Jet Bursts Into Flames on Landing in Toronto

[Hangtime]

"If it ain't a Boeing, yer safer just not going."

(flame suit on)

[Toad]

Originally posted by SirLoin
He got it down though and everyone lived.

That's sort of a famous line in aviation. I remember once a sim instructor telling a story.

The instructor was getting HIS checkride from the FAA as instructor; to do this he had to be giving a checkride to a "line pilot". Well, the line pilot was having a tough day and totally botched an engine-out approach and had to go around. No biggie; it happens. Unfortunately, he botched the second approach and, probably feeling checkride pressure, tried to "salvage" a bad approach. That rarely works and it didn't in this case. He landed outside the touchdown zone, hammered it on the runway, barely got it stopped, overheated the brakes and a few other unacceptable things.

He turns to the instructor behind him and says "Well, it wasn't pretty but I got it down and everyone lived".

The instructor, having no choice whatsover on busting him, says:

"Unfortunately, that's not the standard we judge you by."


It'll be an interesting investigation. If the guy landed long they're going to be tough on him unless there are extenuating circumstances. The weather is going to analysed very closely too, especially with reference to Air France Ops Specs.

[Hangtime]

Air France has Ops Specs?

Champaine Minimums?

[Toad]

24L is a grooved runway too. Supposed to prevent/reduce hydroplaning.

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Skydancer
I hope the passengers realy did all get out OK!

Hats off to the Crew, getting that many people off the plane safe is a credit to their training.

[mosgood]

Originally posted by Krusher
Hats off to the Crew, getting that many people off the plane safe is a credit to their training.

ya...  over 300 out in under 2 minutes.  they are calling it a text book evac.  

WTG Air France.

[Chairboy]

I remember reading about an evacuation from an airplane recently where the crew was alleged to have panicked and exited first, something that was believed to have contributed to injuries and possibly deaths among the passenger because there was no crew there.

Does anyone remember this, and know which airline?

[Dinger]

Any chance it would have been this one?

Nasty crash, but crew/pax survival rate and anecdotes elsewhere suggest that the 14 (of 17) crew members surviving versus 7 (of 49) passengers imply that the crew beat it.

[loser]

Originally posted by Toad
Just about every major US airline has something like this in its Operations Specifications. This example is from the USAF but the sentiment is widespread throughout the aviation community.



Note the part in bold; as I said, just about every major US airline has a rule similar to that.

Man Canadian restrictions as far as I know are way more leniant than the United States ones.

I used to work at Regina International. The only planes that ever opted not to land were the Northwest Airlines planes from Minneapolis.

All the Canadian and non-American International companies would still be landing when RVR was just above 400.

and the RVR reports were often (and this is only in my non-educated opinion) a tad generous.

If im looking out the window and cant see the power-on light of a bridge that is maybe 100 feet long..RVR cant be near 400.

Anyway. Point is, Canadian and European standards are way different than the American ones.

Not really related to the incident just had to reply to your comment regarding SOPs

[Toad]

Loser, airline Ops Specs (International Section) have to comply with the ICAO rules first and then with any country-specific rules that are more restrictive. Then the airline can make them even more restrictive.

In any case, however, Ops Specs control and the most restrictive rule is the one that will be the "bottom line".

[Karnak]

According to the current CNN article it was the pilot's call whether to land it or not.

They are also saying that the pilot was the last one off after doing a walk through of the aircraft to make sure everybody was out.

[loser]

Originally posted by Toad
Loser, airline Ops Specs (International Section) have to comply with the ICAO rules first and then with any country-specific rules that are more restrictive. Then the airline can make them even more restrictive.

In any case, however, Ops Specs control and the most restrictive rule is the one that will be the "bottom line".

And Toad, rules are meant to be "bent"

[Toad]

It's always the "pilot's call" in the end.

However, his decision is still going to be evaluated based on Air France Ops Specs. Those are the "rules" he has to obey and base his decisions upon. As pointed out, Ops Specs include ICAO and individual country procedures/restrictions.

Traditionally, in times of disaster, the Captain is always last off the ship at sea and in the air. After all, he is the one ultimately responsible for his passsenger's lives.

[Toad]

Originally posted by loser
And Toad, rules are meant to be "bent"

LOL!

Unless there's some overriding extenuating circumstance, bending a rule and then bending an airplane is generally the end of your career.

Loser, call the FAA for me, tell them their rules are made to be bent and then get back to me with their response.

[loser]

Originally posted by Toad
LOL!

Unless there's some overriding extenuating circumstance, bending a rule and then bending an airplane is generally the end of your career.

Loser, call the FAA for me, tell them their rules are made to be bent and then get back to me with their response.

Toad, I heard one day during weather...(with obvious portions left out)

(left out) wind at 330 at 15 gusting to 30

clear on 31.

pilot says: (left out) going around...going around, wind shear.

tower: (left out) you are number 1, you WILL land on 31.

nuff said