Best dinner ever. That crew worked non-stop to save the plane in almost impossible circumstances. They never gave up. That may be said of many pilots whose plane is crashing but few can say they fought for two hours and kept going that whole time (only United Airlines Flight 232 as another one…maybe Alaska Airlines Flight 261).
They deserve many great dinners from everyone on-board.
Pretty spectacular save by the Air Astana crew. But also a big reminder to pay attention when you’re running your checklists. They were warned when they ran the control checks. But they missed it. That said, it was still a spectacular save.
the commercial pilots can chime in but can they look out the window and see the ailerons and spoilers work when moving the controls?
I’ve had the luxury of doing the grunt work on annuals and working directly with the mechanic for the rest of it. I know what was done to the plane and yet I treat the pre-flight like I’ve never seen the plane before.
I’ve seen many first flights that didn’t go well because somebody screwed up.
I’ve watched many videos on plan crashes and, it seems, it is rare that a pilot can look out the window and see the engines or most of the wing. (maybe some planes can but it seems most commercial jets the pilots cannot see the engines/wing from the cockpit)
It seems a weird oversight that no one has put a camera in that allows them to see the engines/wings but I guess the need for such is so rare as to not be worth it.
Don’t know if they could see their ailerons, but according to the video, on this aircraft there is a screen that depicts control surface movement. They missed the anomalous movements that were depicted on their in-cockpit screen.
You can’t see the ailerons from the cockpit, not from an A320 anyway, so you look at the instruments that display control position while doing the control check.
It is a lesson in doing checks thoroughly rather than just going through some words by wrote.
There was an A320 that had the captain’s flight stick incorrectly wired. The FO’s controls were fine but the captain’s were reversed in roll. Captain flew the take-off and promptly lost control. The FO took over and saved the day.
Edit: it’s also a good reason not to fly a plane immediately after major maintenance.
A little Catalina trivia. It was the first plane to register an air to air kill in the Pacific during WW-2 (3 days after the attack on Pearl Harbor).
It’s also one of the 1st planes to have a separate flight engineer’s station. It had a light signal system to transmit information to the cockpit. Note the matching panels between the 2 stations. they could communicate back and forth using this system. You would think an intercom would have been simpler.
Don’t want to argue, but I always thought these two guys got the first air-to-air shootdowns during Pearl Harbor, not 3 days later…perhaps you meant after war had been ‘officially’ declared…
that was just a rumor and besides those 2 still owe me money. Yes, I suspect what you said is what is attributed to the Catalina. Doesn’t sound as interesting if you add in the part about the official start of the war with Japan.
So now I need some replacement trivia for the Catalina. The retractable floats were licensed from the Sanders-Roe company. Here’s a video of the Sanders-Roe Princes retracting them. That was a 50’s project that never made it. Sadly they scrapped all 3 prototypes.
Another bit of Catalina trivia: In the 1950s some unknown number of surplus Catalinas were converted into “flying yachts”, luxury toys for the ultra wealthy. I read a more in depth article about them years ago which I can’t find now, but this is the best I could find now.
that’s a really cool article to read. The attack of the Kendall family in Saudi Arabia was quite a read. the plane is still there all shot up. here are the coordinates. 28°05’27.02"N 34°36’30.93"E
I gotta say, if I was a gazillionaire I’d want one of those Catalina luxury yachts. The observation bubbles alone would bend the cool-factor needle into a clock spring.
The article mentioned the ‘enormous cost’ of operation. Yes, it’s an aircraft. Money makes aircraft fly. But I wonder what the cost of operation comparison is between a PBY-5 and a luxury yacht? (NB: I’m thinking a ‘luxury yacht’ would be bigger than a large cabin cruiser. Given that the PBY requires a crew, I would consider a luxury yacht to be a vessel that requires at least two or three people to operate.) I think the PBY’s engines burned about 100 gph each, and its cruise speed was about 125 mph. What’s the fuel burn of a luxury yacht? What is its speed? Aircraft are notorious for requiring (by law) a lot of maintenance. On the other hand, any boat is called ‘a hole in the water you pour money into’.
Even for a gazillionaire it’d be tough to restore a Catalina to that level. I don’t imagine there are a lot of spare parts still available, anywhere; when something breaks you’ve got to make its replacement from scratch.
But you could probably outfit a modern plane to a similar level of luxury. A Twin Otter looks to be about the same size, and you can put it on floats.
A twin Otter is transportation and nowhere near as big. A Catalina is an Amphibian with a lot of personality. imagine looking out one of the bubble canopies or laying out on the wing with a picnic basket in a beautiful Mediterranean harbor.
Yes it would be expensive to maintain but that’s what gazilionaires do. With modern 3D scanners, CNC machines and printers you can make molds, cast parts and then machine them from scratch…