen full of ice. It was a thin film of ice the completely stopped the 200 GPM flow.
In looking at the fuel in a clear jar, we could see ice in the form of what looked like snow flakes suspended in the Jet A.
The water was freezing into a solid and did not settle out. The water was so small it floated in the water. When it got cold enough, it froze.
Dan, I was under the impression that most large airliners did not need Prist, because they have fuel heaters to deal with the low temperatures at altitude?
We shipped some Jet A filter/separators to Antarctica. They use a special Jet fuel that is rated down to -78.
Tylor Hall
www.firstfueling.com
On Feb 2, 2008, at 8:54 PM, W J R HAMILTON wrote:
[quote] For the Avgas Burners.
In brief, there are two common civil jet fuels, Jet A and Jet A-1, with different freeze temperatures ( and a host of Mil. fuels, from JP-4 (aka Jet B) though -5,-6.-7 -
The significance of -37C is that it is a 3 degree pad on the freeze temperature of Jet A, so that is where the warning is set on most modern aircraft. At high Mach numbers, there is quite a temperature ram rise, the difference between OAT/SAT and "Total Air temperature" TAT. Very roughly TAT is OAT plus ram rise.
If the fuel gets cold enough, you either have to increase Mach No. (ram rise) or find a warner air mass, generally but not always by descending, depending where the tropopause height happens to be, depending on latitude, season and the particular weather pattern on the day.
The coldest air masses I have consistently found are over Russia/CIS states in winter, even colder than the certification envelope of Boeing aircraft, and significantly colder than any air masses over US/Canada, and colder than the ICAO standard atmosphere/textbooks suggest will be found.
Such very cold temperatures bring with them a whole host of possibilities, not limited to the fuel going solid.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton ( QANTAS Retired)
At 00:18 2/02/2008, you wrote:
[quote] Put into terms a piston driver could understand, you kerosene burners monitor enroute fuel temps as a flight parameter? -37c seems like it must be quite common?
Higher Mach number because of lower altitude?
---
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jtaddington(at)verizon.ne
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:53 pm Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
My memory is not the best but if I remember right when the MD-80 came out they had ice problems when the aircraft came down from altitude and landed at a cold airport and than went back to altitude. I have forgotten how they fixed the problem. I had moved on when we got the MD-80 so am not sure exactly what the problem really was.
Jim Addington
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tylor Hall
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 10:49 PM
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: FW: Gastwick B-777 Info
I have had several experiences with Jet A and ice.
The first was in 1966. I worked the summer at Meigs Field, Chicago, (now gone). A new Lear Jet had a dual engine flame out. The got a partial power back by the time they came across the field. As the tried to climb out, the flamed out a second time and put it down in Lake Michigan. It floated since it has a clam shell door. It floated two days unit it was lifted out and put on a truck to go to Midway.
Lear Jet and most small Jet including turbo props Including TC, need Prist as an anti ice that keep the water in solution in the jet fuel.
The other experience was in the mid 1990's during a test of some Jet A pumping one winter day. It was well below 0 the night before and the fuel and tanks was cold soaked. The Jet A fuel we used had lost of water in it. We used the fuel to flush out the new equipment and test the operation of Jet A bulk pumping equipment to fill refueler trucks.
The system slowed down and stopped flowing. We shut down and started taking things apart. We removed the line strainer on Jet Single point nozzle and found the screen full of ice. It was a thin film of ice the completely stopped the 200 GPM flow.
In looking at the fuel in a clear jar, we could see ice in the form of what looked like snow flakes suspended in the Jet A.
The water was freezing into a solid and did not settle out. The water was so small it floated in the water. When it got cold enough, it froze.
Dan, I was under the impression that most large airliners did not need Prist, because they have fuel heaters to deal with the low temperatures at altitude?
We shipped some Jet A filter/separators to Antarctica. They use a special Jet fuel that is rated down to -78.
Tylor Hall
www.firstfueling.com
On Feb 2, 2008, at 8:54 PM, W J R HAMILTON wrote:
For the Avgas Burners.
In brief, there are two common civil jet fuels, Jet A and Jet A-1, with different freeze temperatures ( and a host of Mil. fuels, from JP-4 (aka Jet B) though -5,-6.-7 -
The significance of -37C is that it is a 3 degree pad on the freeze temperature of Jet A, so that is where the warning is set on most modern aircraft. At high Mach numbers, there is quite a temperature ram rise, the difference between OAT/SAT and "Total Air temperature" TAT. Very roughly TAT is OAT plus ram rise.
