MD87 Down near Houston

[Moon The Loon]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/19/us/texas-plane-crash/index.html

Charter flight. Runway overrun on takeoff. Failure to climb. Hmmm....

[st27]

Not a lot of runway …..  6100’……I thought the trust reversers would be deployed unless stowing them is part of evac drill.

I had a look on Google Earth, and there were 2 MD 80 series of jets on the ramp.

[GDR]

MD87 Down near Houston

Just wondering how it can be down when it was never up.  

[Moon The Loon]

4 hours ago, GDR said:

MD87 Down near Houston

Just wondering how it can be down when it was never up.  

As Pat Paulsen (Smothers Brothers Show) used to say, "picky, picky, picky..."  

[Airband]

Start of takeoff roll:

[Vsplat]

Never flown the type.  Is it a hard wing or slatted?  Hard to see how much leading or trailing edges are extended.

Vs

[st27]

I thought all dc9/md 80 ac had leading edge devices.

[Innuendo]

35 minutes ago, st27 said:

I thought all dc9/md 80 ac had leading edge devices.

Not all, AC's first six aircraft were -15s and had no slats.

Subsequent deliveries were -32s and had LE slats.

The -15s came in late 1966 and the -32s came in June 1967 and so on.

I would be surprised if the accident aircraft did not have slats.

[J.O.]

All of the MD-80 family has LE slats.

[Vsplat]

OK.  For those familiar with the type then, does it look like slats are extended?  Doesn't seem like much thickness visible on that leading edge from the footage. I presume they would be extended in the takeoff config.

[Innuendo]

For the -32 at AC the preferred T/O flap option was slats/ flap 15 degrees followed by slats/flap 5 and then slats/ flap 0, in that order as required by WAT limits.

The slat/flap selector was operated as a single lever, (first detent slats only),  but could be split by removing the bolt that combined the two.

Slats/flaps 0  T/O was only needed at close to MTOW and high temps and needed a long runway, the T/O speeds were  pretty high.

I can't really see from the images if the slats were extended but if not I believe they should have got a config warning.

 

Edited October 25, 2021 by Innuendo
Add comment.

[Airband]

[conehead]

17 minutes ago, Airband said:

Yup, the slats are extended. 

[J.O.]

 

[st27]

More info …..

Quote

The exact cause of this accident remains to be determined. But the basics are that the crew of the corporate-configured MD-87—an aircraft that had not flown for at least nine months—tried to abort their takeoff from 6,610-foot Runway 36 at Houston Executive Airport, skidded over a road, then spun around after hitting power lines and trees. The flight mechanic on board opened the left front cabin door and initiated the evacuation via an inflatable slide. All 18 passengers and three crew members got out quickly. 

Not specific if it was down for Mtc….but wow, that a long time for an a/c to sit!! And then go flying with pax on board…imo.

[boestar]

23 hours ago, st27 said:

More info …..

Not specific if it was down for Mtc….but wow, that a long time for an a/c to sit!! And then go flying with pax on board…imo.

it may seem like a long time but if the maintenance requirements for shor / long term storage and return to service were followed there should be no issues.

[J.O.]

16 minutes ago, boestar said:

it may seem like a long time but if the maintenance requirements for shor / long term storage and return to service were followed there should be no issues.

That’s a pretty big “if” …

[boestar]

On 10/28/2021 at 9:09 AM, J.O. said:

That’s a pretty big “if” …

oh I do agree.  Extended downtime should be a non event for an aircraft when the recommendation are followed correctly.  Problem is that in many cases those recommendation are not properly followed.

[J.O.]

The maintenance program for a 30+ year old airliner is a lot to take on for any GA operation, even the “managed” ones. When it’s just someone’s vanity project, the outlook is often less than good.

[Maverick]

On 11/1/2021 at 12:15 PM, boestar said:

oh I do agree.  Extended downtime should be a non event for an aircraft when the recommendation are followed correctly.  Problem is that in many cases those recommendation are not properly followed.

Well as someone with first hand knowledge of aircraft storage, I'll tell you this. We followed the manufacturers recommendations to the letter and were still surprised by quite a few things, nothing unsafe really just more labour and costly intensive than expected. 

[Specs]

2 hours ago, Maverick said:

We followed the manufacturers recommendations to the letter and were still surprised by quite a few things, nothing unsafe really just more labour and costly intensive than expected. 

Long term storage procedures by their very nature are always a work in progress. 

[boestar]

it is the release from storage that is where the rubber hits the road.  Storage checks are just upkeep.  The release from storage is the functional and operational testing.  That needs to be done properly and perfectly.

 

[st27]

From an unofficial source……..looking like a flight control problem. Source reports that as a/c accelerated down runway, at Vr, control inputs were applied and aircraft did not rotate! Reject carried out and went off the paved portion……reverse thrust was used, but buckets stowed when a/c stopped “out of habit”.

 

 

[conehead]

Interesting... but was the Horizontal Stab Trim set correctly for take-off config?

Fortunately, the entire tail section of the accident aircraft is in great shape, so investigators should be able to nail this one as to the cause.

[st27]

A preliminary report has been released and raises concerns about the FAA part “rules” the a/c was being operated and I assume, maintained under.

The on site inspection of the aircraft indicated the elevators could not be moved….skip to the 11 min mark on the link.