What are some examples of people getting large planes, meant for commercial cargo or passenger service, to behave impressively in ways well outside of their design specifications? Stuff that makes you think, “Wow, I wouldn’t think you could do that with a plane that size.” Three I know of:
Test pilot Tex Johnston, showing off the Dash-80 (Boeing prototype of the 707), did two barrel rolls.
The “Gimli Glider”, when a 767 ran completely out of fuel and its pilots brought it down safely without engines, using glider pilot techniques.
Fed-Ex flight 705 hijacking. A deadheading flight attendant attacked the pilots of a DC-10 on a cargo flight; the first officer, James Tucker, flipped the plane upside-down to distract the hijcker, and went on to land it safely.
Any other notable cases of airliners being used in ways you’d only expect a compeltely different kind of plane to survive?
I don’t know of any more other than the ones you mention, but as I understand it airliners are a lot more capable than most people think. They just aren’t flown that way very often because it tends to frighten the passengers.
There is one story I heard once that I’m guessing is probably an urban legend and not a real incident – two pilots are doing a ferry flight (that is, no passengers onboard, just moving the plane from one place to another) and decided to attempt a barrel roll. They figure no one will ever know. Except they were caught because that blue fluid in the toilets spilled out all over the lavatory during the roll and was discovered by maintenance folks on the ground. But like I said I strongly suspect that story is an urban legend.
I strongly suspect that this is an urban legend. During a properly performed barrel roll, the forces on the plane remain at one G the entire time. In other words, a glass of water sitting on a table will not spill a drop during the barrel roll. Of course, if the pilots screwed it up, all bets are off.
Yeah, I forgot to mention it but part of the story was that the pilots screwed up the maneuver and failed to keep the plane at 1 G the entire time, thus dumping the fluid out of the toilets. Still most likely an urban legend, though.
That reminds me, test pilot Bob Hoover used to do a stunt where he’d pour a cup of tea while performing a barrel roll in a Saberliner business jet. There are videos of it on YouTube. In fact I once saw a Saberliner perform a barrel roll at an air show. While it’s not technically an airliner people typically don’t associate business jets with those types of maneuvers, either.
There are a lot of horrifying air disasters that didn’t wind up with a lot more dead people because the pilots coaxed extraordinary performance out of the planes in those last few minutes.
United 232. The tail engine literally disintegrated, destroying most of the hydraulic controls. There were no established emrgency procedures for acomplete hydraulic failure, so the pilots literally invented the landing. 185 survived, 111 died.
Eastern Air Lines 833. After a mid-air collision with a larger plane, the pilots managed to fly the airplane using only the throttles and made a crash landing into a field. Only one passenger died, as well as the captain, who died from smoke inhalation while trying to help that passenger get out.
I’ve got a few Concorde books on the shelf, and I believe one of them describes the pilots rolling it. I think this was supposedly on a non-passenger, route proving flight early on.
There’s also the Zero-G company, NASA and a few other entities that fly parabolas for variable g-force training. NASA used to do it in KC-135s, Zero-G uses 727s I think.
Lost quite a bit of the upper forward cabin, taking a flight attendant with it. Damaged a lot of other parts of the plane. Note that the fuselage needs to be intact to maintain a lot structural integrity. You lose a chunk this big and Even Worse things can happen.
Was able to land safely. Like United 232, studied as a guide for how to handle extreme situations.
Note that the plane was a total loss, disassembled on site. That’s a rarity for a plane that landed safely. There have been large planes that have belly landed and been repaired on site to fly out and later return to service. I remember a Boeing guy telling me about a 747 that lost the entire lower half of the plane on a bad landing in India and was repaired and flown back home.
But 243 was just a goner. If the attendant had been wearing her seatbelt at the time, there would have been no loss of life.
Nitpick, but pretty much every aircraft is essentially a glider when it’s landing. It’s just that powered aircraft pilots strongly prefer to defer the glider techniques until the landing strip is in sight and lined up
These guys did a hell of a job. This one exchange from the flight recorder is quite a testament:
They damn near steered it in straight, turning it only with the difference in power between the engines. But they lost control at the last second and the wing caught the ground. Still damn impressive to save 185 people when you have zero functioning inputs to the control surfaces.
I’m not a pilot, but I suspect that failure to keep the plane at 1 g during a barrel roll is about comparable in rarity to failure to keep it at 1 g during straight, level flight. Clean-up crews who found the blue mess would just assume that the plane hit a particularly rough patch of turbulence.
This is certainly not Cecil at his best. What he writes makes the reader question his understanding of the finer points of both loops and rolls. And indeed the coarser ones.
It’s fair to note that when he wrote this column, aviation was only about 64% as old as it is today. The intervening 41 years have added much, and I charitably assume that he’s considerably smarter now than formerly.
Though it was a notable feat, along with HMS Irruncible I don’t think what the pilots of the Gimli Glider did qualifies as a stunt.
Without power, every fixed-wing aircraft naturally glides to the ground. In this case, the pilots did an outstanding job of causing that glide to end safely at a former airfield.
I was counting it because I’ve heard (can’t find the source right now, sorry) that all attempts at replicating the glide in a simulator ended with the virtual plane smeared across the wilderness, and they only pulled it off because one of the pilots had a lot of experience with gliders-on-purpose.
It’s worth noting that this wasn’t the first time a plane completely lost all hydraulics. Japan Airlines flight 123 suffered a similar failure after an incorrect repair to the rear bulkhead. Unlike United 232, the pilots never managed to get the plane anywhere near the airport and eventually crashed into a mountain. There were only four survivors. United 232 could have very easily suffered a similar fate, so it is indeed amazing that they almost managed to land the plane.
In 2003, an Airbus A300 being used as a cargo plane by DHL was hit by a missile as it left Baghdad. It also lost all hydraulics and the pilots were only able to control the plane using engine power. Worse, one of the wings was damaged, making the plane fly unevenly. The crew spent some time learning how to fly what was left of their plane, and amazingly, they managed to land the plane reasonably well, all things considered. The plane veered off the runway, crashed through some barriers, and plowed its way to a halt while throwing up huge amounts of sand. Nobody died.
I’m not a pilot, but my understanding is that the actual piloting skills required to “land” on water aren’t really different from those required to land on a runway. Sully’s heroism really was in his ability to quickly decide that the Hudson offered their best chance of survival and then committing to that decision.
Not technically an airliner, but as big as one, comparable in size to a Boeing 707, and… well, I don’t think anyone will expect this: C-130s landing on and taking off from an aircraft carrier. No arrestor cables, no catapults, minimal modifications to aircraft and ship.
