Talk:United Airlines Flight 232

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Peer review United Airlines Flight 232 has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents

[edit] Impossible to duplicate?

"In subsequent reconstructions of the circumstances of the accident in flight simulators, no pilot of any seniority has succeeded in reproducing Fitch's achievement of maneuvering the aircraft as far as the runway, generally losing control in mid air."

True? Veifiable? Guinnog 00:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Read through the references?? --BACbKA 09:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
When Captain Al Haines came to an Oregon pilots convention in 1991 or 1992, he stated that 'Dozens of airline and test pilots lined up at the simulators programmed for the UA232 scenario. Not one of them could get within 10 miles of the airport. They asked if I'd like to give it a try. I said, "I've already done the one that counts." — EncMstr 20:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

The statement that they were only able to make right hand turns contradicts the statement 3 sentences later that they lined up for the runway making left hand turns.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.42.213.174 (talk • contribs).

Thanks. I've edited the article to address this point. Please sign by typing ~~~~. Thanks, --Guinnog 04:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
The accident report and the CVR transcripts shows that they had diffucuties making left turn... but left turns were not impossible.When applying asymmetric power, this raised the wing of the side where the power was applied, rolling the plane and thus allowing them to make banking turns. --J-Star 08:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Mac Job says, if I remember correctly, that this is because the controls were frozen by the loss of fluid into the right turn they were making when the incident occurred. --Guinnog 19:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't know about that. Check he NTSB report for clues. --J-Star 10:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
They only made one left turn, and four right turns, including a 360. See [1] --Guinnog 00:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sioux City Memorial (Picture Anybody?)

The subsection "1994 memorial" can be improved with a picture of a memorial. If anybody can help, please upload one.

[edit] Needs cleaning up

This article is informative, but it seems to me the writing could be improved. I hesitate to do this myself, because I do not have sufficient knowledge of the incident or the topic.

Maybe at UAL there is no pilot, but this has been reproduced at other airlines with some success.

[edit] Jan Brown Lohr

Google for Jan Brown Lohr and you find plenty of references to her and her advocacy. Can someone please add one ro the requested citation request? I havn't figured out how to use those pesky ref-tags yet.

--J-Star 13:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Verifiable?

I tagged the following as I have never heard it before and rather doubt it is true. Any cites? "Other planes were modified following the accident to incorporate additional backup means of manipulating some of the flight controls even if the three hydraulic systems fail." --Guinnog 23:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know this is not true. I added the statement about newer designs using hydraulic fuses. They are designed to prevent a total failure, not provide a backup means of control. 23:47, 28 August 2006 (PST)
There is a move in aviation to use electric actuators in place of hydraulic systems. I'm sure this accident was a factor in this decision, as well as savings in weight and maintinance. The Boeing Dreamliner will have electric actuators and breaks. ANTIcarrot 00:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not against including it, if it can be verifiably referenced. --Guinnog 00:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

This article desperately needs an image of the fireball and/or wreckage to demonstrate the scale of the crash and the kind of media coverage it received. Abc30 18:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New article

Please see if you can add anything to Dennis E. Fitch which I created today. I have emailed his PR company asking for any additional info like his DOB, and will add it if and when it comes. Thanks. --Guinnog 11:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redundant explanation?

A point about the number two engine being shut down was deleted, supposedly for being redundant. Number one and number three hydraulic systems were punctured by shrapnel. Number two system was lost when the engine was shut down. This may not be obvious to readers unfamiliar with the design of the DC-10. More information never hurts.

The engine was not "shut down", it exploded into, as you say "shrapnel". I deleted it as being redundant, and your argument here has not convinced me. More information can hurt, if it is misleading. Please sign your posts. --Guinnog 09:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
That is not coorect. The engine did not "explode". The fan disc fractured and it was pieces of that that damaged the plane. The rest of the engine was pretty much intact though and kept running for a short, causing vibrations to be felt all over the plane. This prompted the flight crew to initiate engine shut-down procedures.
I think some kind of explanation should be in the article that the numer 2 engine failure shut down the corresponding hydraulic system. It is not immediatly obvious to readers that the engines power the hyrdaulics. --J-Star 10:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
It was an uncontained disintegration of the fan disc, yes. The rest of the engine was irrelevant; the crew initiated shutdown procedures after the engine spooled down, according to Mac Job, usually a very reliable source. Job also has all three hydraulic systems' pressure and quantity falling to zero, and includes a diagram by Matthew Tesch adapted from one in the NTSC report showing in detail that all three systems were breached by the engine failure. If you have better sources than the NTSB report, please quote them. Failing that, I think I will stick to my guns on this one. I also might see if I can include the original diagram in the article, to clarify this matter. --Guinnog 10:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
"All three hydraulic system reservoirs were examined and found empty. The system 1 and system 2 reservoirs and associated plumbing were found intact and undamaged mounted in their normal positions. The system 3 reservoir and its associated plumbing were found intact with minor blackening from fire damage in their normal positions in the right wheel well." (NTSB report, p35) --Guinnog 11:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
I've clarified the wording and added a ref to the airdisasters.com special report, as well as the crash image requested above. --Guinnog 11:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] More nitpicking, I'm afraid

