European Tribune

Display:
The pilot aborted a first takeoff attempt because an air intake temperature gauge was detecting overheating. The maintenance staff decided the gauge was faulty and turned it off. This allowed take-off and Spanair claims the temperature gauge is not necessary for flight according to the maintenance standards. The engine then caught fire on takeoff.

Question: is it possible that the gauge was detecting overheating not of the incoming air (incorrect) but of the engine itself, that the maintenance staff failed to notice anything wrong with the engine and so (wrongly) declared the gauge faulty and disabled it?

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 22nd, 2008 at 06:50:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I rather imagine the maintenance engineers will face those same questions in a rather more formal and intimidating atmosphere sometime in the next few days.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Fri Aug 22nd, 2008 at 07:27:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I rather imagine they've been facing them in the dark of the night for last few days.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Aug 22nd, 2008 at 07:31:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
How about the guys at MacDonnell-Douglas who wrote the maintenance manual? Are they going to be facing the same questions?

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 22nd, 2008 at 07:33:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Initial reports seem to have been misleading. The story now is that the fault was in a heating element designed to prevent ice buildup on the engine turbines. The determination was made that in summer weather the risk of ice buildup was minimal and the plane is able to fly with that element disabled for 10 days according to the maintenance manual. The fault is believed to not be related to the crash. Also, reports that the engine caught fire on takeoff and caused the crash are incorrect according to a video taken by AENA, the airport operator. Instead, the plane passes the point of no return but fails to attain enough lift and crashes, bouncing several times before catching fire. (sources: El Pais, including this editorial demanding an end to wild speculation)

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 22nd, 2008 at 03:18:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The story now is ...

They can't possibly know the triggering event at this stage of the investigation, way too early.  

I presume they've collected the 'Black Box' Flight Data Recorder and are doing preliminary analysis of the information.  However, that only gives the data the avionic system was passing around and what the pilot, co-pilot, and flight engineer were seeing/saying.  

Important Point: the FDR does not give the actual state and condition of the mechanics of the airplane but only what the avionics thought their condition was.  That thermometer was doing what a thermometer does: record temperature.  WHAT was causing the temperature rise will not be known until the US NSTB and Spanish authorities reassemble the bits and pieces of the plane and conduct a visual inspection and analysis.  

A doo run-run-run, a doo run-run

by ATinNM on Sun Aug 24th, 2008 at 12:57:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series