婆罗门
精华
|
战斗力 鹅
|
回帖 0
注册时间 2007-4-27
|
Scott Manley
@DJSnM
Well more details have come in about this terrible crash in Korea, with confirmation of a go around and a bird strike.
I looked at landing video, located the viewpoint and best guess is the touchdown was more than halfway down the runway, with <4000 feet left.
It was also fast with a clean configuration, given speed, altitude and limited power from bird damage this was a bit like an ‘impossible turn’, crew likely would have chosen to keep flaps in because they would be worried about running out of altitude.
Given unfamiliar situation crew may have misjudged the turn and approach and with limited power flaps may have been slow to deploy.
关于韩国这起可怕坠机事件的更多细节已经公布，并确认了飞机复飞和鸟击事件。
我查看了着陆视频，找到了视点，最佳猜测是着陆点位于跑道的一半以上，剩余距离不到 4000 英尺。
它的速度也很快，并且配置干净，考虑到速度、高度和鸟损造成的有限动力，这有点像“不可能的转弯”，机组人员可能会选择保持襟翼收起，因为他们担心高度不够。
由于情况不熟悉，机组人员可能对转弯和进近判断错误，并且由于动力有限，襟翼可能展开缓慢。
To be clear, other angles show it touched runway earlier, but continued to fly, floating in ground effect over half the runway length before settling onto the runway.
需要明确的是，从其他角度看，飞机早些时候接触到了跑道，但继续飞行，并在地面效应的作用下漂浮了跑道长度的一半，然后才稳定在跑道上。
Blancolirio is the person to talk to, I'm a physicist with only a few hundred hours in small planes.
But what I see is the plane has no flaps deployed, and the crew might choose to do that if they're gliding and need to be sure they reach the airfield. Flaps let you fly slower so you can descend more quickly, you don't want those when you need the maximum glide performance.
布兰科利里奥 (Blancorio) 是值得交谈的人，我是一名物理学家，在小型飞机上只有几百个小时的飞行经验。
但我看到飞机没有打开襟翼，如果机组人员正在滑翔并且需要确保飞机能够到达机场，他们可能会选择打开襟翼。襟翼可以让你飞得更慢，这样你就可以更快地下降，当你需要最大的滑翔性能时，你不会想要襟翼。 |
|
楼主: lindley
沪公网安备 31010702007642号 )
发表于 2024-12-30 18:48
这什么鬼操作
