Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners Path: news From: pab@po.CWRU.Edu (Pete Babic) Subject: Re: hydraulic problems with DC-10's?? X-Submission-Date: 10 Dec 1992 14:36:36 GMT References: Message-ID: Approved: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM Reply-To: pab@po.CWRU.Edu (Pete Babic) Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Sender: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM X-Submission-Message-Id: <1g7klkINNagb@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> Date: 10 Dec 92 16:07:11 PST In a previous article, rdd@rascal.ics.utexas.edu (Robert Dorsett) says: > >The slat retraction DID affect the wing: it then became both a control and >aerodynamic problem. Exercising established control practices in an >unknown aerodynamic regime crashed the airplane (I'd love to know whether >this went into Airbus's "pilot error" database :-)). Had the slats remained >down, the airplane would have survived the engine failure, even with the >failure of the stall warning system. Other airframe manufacturers have >manual locking mechanisms for their slat jackscrews. McDonnell Douglas >relied on hydraulic pressure to hold it all together. > >Incidentally, this problem wasn't corrected: the SUX DC-10 also experienced >extension of its slats after it lost all its hydraulics. Does anyone know if the MD-11 has a proper locking mechanism for the slats? I'm a layman when it comes to aircraft design, but the DC-10 really looks like a substandard design that has killed a bunch of people due to cost cutting short cuts. -- Pete Babic - pab@po.cwru.edu /// LIVE TO PARTY, SKI TO DIE!!! /// /\ Member of ACE \\\ /// /--\MIGA (American Coaster Enthusiasts) \\\/// MS-DOS or a Mac? What's that?