Chip, no, the 757 is entirely docile, particularly when heavy. Boeing got it absolutely right, and the machine is just superb in every way, a pure delight to fly and a *****cat to land with the inclined bogies , she even looks superb ! Not like the Canberra on one, THAT was a real handful !

Regards, David G.

Made exactly the same move with my RII and have to agree, still accelerates nicely in any direction, get 10mins with reserve on stock tank, Jet 1A's are also a perfect match.

Rob.

If memory serves me right I think Jason Fletcher had a birdstrike with a Bobcat or something similar at one of the European meets maybe a year or 2 ago ?

Talking of great aircraft David.......you might know 558 (fullsize Vulcan) is due for it's first flight any time now after the extensive and prolonged rebuild. Should manage a few show appearances here during the show season.

Rob.

i had that
i test a lot of engines at my outdoor shop,you see the little *******s fly by , i throttle up ,and they get sucked in....
and you do find their little remains back in the back of the casing or between the aft fuel and gas lines

yes Jetpower 2005

(found the frighning part? )

Hopefully, this the part ?

Rob.

I was wondering where that was!

I finished building my lightning, I go to install that piece, and it's missing, had to get another one from overseas! And all this time it was sitting in your lawn in Europe? I'm not kidding, my box was missing it

Must have fallen out the box as the shipment flew overhead in transit !!

Rob.

Silly question:
Why did the pilot circle to burn off fuel instead of landing immediately? I would think that they would want to get the plane back on the ground as soon as possible.

Thanks
Anthony

To reduce the chance of it bursting into flames on the runway i think its procedure.

to burn off fuel so as to be @cert. max landing weight....with existing fuel/pass weight.......kpc

Actually, proper training directs when on fire...you land immediately (at the nearest suitable airport) regardless of your current weight. The max landing weight for the 757-200 series is 198,000# and the max take-off weight is either 240,000 or 250,000#s depending on the mods done to the jet. That being said, the jet is certified to make an "over weight" landing at the certified max take-off weight with no problems. All that is required is that maintenance come out and make an "Overweight landing inspection" which takes very little time.

Remember the Swiss Air MD-11 that caught on fire after take off from JFK? Had the pilots landed immediately when they realized they had problems (They could have, but the Captain decided to circle to burn off fuel) they would have been fine, but instead all were killed when the fire got out of control. Since then...when on fire...land immediately...period.

Beave

yep!

if its says Sean on it send it to me please

does it still is covered with landing strip debree?

well it was missing also form ours
and i beat you to it..

Bevar,
I agree if you are on fire you,ve got to land but he wasn't. The flames are from an engine surge/stall as the birds disrupted the airflow and damaged the engine, internally. In that case you burn down to max landing weight or dump fuel depending on aircraft type and land. I,m speaking from experience.

John

fire.....thats the operative word......get it on the ground asap......all my training stated land immediately!!!! airport/no airport/interstate/lake/river/park/golf course.....any where reasonably flat.....kpc

I used the tailcone from the first Frightning painted matt black, this is a brand spanking new one from my second kit, but I have a bit of a problem........................

Rob.

the thing is we are not sure if we lost it , or like Sean that they "forgot" to put it in the box....
i need one anyway so i pay half its value for it....
or better said : i will "retract" it of the parts
anyway lets stay on topic...
it was a good thread and lots to lurn
i want to see that volcan since you mentioned some details and we spoke about it ..

John,

If you have suffered engine damage and are now single engine...you land ASAP. I have been flying RB-211s for 8 years now and have never heard of one stalling like that one did. If you have had an engine situation like the one depicted in the video and you elect not to continue to your destination you are in an emergency situation per the regs and should land ASAP...regardless of your actual weight. Remember...max landing weight is only for normal ops and if safety of flight is in question...you land...period. All part 121 transport category aircraft are certified to land at their maximum take-off weight without any difficulty. I too speak from experience.

Beave
(BA-3100, SF-340, DC-9, B-737, B-757, B-767, B-727 FEJ)

I wish I hadn't replied now. Yes, I agree if you are on fire land ASAP, but from what I hear the engine was basically OK. Check it out for yourself: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=273844
Oh, and Swiss Air 111 was a lot more than a bird strike.

John
18yrs UK TRE (check airman), JAA simulator evaluator, 737,737Ng,757.767,DC10,A319,320,321,330,340, jump seat of the A380 (does that count) and they tell me next year 787.

Having started the thread purely as a matter of interst for the excellent video may I put my oar in (with 10,000 hrs command time on 4 types of Boeing twins plus training Capt time). Basically you are all right. Land ASAP but what does that mean? If I had cabin fire (Like SR111 and the AC DC9) just after T/O I am going straight into a visual circuit put it on the ground and order an immediate evacuation. Some of us also rememeber the fire tragedy at MAN just off that same runway, back in 1985 or therabouts.

It may well be that the crew, as I said earlier, may NOT have had a fire warning, just vibration and excess EGT and in that case I would not expect a crew to rush anything and risk compounding the situation . I think the crew did exactly the right thing if this was the case. Climb to a safe height, go to a nearby holding pattern maybe with extended legs with ATC approval to reduce pilot workload, clean up, complete the checks and get the aircraft set up, correct V speeds etc and crew mentally prepared and fully briefed, inc go-around drill for a one engine inop landing which is no sweat on the 757. Fuel dump is not possible and it would take a long time to burn off fuel to MLW on one engine so an overweight landing is inevitable and not a problem (to fly, due runway length at MAN, or structurally).

On four engines its a little different, 30 years ago I had the HP compressor of a Conway let go of a number of blades on a BA VC10 climbing out of LHR just aftert T/ O. Indications were vibration, felt and on the vib guages and excess EGT In that case I decided (I had a great captain ex wartime captain who told me to get on with it, trust indeed) that after shutting down the engine , no fire indicated or observed, and with three other engines looking fine, we did dump fuel, about 40 tons which took about 40 minutes and then we landed back at LHR.

It seems the crew did a fine job and reports vary on the condition of the engine, from OK to write off ! One thing is for sure the RB211 is a tough engine with (very sharp) titanium fan blades. What really matters is that the aircraft was safely landed and all is well. No doubt some may pick holes in their performance and my bit here but Prune comment has been highly complimentary about all concerned at MAN, crew and ATC ! Well done guys (and girls if app) !

Regards, David Gladwin.

Actually from all the reports that I have read, the rate at which the fire grew on board SR 111 would have meant that by the time a pan pan was declared they would not have been able to land had they started to do so immediately. Such a tragic crash...[sm=sleeping.gif]

Here's a good one...it's always brings a chuckle...

Beave

Check this out...

http://www.digistar.cl/SR111/srmv3o.html

It was worse than you think...one of my Mates wife was on 111.

Beave

I am sorry to hear that bevar. A lot of people were affected by that crash, trully awful indeed.