I've tagged this passage as needing a citation; it doesn't seem to make sense to me and I don't see it in any of the references: "At one point Fitch manually lowered the landing gear in flight, hoping that this action would force trapped hydraulic fluid back into the lines allowing some movement of control surfaces"

Also, the very useful transcription of the CVR contains at least one error as it refers to Fitch as "Jumpseat captain" when as far as I know (and according to all the refs I've seen) he was travelling in the passenger cabin. --Guinnog 19:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The landing gear info comes from the mini-documentary made by Errol Morris as an episode for "First Person". In it Fitch was interviewed at length (actually the entire documentary is a Fitch monologue) and he describes trying to lower the gear as a desperate last ditch effort to force hydraulic fluid back into the system. --Bk0 (Talk) 02:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I haven't seen that and I accept your word for it. I've put it back. Obviously, if we could come up with a verifiable transcript of that docu that would be ideal. --Guinnog 15:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plea for quote

I remember seeing a TV documentary where one of the flight crew said something about the height of the corn as they crashed. Can anybody provide the accurate quote? --Guinnog 02:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Here (Aircraft Accident Report United Airlines Flight 232 (pdf) 37. NTSB (1989-07-19).) it says the corn was approximately seven feet tall (in the sixth paragraph). Is that good enough? — EncMstr 02:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, that verifies the height of the corn. The quote (I think probably from Fitch) was something like: "When I looked out the window and saw corn above me, I knew we were in trouble. I knew that corn grows tall in Iowa, but...". Ring any bells? --Guinnog 15:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speed in knots, Km/h, and Mach.

I'm confused by the 'Chronology of the flight' section. It reads 'At 15:16, while the plane was in a shallow right turn at 37,000 feet, and flying at Mach 0.83, or 270 knots'. I don't see how the speeds stated are the same.
Mach 1 is ~1 225kmh. So Mach 0.83 is ~1016.75 km/h.
1 Knot = 1.000 nautical mile/hour = 1.852 km/h, so 270 knots is ~500.04 km/h.
So, what speed was the aircraft travelling? ~1016.75 km/h or ~500.04 km/h?
User:Shirt58 11:09, 19 Oct 2006 (UTC)
ps: NPOV be damned, how brave were those pilot guys?

I originally added the reference to the airplane's speed at the time of the engine failure, and I believe it was 270 knots indicated airspeed, not true airspeed. Mach number doesn't really matter. Indicated airspeed matters in this case because when the hydraulics failed, the trim was stuck in position for 270 knots IAS. The NTSB concluded that without trim control, the airplane was impossible to land safely (contrast with the DHL shootdown incident in Baghdad). I agree that this sentence is a bit confusing, and it probably should be cleaned up, but I'll let Guinnog do it. 71.105.148.155 14 November, 2006

[edit] Crew Resource Management

The crash is considered to be a textbook example of successful Crew Resource Management, due to the effective use of all the resources available aboard the plane for help during the emergency.

It would help if further explaination could be added to the above. What did the flight crew do etc that makes it noteable? Nil Einne 09:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Crew Resource Management (CRM) originated from the need to improve aviation safety by improving communication within the cockpit. Capt Al Haines was faced with a nearly impossible situation with no precedents to provide guidance. By involving every crewmember in the cockpit, and soliciting input from each one, he was able to assign duties and create a team that successfully managed a situation that could never have been handled alone. CRM teaches skills and techniques of "synergy" that literally make the crew greater than the sum of its parts. Nibes 19:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review

I've added a link at the top of this page to a peer review, to see how we can make this article even better. Any ideas are welcome. --Guinnog 19:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "lap Childs"

On the "Lessons learned" section, it says that the 1 out of 4 kids to die was from smoke inhalation instead of injuries during the accident, this wouldn't have prompted the kid's mother to say what she said to Lohr and the subsequent reaction it had with her lobbying for "every child on a seat" law.

Isn't this a contradiction? Probably just for the benefit of the point against the law thing. Vizoso 21:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)J Vizoso —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vizoso (talk • contribs) 21:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

I think the mother's logic was that if the baby had had a seat of his/her own, then the baby would have stayed in the seat and then been carried out of the wreck after the crash. As it was, the mothers that held their babies in their arms lost their grip on them during the crash. The one died from smoke inhalation because it wasn't with its mother after the accident. Shreditor 04:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../u/n/i/Talk%7EUnited_Airlines_Flight_232_1515.html"