Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!tank!ncar!dinl!holroyd
From: holroyd@dinl.uucp (kevin w. holroyd)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: 104% Throttle ??
Keywords: Throttle up 104%
Message-ID: <775@dinl.mmc.UUCP>
Date: 26 Oct 88 15:20:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: dinl.775
References: <8837@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <497@idsssd.UUCP> <280@iconsys.UUCP>
Reply-To: holroyd@dinl.UUCP (kevin w. holroyd)
Distribution: sci
Organization: Martin Marietta I&CS, Denver CO.
Lines: 24

In article <280@iconsys.UUCP> mcd@iconsys.UUCP (Mark Dakins) writes:

			stuff deleted

>
>A particular thrust was defined as 100% and the run time and reliability
>parameters were based on this thrust level. However, the spec also
>called for the ability to run the engine at up to 110% of "rated"
>thrust. Note: this was in the original spec, not a later, discovered
>improvement. If run beyond 100% rated thrust the "run time before
>overhaul" goes down, actually I think it goes way down. Yes I know
>that they overhaul them after every flight but, this was a spec,
>remember? It doesn't have to relate to reality.
>
			stuff deleted


Remember the 737 crash onto the 14th street bridge in Washington D.C.?
The pilots went to only 100% thrust at the very end, NOT maximum thrust.
There was some speculation about wether full thrust would have made a 
difference or not.  It seems they were reluctant to damage the engines by 
overthrust, and so damaged them by impact with the ground.

Kevin W. Holroyd