Jeju Air Flight from Bangkok Skids Off Runway at Muan Airport, 28 Dead

[nauseus]

10 hours ago, Harsh Jones said:

That is incorrect 

 

The 737NG has two 24 volt nickel–cadmium batteries, one main and one auxiliary, located in the electronics compartment. The auxiliary battery operates in parallel with the main battery when powering the standby system. The batteries can power all systems for 60 minutes.

 

A dual engine failure does not lead to instantaneous loss of electrical power. 

 

 

• The B737 flight controls are hydraulically powered.
• There are three hydraulic systems: System A, System B, and Standby. Only one main system (A or B) is required for hydraulically flying the aircraft, during normal operation they are both operational.
• The two main hydraulic systems have an Engine Driven Pump (EDP), which can continue delivering hydraulic pressure when the associated engine is windmilling. All three hydraulic systems are also powered by their own Electric Motor Driven Pump (EMDP).
• In case of dual engine failure the APU can power the electrical systems for the EMDPs, still delivering full hydraulic power.
• If the fuel has run out and the APU cannot operate, two batteries provide at least 60 minutes of backup power for the electrical systems. The EDMPs can be powered in this stage, however they provide a high load.

 

 

 

No. You are wrong, as usual. I'm talking about the data recorders, which auto start and stop recording depending on engine power status. The auto function at engine start may be manually overridden to start recording early. Recorder Independent Power Supply (RIPS) was not installed as standard at the time that this aircraft was manufactured,

[nauseus]

22 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

There was blackbox data.

Due to loss of power, etc, the recording ended before the crash.

 

Also, there was other data which was sent directly to the ground, which is recorded and available.

 

However, this data transmission also ENDED just after the plane began its GO-AROUND.

 

Also, the black-box should have been given directly to NTSB.

No need to allow the Koreans to fool with it first.

 

Just give it to the NTSB from the beginning.

Handing it off to the Koreans, first, was just a waste of time.

Also, the Koreans might have damaged or tampered with the data, and so giving it to the Koreans first was not a secure way to protect the black-box or the data recorded by it.

 

The box should have been given directly to a reliable third party, in this case, the NTSB.

 

 

 

 

 

If they do that, will you hand yourself over to the Koreans?

[marin]

3 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

Stop posting utter crap.

That is all he posts. 

[nauseus]

17 hours ago, Harsh Jones said:

 

Comments: I’m a mechanic for many years on 737-800. There is no reason they will stop recording, They work on battery power also The APU is a one flick of the finger start that takes around 30 seconds. No idea unless circuit breakers are pulled. This is very strange.

 

That was always going to happen, the loss of face to have such a monumental cock up laid bare for the world to see would’ve been unforgivable.

 

 

BS

[GammaGlobulin]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

If they do that, will you hand yourself over to the Koreans?

 

North?

or South Koreans?

 

The two are basically exactly the same.

 

One thing though, I will not be flying to either N. or S. Korea aboard a Korean airline flight.

 

[Ralf001]

10 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

North?

or South Koreans?

 

The two are basically exactly the same.

 

One thing though, I will not be flying to either N. or S. Korea aboard a Korean airline flight.

 

 

I flew to S.Korea last year on Korean air.... was no issue.

 

Those S.Korean ladies sure are tasty !

[GammaGlobulin]

5 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

 

I flew to S.Korea last year on Korean air.... was no issue.

 

Those S.Korean ladies sure are tasty !

 

 

WHY, seemingly, was JEJU Air comfortable flying aircraft with Honeywell black boxes that may have not been equipped with internal power supply which could operate and not be dependent upon aircraft power, in case of power failure.

 

This was another bad choice of the Korean Airline.

 

This is another reason why I will not fly any Korean airlines.  

 

Another thing.

Koreans are super sensitive to loss of face.

So, best not to allow the Koreans to take possession of the black box after a crash such as this.

 

Black box must immediately be given into the possession of a reliable third party, such as NTSB.

 

 

[Ralf001]

5 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

 

This was another bad choice of the Korean Airline.

 

This is another reason why I will not fly any Korean airlines.  

 

 

 

[GammaGlobulin]

Just now, Ralf001 said:

 

 

Feel free to ride.

 

It's a free world we live in (except for N. Korea, and also S. Korea, in some respects)....so...YOU ride on korean airlines...and we will watch from the ground.

 

[nauseus]

21 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

 

WHY, seemingly, was JEJU Air comfortable flying aircraft with Honeywell black boxes that may have not been equipped with internal power supply which could operate and not be dependent upon aircraft power, in case of power failure.

 

This was another bad choice of the Korean Airline.

 

This is another reason why I will not fly any Korean airlines.  

 

Another thing.

Koreans are super sensitive to loss of face.

So, best not to allow the Koreans to take possession of the black box after a crash such as this.

 

Black box must immediately be given into the possession of a reliable third party, such as NTSB.

 

 

 

The racist and idiotic commentary continues...

[Phillip9]

23 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

WHY, seemingly, was JEJU Air comfortable flying aircraft with Honeywell black boxes that may have not been equipped with internal power supply which could operate and not be dependent upon aircraft power, in case of power failure.

 

No 737 manufactured before 2010 was equipped with a battery backup for the black boxes.  That means the vast majority of 737s still flying today have no battery backup for the black boxes.  

 

That seems like a flaw caused by the American company Boeing, not anything the Koreans did wrong.

[GammaGlobulin]

1 hour ago, Phillip9 said:

 

No 737 manufactured before 2010 was equipped with a battery backup for the black boxes.  That means the vast majority of 737s still flying today have no battery backup for the black boxes.  

 

That seems like a flaw caused by the American company Boeing, not anything the Koreans did wrong.

