You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer
supported by the Administrators.
Visit
The New DU. Reply #5: I disagreed with the assesment of overreaction.
[View All]
Webster Green
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Apr-18-10 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
| 5. I disagreed with the assesment of overreaction. |
|
"But a case study by the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) suggests that even tenuous volcano ash clouds can inflict serious damage to an airliner. While the damage may not necessarily threaten the immediate flight, one cruise through an invisible ash plume can run up a multimillion-dollar repair tab.
The plume in the NASA study was so thin that the flight crew had none of the cues they ordinarily might rely on – odd engine readings, the smell of smoke of sulfur in the cockpit, or even outside electrical phenomena such as St. Elmo's Fire – to alert them to a plume's presence. And they had no visual clues on the aircraft after landing to tell them they'd encountered a plume.
The case study concludes that the engines sustained enough damage that key components could well have started to fail with only another 100 hours of flying time."More at source: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0418/Should-planes-fly-in-Iceland-volcano-ash-Be-careful-study-says.Winds can shift. Shit can (and usually does) happen. Don't fuck with Mother Nature!
|
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread