boeingboy wrote:A/C has been tested to 105,000 hrs without failure
Therefore, the time to onset of WFD for the wing, fuselage, and tail structure is determined to be
greater than 105,000 hours with a high degree of certainty and greater than 50,000 hours (the
goal of this program) with a very high degree of certainty.
Reference 5 was the Fairchild full scale fatigue test. I would like to see how they simulate the type of flying the previous posters mentioned and which many of us have heard about at regional cargo operators, not to mention the temperature and moisture extremes and constant exposure to salt air these old airframes are subjected to out here on the west coast. I would not be surprised if that document is revised as a result of this investigation.
I'm curious to know what, if any, changes have happened at Carson Air from the day following this accident.
Was a memo sent out, any emergency inspections, any aircraft grounded pending...?
An airplane comes apart in the air and it seems odd that business would carry on as usual. I'm not saying it has, but interested in how operations might have changed after this accident and with these aircraft.
---------- ADS -----------
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.
Has there been any talks about a gear well fire? That, unfortunately, is a possibility.
Pretty unlikely. There would have been multiple issues long before it broke up.
Not to mention it only happened once, the crew knew about it, and they made multiple major screw ups.
wallypilot wrote:Does the metro have any gear well fire warning system?
Not necessarily. It has a "Wing Overheat" light, which if I remember correctly gives you about 12 mins to get on the ground if it's a true wheel well fire before it burns through the spar and you have wing seperation. If that light ever came on they advised get the gear out of the well and land asap.
wallypilot wrote:Does the metro have any gear well fire warning system?
Not necessarily. It has a "Wing Overheat" light, which if I remember correctly gives you about 12 mins to get on the ground if it's a true wheel well fire before it burns through the spar and you have wing seperation. If that light ever came on they advised get the gear out of the well and land asap.
In the picture below, I'd venture this is the left wing. It seems that may be part of the fuselage lying across the top beside it. This wing is upside down in the picture. Obviously.
The gear is extended backwards, rotated about 90 degrees from the down position. No sign of burning and that wing didn't separate.
TSB says that there was a small fire in the right nacelle. Does that mean they have the whole right wing?
No one at Carson seemed to want to comment on what if anything changed the next day.
---------- ADS -----------
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.
The wing overheat has 2 ways of operating. If the light is on steady - it was an ACM failure, bleed duct rupture, or short/overheat in the leading edge wiring bundle. If it was flashing - it was a wheel well overheat, caused by a ruptured bleed line or brake fire.
boeingboy wrote:The wing overheat has 2 ways of operating. If the light is on steady - it was an ACM failure, bleed duct rupture, or short/overheat in the leading edge wiring bundle. If it was flashing - it was a wheel well overheat, caused by a ruptured bleed line or brake fire.
Power back - gear down and land asap.
Close but no. Steady wing overheat light covers the wheel well and engine nacelle. Flashing is the leading edge. Doesn't really matter because the drill is the same. Reason being is a steady signal could be flickering on off as things are electrically getting out of control.
Close but no. Steady wing overheat light covers the wheel well and engine nacelle. Flashing is the leading edge. Doesn't really matter because the drill is the same. Reason being is a steady signal could be flickering on off as things are electrically getting out of control.
Also close - It is wheel well only - the engines have there own "engine fire" light. Flashing is leading edge/acm.
Thanks for the clarification on flash/no flash. I could never keep those two right.
Close but no. Steady wing overheat light covers the wheel well and engine nacelle. Flashing is the leading edge. Doesn't really matter because the drill is the same. Reason being is a steady signal could be flickering on off as things are electrically getting out of control.
Also close - It is wheel well only - the engines have there own "engine fire" light. Flashing is leading edge/acm.
Thanks for the clarification on flash/no flash. I could never keep those two right.
My apologies, I should have clarified. I realize there are temp sensors for the ENGINE FIRE lights in the nacelle. I just was thinking back to my grond school days where the diagram points to the 450F sensor in the AC duct near the engine nacelle. This is all beside the point though. I believe most operators adopted the same procedure for flashing/steady overheat lights because of the accident in Montreal a while back. The light was flickering, and thought it was a leading edge problem, when really a fire was raging in the gear well and burning through the circuit. If the drill had been the same, they would have put the gear down and maybe bought more time?