If the fuel gets cold enough, you either have to increase Mach No. (ram rise) or find a warner air mass, generally but not always by descending, depending where the tropopause height happens to be, depending on latitude, season and the particular weather pattern on the day.
The coldest air masses I have consistently found are over Russia/CIS states in winter, even colder than the certification envelope of Boeing aircraft, and significantly colder than any air masses over US/Canada, and colder than the ICAO standard atmosphere/textbooks suggest will be found.
Such very cold temperatures bring with them a whole host of possibilities, not limited to the fuel going solid.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton ( QANTAS Retired)
At 00:18 2/02/2008, you wrote:
Put into terms a piston driver could understand, you kerosene burners monitor enroute fuel temps as a flight parameter? -37c seems like it must be quite common?
Higher Mach number because of lower altitude?
----- Original Message -----
From: W J R HAMILTON (wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.com.au)
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com (commander-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Gastwick B-777 Info
Folks,
Anybody interested can download the progressive reports from the UK at http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/latest_news/accident_to_boeing_777_236__g_ymmm__at_heathrow_airport_on_17_january_2008___initial_report_update.cfm
As a matter of interest, the air masses over Russia/CIS/Eastern Europe were particularly cold that morning, aircraft were having to come as low as FL250, and maintain higher than LRC Mach No. to maintain fuel temps. warmer then -37C.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
At 14:13 1/02/2008, you wrote:
I got this from a friend and thought you would like it.
Jim
Subject: Gastwick B-777 Info
I recently received this from a Retied DL Colleague. I do not know the identity of the author. I have done some small bit of editing for my non pilot friends.
Ken
Heard from a friend regarding the U.K. 777 crash. As I recall this aircraft had Trent engines built by Rolls Royce.
******************************
*********************************
This is part of a message forwarded to me:
Had the pleasure of chatting with a member of the NTSB board last night at dinner. Here is what he shared. Aircraft was at 600 ft agl (Above Ground Level ) when the right engine (RPM) started to roll back to slightly above flight
idle.
The First Officer was flying and auto throttles were engaged. The auto throttles moved the throttles up to catch the deceleration in airspeed. The right engine did not respond to the movement of the auto throttles. The First Officer disengaged the auto throttles and manually moved both throttles to max power as the Captain joined him and they both applied emergency power. Within 8 seconds of the right engine rolling back to just above flight idle the left engine did the exact same thing. The engines never changed RPM from that point till ground contact. The F/O continued flying and kept nibbling on the stick shaker to clear a hill just prior to the impact point. Apparently the crew is being hailed as heroes for their performance.
The two areas under investigation are fuel that was uplifted in China. Ice in the fuel is a consideration and they are running chemical test at this time. The other area is engine software. So far they can confirm that everything from the throttles to the ECC's worked as it should. Its the info from the ECC's to the fuel controller that is in question. This aircraft had just had a software update 2 days earlier
| Quote: | | href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution |
[quote]
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
[b]
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dongirod
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 140
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 9:11 pm Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
Jim;
I vaguely remember that, but wasn't that ice on the outside of the wing caused by super cooled fuel.
Don
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jtaddington(at)verizon.ne
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:22 am Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
I don't remember it could have been and I think you are right. It was a long time ago and I was either on the B-727 or the L-1011 by then so did not pay a lot of attention to it since it did not apply to me.
Jim
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 11:09 PM
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: FW: Gastwick B-777 Info
Jim;
I vaguely remember that, but wasn't that ice on the outside of the wing caused by super cooled fuel.
Don
[quote]
---
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rsrandazzo(at)precisionma
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:34 pm Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
Don-
I think you are correct here. My recollection is that the MD80 and (very occasionally) the 727 would develop thick frost on the wing surface as a result of carrying very cold fuel down into a destination with a humid atmosphere. This was not much of an issue for the 727, but required some special procedure or other (that i do not recall) for the MD80.....
Robert S. Randazzo
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 9:09 PM
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: FW: Gastwick B-777 Info
Jim;
I vaguely remember that, but wasn't that ice on the outside of the wing caused by super cooled fuel.
