• deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    16 days ago

    Looks like it stalled due to lack of thrust. What could have killed both engines right after takeoff?

    • floofloof@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      16 days ago

      It seems to climb OK for a little while then suddenly start sinking. There’s no sign of an obvious engine problem. Not sure whether we’d be able to see any sign of a bird strike from this far away.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      16 days ago

      For multi engine planes it’s pretty rare, most likely a fuel system failure, or less likely pilot throttling error. My money would be on something with the fuel system.

    • philpo@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      16 days ago

      Yeah, it’s rather strange. There is another one from a perspective where the aircraft almost “overflew” the cameraman (basically at a 5’o clock angle)- it shows them having aileron and elevator control right until they crash. And while the quality is poor, I am somewhat convinced that the RAT has not deployed (yet?)

      A bird strike would likely have caused something visible So it doesn’t sound like hydraulics or fuel(water in the fueltanks?) or something electronic wise with the engine control. Strange and sad.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 days ago

        I just saw that video and it is really strange. Not so much that rat hasn’t been deployed, I don’t think they lost hydraulics or electronics and I’m not sure they even reached the minimum speed where the rat would really help.

        The strange thing is that it didn’t really look like there was very much yaw or rolling which you would expect to see with a fuel system failure. They seemed to be flying straight as an arrow and gliding it down?

        Maybe something wrong with thrust control? Kinda crazy.

        • philpo@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          Yeah,I am not sure if there is a safety interlock with Boeing RATs(and the video is really bad)…so it might be intentional.

          It’s strange. Personally I currently go with water in the fuel system as the “most likely guess by a armchair pilot”(me),but wouldn’t also be surprised being it an electronic error. When that would be the case Boeing would be fucked beyond repair,imho.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 days ago

            Something wrong with the fuel system was my initial armchair guess, but I’m not so sure based off the second vid. One would expect to see some yaw or rolling in an underpowered or lost of power take off with a jet.

            Guess we’ll have to wait until someone more qualified explains it.

        • Supervisor194@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Is it common for CCTV to track and follow all planes as they take off like the camera in this video seems to be?

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      16 days ago

      “Did I fill the water in the right hole on that plane?” – Guy at the airport driving the freshwater tanker.

        • thefartographer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Why not? Genuinely asking. I thought I remembered wake turbulence being able to cause engine stall or complete shutoff, but I only see that anecdotally, not on the FAA’s website.

          I also thought I’d remembered it being able to cause stalls, but I’m mostly only reading about it causing planes to roll on the FAA’s website.

          • philpo@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            15 days ago

            Wake turbulence requires something to cause the wake - usually another aircraft. Additionally wake turbulences autoregulate themselves - they don’t stay “in the air” but rather disperse rather fast, especially close to the ground. VAAH is a pretty small airport that has no continual taxiway(which they once had,for some strange reason) so aircraft need to backtrack(Basically go in the wrong direction on the RW, then do a U-Turn) at the end of the runway if they go for a take-off runway of RW23.This leads to a long time for any wake turbulence to disperse.

            Additionally the 787 is a mighty big aircraft and mostly wake turbulences affect aircraft that are smaller than the ones which caused it. (This is of course not fully accurate,but it gets complicated then) And the 787 is absolutely powerful enough to power through basically any wake turbulence.

            Last but not least there was not a starting aircraft directly before the flight but a (very small) landing one - so even more time for any wake to disperse.

            So in the end I would be pretty damn sure it wasn’t that.