"Bruce L. Bergman" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:48:51 -0500, Don Stauffer
wrote:
Nick Hull wrote:
In article et,
"carl mciver" wrote:

To lose an elevator or two can be compensated for, usually, but the
elevators on the horizontal stabilizer, if so equipped, or careful use
of
engine power. Losing the horizontal stabilizer is usually pretty hard
to
deal with; some of you remember a jackscrew problem on an MD-80 not so
long
ago.

In that jackscrew case, the stabilizer was too far off for level flight.
Could the pilot have flipped the plane upside down intermittently to
compensate? Would be rough but a nose first crash is worse.

Indeed, emergency procedure for runaway down trim on some planes was to
invert plane and put into bank while troubleshooting cause of trim
problem.

Holy Sheeeeit, Batman! I'll bet the passengers would just love the
hell out of that maneuver. Half screaming, half puking, and the few
people who didn't believe the pilot when he quickly announced to "Sit
down, belt in, and hold on!" are bouncing off the overhead... ;-P

Are MD-80's or 747's (or any other large passenger jets) aerobatic
rated? I really doubt it. You can run around inverted in a Pitts
Special or an F-16 all day, but not a 727...

If the fuel systems and hydraulics systems could feed inverted, what would
be the problem? Below maneuvering speed, the wings could take it.

LLoyd