Don
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
billleff1(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:41 am Post subject: Gastwick B-777 Info |
|
|
The problem with the MD-80 was that the wing fuel tanks touch the top wing skin in the area in front of the engine inlets. After an extended flight at altitude, the fuel would cold soak and on the ground would form frost and sometimes ice that could separate and go through the engines causing an engine failure. This happened to a Swiss Air MD-80 and it crashed. There was a requirement to check the top of the wing before each flight, under certain conditions, to verify that this ice had not formed. There is now an AD requiring an electric heating blanket to prevent ice formation.
This did not cause fuel temp problems operationally.
Bill Leff
MD-80 instructor
Trans World Airlines
In a message dated 02/03/08 15:54:29 Eastern Standard Time, jtaddington(at)verizon.net writes:
[quote] .aolmailheader {font-size:8pt; color:black; font-family:Arial} a.aolmailheader:link {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; font-weight:normal} a.aolmailheader:visited {color:magenta; text-decoration:underline; font-weight:normal} a.aolmailheader:active {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; font-weight:normal} a.aolmailheader:hover {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; font-weight:normal} v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
My memory is not the best but if I remember right when the MD-80 came out they had ice problems when the aircraft came down from altitude and landed at a cold airport and than went back to altitude. I have forgotten how they fixed the problem. I had moved on when we got the MD-80 so am not sure exactly what the problem really was.
Jim Addington
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tylor Hall
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 10:49 PM
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: FW: Gastwick B-777 Info
I have had several experiences with Jet A and ice.
The first was in 1966. I worked the summer at Meigs Field, Chicago, (now gone). A new Lear Jet had a dual engine flame out. The got a partial power back by the time they came across the field. As the tried to climb out, the flamed out a second time and put it down in Lake Michigan. It floated since it has a clam shell door. It floated two days unit it was lifted out and put on a truck to go to Midway.
Lear Jet and most small Jet including turbo props Including TC, need Prist as an anti ice that keep the water in solution in the jet fuel.
The other experience was in the mid 1990's during a test of some Jet A pumping one winter day. It was well below 0 the night before and the fuel and tanks was cold soaked. The Jet A fuel we used had lost of water in it. We used the fuel to flush out the new equipment and test the operation of Jet A bulk pumping equipment to fill refueler trucks.
The system slowed down and stopped flowing. We shut down and started taking things apart. We removed the line strainer on Jet Single point nozzle and found the screen full of ice. It was a thin film of ice the completely stopped the 200 GPM flow.
In looking at the fuel in a clear jar, we could see ice in the form of what looked like snow flakes suspended in the Jet A.
The water was freezing into a solid and did not settle out. The water was so small it floated in the water. When it got cold enough, it froze.
Dan, I was under the impression that most large airliners did not need Prist, because they have fuel heaters to deal with the low temperatures at altitude?
We shipped some Jet A filter/separators to Antarctica. They use a special Jet fuel that is rated down to -78.
Tylor Hall
www.firstfueling.com
On Feb 2, 2008, at 8:54 PM, W J R HAMILTON wrote:
For the Avgas Burners.
In brief, there are two common civil jet fuels, Jet A and Jet A-1, with different freeze temperatures ( and a host of Mil. fuels, from JP-4 (aka Jet B) though -5,-6.-7 -
The significance of -37C is that it is a 3 degree pad on the freeze temperature of Jet A, so that is where the warning is set on most modern aircraft. At high Mach numbers, there is quite a temperature ram rise, the difference between OAT/SAT and "Total Air temperature" TAT. Very roughly TAT is OAT plus ram rise.
If the fuel gets cold enough, you either have to increase Mach No. (ram rise) or find a warner air mass, generally but not always by descending, depending where the tropopause height happens to be, depending on latitude, season and the particular weather pattern on the day.
The coldest air masses I have consistently found are over Russia/CIS states in winter, even colder than the certification envelope of Boeing aircraft, and significantly colder than any air masses over US/Canada, and colder than the ICAO standard atmosphere/textbooks suggest will be found.
Such very cold temperatures bring with them a whole host of possibilities, not limited to the fuel going solid.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton ( QANTAS Retired)
At 00:18 2/02/2008, you wrote:
Put into terms a piston driver could understand, you kerosene burners monitor enroute fuel temps as a flight parameter? -37c seems like it must be quite common?
Higher Mach number because of lower altitude?
---
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