 

Obviously, if there was not internal battery backup, and IF this was due to a choice by the Korean airline, then there is fault on the Korean side, for this issue.

 

However, obviously, if the Boeing company, or it's black-box supplier Honeywell, failed to provide an internal battery backup power supply, then this is just a matter of stupidity and negligence and poor design.  There is no reason why a black-box should not be equipped with a backup battery power supply.

 

Note: Also, these black boxes should be installed in such a way that they cannot be deactivated by the crew of the aircraft.  Some configurations allow the pilot to deactivate the voice recorder under some situations.  Or, it is possible to deactivate if a circuit breaker is pulled. (But these are design flaws.  The black-box should record under all circumstances...if in the air, or also if taxiing. And it should continue to operate even if disconnected from the aircraft power supply.)

 

 

[rabas]

2 hours ago, Phillip9 said:

 

No 737 manufactured before 2010 was equipped with a battery backup for the black boxes.  That means the vast majority of 737s still flying today have no battery backup for the black boxes.  

 

That seems like a flaw caused by the American company Boeing, not anything the Koreans did wrong.

 

The impetus to upgrade flight recorders with battery backup came from ICAO after a McDonnell Douglas MD-11 airliner crashed in 1998 when a fire burned through its wiring and investigators found the final 5 minutes of recording missing. ICAO then recommended battery backup should be added by 2004. ICAO is an international organization.

 

But technical issues slowed the upgrade in part due to environment requirements. As of 2009, new US registered planes were to have battery backed recorders by April 2010, with retrofits on old planes by 2012. Planes registered in Europe would following in 2012.

 

See [reference].

[Captain Flack]

Some name calling posts and replies have been removed. You can disagree on opinions without needing to just post personal attacks.

[GammaGlobulin]

2 hours ago, rabas said:

 

The impetus to upgrade flight recorders with battery backup came from ICAO after a McDonnell Douglas MD-11 airliner crashed in 1998 when a fire burned through its wiring and investigators found the final 5 minutes of recording missing. ICAO then recommended battery backup should be added by 2004. ICAO is an international organization.

 

But technical issues slowed the upgrade in part due to environment requirements. As of 2009, new US registered planes were to have battery backed recorders by April 2010, with retrofits on old planes by 2012. Planes registered in Europe would following in 2012.

 

See [reference].

 

So then...

This will obviously be an important point that will show up in the NTSB Investigation Report.

 

Makes no sense to use a black-box which does not have battery backup.

 

 

[Will B Good]

15 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

So then...

This will obviously be an important point that will show up in the NTSB Investigation Report.

 

Makes no sense to use a black-box which does not have battery backup.

 

 

 

The reason given is that aircraft have multiple backup systems in the event of primary electrical failure.

 

Having said that I was surprised they don't have their own power supply.

 

Very odd the last four minutes are missing.

[Phillip9]

7 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Makes no sense to use a black-box which does not have battery backup.

 

For the flight data recorder that records the airspeed, etc, there is not really much reason to have an independent battery backup because if the aircraft electrical power fails, all of the various electronic sensors that provide the data will stop working, so there will be nothing to record anyway.

 

The cockpit voice recorder is the only thing that really makes sense to have its own independent battrry backup.  

[Captain Flack]

Off topic post about noise-abatement and nonsense about only Korean aircraft being noisy has been removed.

[Harsh Jones]

 

Man oh man.... This is what happens when you pull the engine fire handles on a 737 :

 

Pulling the engine fire handle on a Boeing 737 engine closes fuel and air shutoff valves, trips the generator, and closes the hydraulic fluid shutoff valve. It also arms the discharge squib on each engine fire extinguisher bottle. Rotating the switch electrically discharges the extinguishing agent into the engine

 

They pulled the fire handles after the bird strike. This killed the electrical which is why the transponder and data recorders were lost  (terrible design, but that's why you have to follow the checklists word for word) and shut the hydraulics down. This is why the plane became a glider. 

 

It is unlikely that there was a catastrophic electrical problem. They just pulled the fire handles which killed the electrical and hydraulics. And I'll say it again, that's an unbelievably terrible design. The pilots have probably flown on aircraft where the fire handle just discharges the onboard fire extinguisher. 

 

As Dan Gryder explains here 44 minutes in

 

[Harsh Jones]

There could have been smoke/fumes through the AC system. It could have led to a hasty reaction vs. a controlled, checklist-oriented one.

[nauseus]

7 hours ago, Harsh Jones said:

 

Man oh man.... This is what happens when you pull the engine fire handles on a 737 :

 

Pulling the engine fire handle on a Boeing 737 engine closes fuel and air shutoff valves, trips the generator, and closes the hydraulic fluid shutoff valve. It also arms the discharge squib on each engine fire extinguisher bottle. Rotating the switch electrically discharges the extinguishing agent into the engine

 

They pulled the fire handles after the bird strike. This killed the electrical which is why the transponder and data recorders were lost  (terrible design, but that's why you have to follow the checklists word for word) and shut the hydraulics down. This is why the plane became a glider. 

 

It is unlikely that there was a catastrophic electrical problem. They just pulled the fire handles which killed the electrical and hydraulics. And I'll say it again, that's an unbelievably terrible design. The pilots have probably flown on aircraft where the fire handle just discharges the onboard fire extinguisher. 

 

As Dan Gryder explains here 44 minutes in

 

 

Or Dan's Worst Guess? Seems like he has a history of poor judgement ...a bit like you. Man oh man!

 

 

 

No wonder you post so much carp.

 

 

 

[nauseus]

6 hours ago, Harsh Jones said:

There could have been smoke/fumes through the AC system. It could have led to a hasty reaction vs. a controlled, checklist-oriented one.

 

A clear case of could have beenery then.