Re: [OT] A variety of terminology/history questions

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/
From - Mon Dec 17 12:34:34 2001
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.247.225])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA09648;
	Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:39:40 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.6/8.11.4) with SMTP id
fB77cJb95193;
	Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:38:19 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from owner-gzg-l)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 6 Dec
2001 23:38:16 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.6/8.11.4) id fB77cFS95169
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:38:15 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU)
Received: from tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts10.bellnexxia.net
[209.226.175.54])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.6/8.11.4) with ESMTP id
fB77cDE95164
	for <gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:38:13
-0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca)
Received: from J ([64.229.67.204]) by tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net
	  (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP
	  id <20011207073807.RBAE17034.tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net@J>
	  for <gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>;
	  Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:38:07 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20011207024003.008eb900@POP2.sympatico.ca>
X-Sender: b1mriy72@POP2.sympatico.ca
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 02:40:03 -0500
To: gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu
From: adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca
Subject: Re: Why we fight (there was an old B&W movie by that name IIRC)
In-Reply-To: <200112070116.fB71GBb87358@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00004e41
Status: RO
Content-Length: 3819
Lines: 73

Just FYI ('cause the points are very valid),

>On the other hand, if you have rational options, panic inducing
situations
>drastically improve your performance.	An Air Canada pilot that was
flying
>a wide bodied jet, only to have it become a very bad glider (due to
>loading insufficient fuel), managed to bring it down on an abandoned
>airstrip.  No other pilot has managed to duplicate this feat in the
>simulator [Because it was the pilot's own fault that the plane had
>insufficient fuel, Air Canada wrote absolutely stunning references
before
>firing him]. 

Actually, they fired him for two reasons.  The first was that even
though
he wasn't actually the person supervising the fueling, and the error was
a
groundcrewman's mistake in converting gallons and litres, he is
ultimately
responsible for everything that happens on the plane.  He's the
Captain...

The second was that he picked a *closed* runway to land on.  When the
plane
ran out of fuel, it was over (IIRC, Manitoba).	The pilot had, in his
early
career, been a fighter jock with the CAF based in the area, and
remembered
that very close to his current position was his old fighter base.  He
glided the airliner to a landing on one of the runways of the base.
However, the base had long been closed, and that runway was deactivated.
It was being used as a drag-strip, and the plane's landing gear was
quite
seriously damaged as it crashed through stuff during the landing.  The
reason he was fired was that in all cockpits, the pilots are required to
carry a book, the "AIP" - Aeronautical Information Publication.  It is a
guide to every open and closed airfield in Canada, and has all pertinent
information.  The book is regulary updated (like every few months), and
if
he had actually *checked* his book, as called for in the emergency
procedures, he would have seen that the runway was closed, but there was
an
adjoining runway that was not only still open, but still used as a civil
airport.

So, he was fired for needlessly endangering the plane (well, more than
it
was already endangered by the situation) by not checking his AIP - which
he
certainly had time to do.

HOWEVER, having said all that, it was still a bloody ballsy thing to do
(pardon the emphasis) and he deserved a medal...

The public outcry at his firing was enough, IIRC, that the Pilots' Union
got him reinstated in short order.  I remember all this in the news
quite
clearly.

 I think it was in Sioux City that an aircraft actually made
>it to the ground, with no hydraulics and only the having the throttle
to
>control the aircraft, two thirds of the passengers and crew survived
the
>breakup of the aircraft, as it cart-wheeled off the runway.  This has
also
>never been duplicated in the simulator.
>

Actually, NASA took a big interest in that particular situation.  The
pilot
managed to use differential engine thrust to get himself and the plane
all
the way to an airport, steer to the runway, land almost properly, but
one
of the wings dipped and his control wasn't fine enough to get it up
again
before the wingtip hit and the plane rolled.  As you said, he saved more
than half the passengers and his flight crew, by *inventing a method of
flying that was never taught, discussed, or anything* because he had to
do
*something*.

This guy had great big brass ones...   He *really* deserved a medal.

And NASA went on to experiment using differential engine thrust control
on
real planes.  I've seen pictures of them landing an (F15, I think) using
that principle.  In the past year or two I saw a photo of a NASA
passenger
jet (I think a 737) landing using differential thrust only.  They're
perfecting the technique so it can be taught to pilots worldwide as a
standard emergency procedure...

Just the thought of that pilot's presence of mind is boggling...