Turbulence Question
Sep 9, 2007 | 3:43 pm
#16
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA*G, UA 1MM
Posts: 1,276
Sep 9, 2007 | 3:49 pm
#18
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ICN / 평택
Programs: AA, DL Gold, UA Gold, HHonors Gold
Posts: 8,713
Exactly. Woodway: I don't know what differences it would have made, but to be completely honest, it would have made the test more accurate. I don't claim to be a scientist, but I think that testing something in conditions as close to absolute accuracy is better than what they did.
Sep 9, 2007 | 4:10 pm
#19
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Silver. (Former UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat)
Posts: 9,536
Certification requires a 150% margin prior to failure so nothing "breaks" until above +3.75g/-1.5g.
Sep 9, 2007 | 4:14 pm
#20
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Programs: UA 1K in training
Posts: 2,107
Exactly. Woodway: I don't know what differences it would have made, but to be completely honest, it would have made the test more accurate. I don't claim to be a scientist, but I think that testing something in conditions as close to absolute accuracy is better than what they did.
Who knows, maybe they other tests with fuel loaded. If they did, they probably stopped at or not much past the design limits so that the wing wouldn't rupture. And that wouldn't make for nearly as interesting of a YouTube video.
Sep 10, 2007 | 1:17 pm
#21
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ?
Posts: 7,544
^The worst turbulence I've encountered has always been when I have a full cup of coffee on my tray.
Sep 10, 2007 | 1:25 pm
#22
Join Date: Dec 2002
Programs: UA MM, Hilton-Dia
Posts: 1,487
Being banged around during turbulence can be no fun. I remember a UA flt departing NRT several years ago being in the news for a fatality resulting from turbulence. I'm sure others have more details on this.
Sep 10, 2007 | 1:25 pm
#23
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Massachusetts, USA; AA 2.996MM & Plat Pro, DL 1MM, GM & Flying Colonel
Posts: 25,037
Given the amount of engineering that goes into any new aircraft, I'm sure they designed the test to be a reasonably accurate indication of real-word performance. Filling the wings with fuel would have made it a much more dangerous test; it would have been very easy to generate a spark when the wing ruptured, and the resulting explosion would have been, to say the least, very big.
Who knows, maybe they other tests with fuel loaded. If they did, they probably stopped at or not much past the design limits so that the wing wouldn't rupture. And that wouldn't make for nearly as interesting of a YouTube video.
Who knows, maybe they other tests with fuel loaded. If they did, they probably stopped at or not much past the design limits so that the wing wouldn't rupture. And that wouldn't make for nearly as interesting of a YouTube video.
Sep 10, 2007 | 2:55 pm
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
as a second comment, I recall about 20-30 years ago, transatlantic flights(these were jets) slowed down when they hit "severe" turbulence. sometimes the slowdown cost a couple of hours on arrival time.
Sep 10, 2007 | 3:09 pm
#25
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ICN / 평택
Programs: AA, DL Gold, UA Gold, HHonors Gold
Posts: 8,713
There is no reason the wings would have to be filled with real fuel. If such tests are better measures of structural strength, and I am not a structural engineer so I don't know if they are, they can be carried out with any non-flammable liquid of the same specific gravity.
Sep 10, 2007 | 3:21 pm
#26
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: MCO
Programs: UA Gold, DL Gold (MM), HH LT Diamond, MR LT Platinum
Posts: 566
Mountain-wave/rotor turbulence is a third kind of turbulence that can make for controllability issues particularly in light aircraft. Very intense "spinning" vortices can develop over mountain ranges and no aircraft wants to get caught in one of those, particularly light aircraft.
Sep 10, 2007 | 6:07 pm
#27
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: PHX
Posts: 3,794
There was also a Braniff BAE 111 that broke up in late 1966 in a thunderstorm.
The most recent major incident on a 1st world airline I can find is an Evergreen cargo 747-100 in 1993. It lost an engine in severe turbulence near Anchorage, but safely returned to the airport. However, the NTSB believed that the engine pylon already had a weak spot and required inspections after the accident on other 747s.
The most recent major incident on a 1st world airline I can find is an Evergreen cargo 747-100 in 1993. It lost an engine in severe turbulence near Anchorage, but safely returned to the airport. However, the NTSB believed that the engine pylon already had a weak spot and required inspections after the accident on other 747s.
Sep 10, 2007 | 9:06 pm
#28
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 60
How To Generate Turbulence 101
I can predict, to amazing accuracy, when my aircraft will encounter turbulence: within 5 minutes after I turn off the FASTEN SEAT BELTS sign.
Almost never fails, and it drives me nuts.
Almost never fails, and it drives me nuts.
Last edited by jetskipper; Sep 10, 2007 at 9:12 pm Reason: Causal exposition.
Sep 11, 2007 | 7:10 am
#29
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 61
Sep 11, 2007 | 9:28 am
#30
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA*G, UA 1MM
Posts: 1,276
There is no reason the wings would have to be filled with real fuel. If such tests are better measures of structural strength, and I am not a structural engineer so I don't know if they are, they can be carried out with any non-flammable liquid of the same specific gravity.