Gimli Glider retires, Jan 24

[Wilber]

Headed for the desert.

[kimmy]

For those scratching their heads, this is the airplane that ran out of fuel in mid-flight due to ground-crew error. The pilots were able to make a remarkable emergency landing at a small airfield near Gimli, Manitoba. I once saw a TV movie about the incident.

-k

[Jerry J. Fortin]

It was an error that was not caught by the person responsible for making sure the plane is safe to travel, the pilot. While he was declared a hero for his valiant effort in saving the plane folks need to remember that the pilot was at the extreme end of a logistics train wreck. He was the last line of defense.

[Wilber]

It was an error that was not caught by the person responsible for making sure the plane is safe to travel, the pilot. While he was declared a hero for his valiant effort in saving the plane folks need to remember that the pilot was at the extreme end of a logistics train wreck. He was the last line of defense.

Like most incidents and accidents, it wasn't just one thing but an accumulation of circumstances that added up to the final result. It came at a time when the 767 was new to the fleet. It was the company's first exposure to a glass cockpit aircraft which had a flight management system that was advanced for the time and unlike anything they had been using before. It also came at a time when the fuel companies were switching from gallons to liters and the airline was changing over from pounds to kilo's for fuel quantity measurement. The aircraft's fuel quantity indicating system was inoperative at the time requiring the tanks to be manually drip checked to make sure the fuel is on board. That quantity would be entered into the flight management computer which would calculate the fuel used with the fuel flow indication system to give an running total during the flight.

Bottom line is, the fueler screwed up, the guys dripping the tanks and doing the manual calculation screwed up and the crew didn't catch it because they were as confused as everyone else. They went flying with pounds instead of kilos. Everyone else learned a valuable lesson about metrics and a lot of pilots from a lot of airlines had some fun trying to fly a new profile during future sim sessions.

[AngusThermopyle]

Small note here Wilber. They "dip" the tanks. Sorry but I had to mention that.

[Wilber]

Small note here Wilber. They "dip" the tanks. Sorry but I had to mention that.

They really drip them. On jet transports all fueling functions are carried out below the wing. A tube called a drip stick is pulled out of the bottom of the tank. Fuel flows down an hole in the top of the tube when it reaches the level of the fuel in the tank and out another hole in the bottom. The stick is calibrated and the reading is then entered into a chart which gives the quantity of fuel in the tank. Later model aircraft have a magnetic float which latches onto the top of the stick when it reaches the level saving the person doing the job from having jet fuel running up his sleeve. Had the experience a few times myself. Even though they no longer drip they are still referred to as drip sticks.

[bush_cheney2004]

They really drip them. On jet transports all fueling functions are carried out below the wing. A tube called a drip stick is pulled out of the bottom of the tank....

Thanks for this interesting thread...never heard of this amazing incident. Wouldn't experience with trim, step climb, and take-off weight have been a clue to their fuel circumstance?

...As Pearson executed the slip, the aircraft was flying over a golf course, and one passenger reportedly said, "Christ. I can almost see what clubs they're using".[3] A slip is commonly used with gliders and light aircraft, either to lose height quickly or to execute a cross-wind landing.

...Mechanics were sent from Winnipeg Airport; their van ran out of fuel on the way to Gimli, leaving them stranded.[4] Another van was sent to pick them up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

[Wilber]

Thanks for this interesting thread...never heard of this amazing incident. Wouldn't experience with trim, step climb, and take-off weight have been a clue to their fuel circumstance?

Quite possibly but Montreal Edmonton isn't a very long leg for this aircraft. The difference in gross weight wouldn't have made the difference in performance that noticeable and if they were using the FMS for step climb and cruise data it would have been using the erroneous fuel weight they had entered to make its calculations. In hindsight, a lot of things often seem obvious.

[bush_cheney2004]

Quite possibly but Montreal Edmonton isn't a very long leg for this aircraft. The difference in gross weight wouldn't have made the difference in performance that noticeable and if they were using the FMS for step climb and cruise data it would have been using the erroneous fuel weight they had entered to make its calculations. In hindsight, a lot of things often seem obvious.

Fair enough....it is always easier to make such analysis after the fact. Plus the aircraft was new, so "experience" is a relative term. Thoughts of reaching V1, VR, and V2 faster also come to mind. I'm not experienced in aviation, so your expertise is appreciated.

Edited January 29, 2008 by bush_cheney2004