Existe apenas 1 resposta neste tópico. Que tal colaborar ainda mais?

[lylyanna]

Aviation News Release


Experts: Crosswinds a factor in Denver air crash

By JOAN LOWY
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON — It was very windy when a Continental Airlines jet was destroyed while trying to take off in Denver last month, leading aviation safety experts to cite crosswinds as a likely factor in the accident.

But were those winds strong enough to "weather-vane" the Boeing 737-500? In that phenomenon, the wind pushes an airliner's tail hard enough to swing its nose into the wind, like a weather vane. In Denver, experts suspect weather-vaning caused the plane to skitter off the runway in a bone-jarring ride across open, snowy fields, eventually coming to a halt and catching fire. But some additional factor — either mechanical failure or human error — probably also played a role, safety experts said.
(enlarge photo)
Workers move the wreckage of Continental Airlines flight 1404 to a site outside a Continental hangar at Denver International Airport in Denver on Saturday, Jan. 3, 2009, from the ravine where it crash landed on Saturday, Dec. 20, 2008. Aviation safety experts said Tuesday, Jan. 6, strong crosswinds likely were a factor in an accident last month that sent a Continental Airlines jet into a bone-jarring veer off a Denver runway and across open, snowy fields before it came to a halt and caught fire. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

Crosswinds were "definitely a contributing factor," said John Cox, a former pilot and president of Safety Operating Systems, an aviation consulting firm in Washington. "Whether it's causal or not, I don't think you have enough information to go there yet,"

Gusts of up to 37 mph were reported at Denver International Airport on the day of the accident, according to the National Transportation Safety Board. Cox and other experts said those gusts may have been strong enough to push the aircraft's tail around, but the plane's pilots should have been able to compensate.

Continental Airlines flight 1404 was taking off for Houston on Dec. 20 when the accident occurred. The main landing gear was sheared off, its nose gear collapsed, and the plane carrying 110 passengers rumbled about 2,000 feet from the runway. Thirty-seven people were injured.

NTSB officials have said the plane's brakes and engines appeared to have been operating normally. Investigators dug the destroyed nose gear out of the ground last week, and safety board spokesman Peter Knudson said preliminary results of that examination may be available later this week.

"We're looking at (crosswinds), but it's just one thing we're looking at," Knudson said. "Nothing is off the table."

Spokesmen for Boeing and Continental declined to reveal their guidelines on safely operating the 737-500 in crosswinds. However, Knudson said the winds at the time of the accident should have been "within the envelope" of what the plane could withstand.

NTSB has not identified the plane's pilot, and the Air Line Pilots Association declined to comment.

But John Nance, a former pilot and aviation safety consultant, was doubtful that crosswinds will ultimately be shown to be a cause. He said wind created by the plane's velocity as it gained speed heading north down the runway would have offset the impact of the crosswinds from the west.

"It would have taken a mighty burst of wind way, way above anything anybody has recorded, in my view," Nance said.

Also, he said, compensating for the type of crosswinds experienced in Denver that day would have been second nature for an experienced pilot, "just like riding a bicycle."

Copyright 2009, The Associated Press.

• Back to top

[Clipper]

Pelo visto, todos estão procurando se defender, apresentando alegações diversas, mas tomando como base o que foi citado nessa noticia, sendo imparcial no raciocínio, não é completamente impossível que uma condição de vento de través ocasione um acidente como aquele, mesmo que isoladamente e sem que a aeronave apresentasse qualquer problema técnico. Se houver uma somatória de inconvenientes, como alguma pane, a chance de perda de controle aumenta consideravelmente. Se adicionarmos um vento de rajada de 37 milhas e uma condição de pista escorregadia, a possibilidade de uma decolagem mal sucedida cresce absurdamente, e isso em qualquer aeronave, não somente num B737-500. Vamos aguardar os próximos capítulos das investigações.

Como exemplo, supostamente mais ameno, alguns anos atrás um B747, durante uma decolagem de JFK, começou ainda em baixa velocidade a derivar para a esquerda. O comandante tentou realinhar a aeronave com a pista, porém, sem resultado. Ele decidiu abortar a decolagem, poucos metros após ter iniciado a corrida, somente aplicando os freios, sem o uso do reverso dos motores. Mesmo com toda a cautela para não perder o controle do avião, o Jumbo saiu da pista pela esquerda, completamente descontrolado, atingiu um transformador de energia, deixou pelo caminho o motor 4, quebrou o trem de pouso do nariz e somente parou de deslizar 200 metros depois. Condição da decolagem: visibilidade inferior a duas milhas, vento de través pela esquerda de 11 nós, com rajadas de até 22 nós, leve nevasca, que acabou dificultando em alguns momentos a visualização do eixo da pista e dos limites laterais. A pista escorregadia e a técnica de controle direcional da aeronave sob tal condição foram os fatores decisivos no desfecho que aparentemente não causaria nada além de um aborrecimento de ter de voltar para a fila para aguardar uma nova decolagem.

• Back to top