- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Thanks, Patrick, for putting the "A" back in ATP (where "A" equals "ask" or "answer").
Although [the MD-80's] tail-mounted engines have a close-to-centerline thrust vector, an engine failure requires more rudder correction than would be needed on many planes with wing-mounted engines.
This answers - albeit opposite what I would expect - one of my nagging airplane questions not asked: If power is lost to an engine, wouldn't a plane with engines spaced far apart, as typically found with wing-mounted engines, be harder to control than a plane with tail mounted engines whose thrust is more centered? This logic from my years of boating: losing one engine of a twin-screw boat results in a lot worse control than a single screw vessel - and on a boat, there's a rudder behind each screw.
[T]hese sorts of traits in no way make the MD-80 unsafe. But they do make it more challenging and work-intensive.
While all pilots are trained, trained, and retrained, they're still people - they don't call it "human error" for nothing. So would not any pilot have a lesser chance of getting my ass back on the ground in a non-dead condition should a "more challenging" plane offer up some non-routine challenge?
