Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Rafe35 on August 02, 2005, 04:08:39 PM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,164534,00.html
More news update later....
-
Update news
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050802.wcrash0801/BNStory/National/
-
The jet burst into flames after running off the end of the runway after landing in heavy rain.
I'm sure we'll eventually get an update that further clarifies it as something like "jet bursts into flames after running into obstacle (or through ditch) after running off the end of the runway during a thunderstorm."
And then we'll get a body count.
And someday maybe we'll hear if the jet had a malfunction such as the brakes failing or the thrust reversers not working, or if the pilot goofed by landing long, landing too fast, landing with the plane in an improper configuration, or not properly applying short/wet field landing procedures.
And maybe we'll get lucky and hear about the lawsuit or settlement. So why is anyone reading about it here instead of a news site?
:confused:
-
Looks like they all survived by reports coming out now.
Oh, and it ran into a gully eagl. :p
-
Interesting comment in the CNN report:
One passenger, Olivier Dubos told reporters: "We had absolutely no insight or hint that the landing would be difficult. Power went out just before we landed...we thought it had to do with the rain."
-
Maybe someone smart like Ripsnort can reply, but here is a guess. Compressor fire. So hydraulic lines get burst. Why aircraft dont have hydraulic-off brakes is beyond me.
Like trucks (which are air-off.) Meaning that springs hold the brakes on, and if the air system fails, or the lines to the trailer break or leak......the brakes are applied.
Anyway, I have been in a few Airbus aircraft
and everything is in the arse end...comp, electrical head...everything.
If that compressor got popped....
-
IMO too early to be guessing Loser.
First reports say the weather was pretty bad; rain, hail, lighting strikes near (on?) the field. Generally, most Operations Specifications would have the Captain hold away from the field for a while if there was a thunderstorm over the field generating that sort of weather.
As for brakes, redundancy is built into the systems. A single failure essentially cannot make all the brakes inoperative.
-
Lightning is the least of worries in a thunderstorm for aviating, as far as I can tell. It's the wind shear, sudden gusts and whatnot that drop you out of the sky or mess with your landing distances and so on.
...but I'm a young'n pilot, I'm sure folks like Golfer should be able to say whether I'm right about that.
-
I hope the passengers realy did all get out OK!
-
Its confirmed... all are ok, just minor injuries :)
-
Then I expect for those guys thats all thats realy important.
Good
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Lightning is the least of worries in a thunderstorm for aviating,
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.
5.23.4. (Added) Remain at least 10 NM away from thunderstorms and lightning during enroute flight operations. Do not take off from or fly an approach or landing at a field if a thunderstorm or lightning is within 10 NM of the field or the intended flight path. If lightning is reported at or within five NM, flightline operations will cease. 34thOperations Group Commander (34 OG/CC) may grant approval for flight operations when a thunderstorm or lightning is between 5 NM and 10 NM as long as such weather is not expected to move towards the airfield and is not producing local effects.
Note the part in bold; as I said, just about every major US airline has a rule similar to that.
-
Today at 4 pm I called weather briefing for a weather report as I was flying from Sudbury to Collingwood which is north of Toronto about 100 nm.
I was suprised at how the guy on the other end was being so careful to warn me about thunderstorms in the area as well as asking for me to file a flight plan.
I had no idea about the plane crash and my flight was uneventful although I saw a pretty big thunder head south when I landed. I heard a couple of commercial flights ask about the airports status which was strange as well. Later when I landed I found out what happened and was totally shocked. I am glad no one was hurt.
-
The storm cell wasn't that bad..mostly heavy rain and some lightning...im guess poor visibility on final caused the pilot to overshoot...He got it down though and everyone lived.
scary the O2 masks didn't deploy.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
scary the O2 masks didn't deploy.
Why would they? There wasnt any loss of cabin pressure since they were on the ground and fire is a big enuff problem without filling the cabin with O2.
These airbuses seem to crash or ditch a lot, but luckily few people get killed.
-
"If it ain't a Boeing, yer safer just not going."
(flame suit on)
-
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.
-
Air France has Ops Specs?
Champaine Minimums?
;)
-
24L is a grooved runway too. Supposed to prevent/reduce hydroplaning.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
Any chance it would have been this one (http://www.aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19790314-0)?
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.
-
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
-
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".
-
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.
-
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"
-
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.
-
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. ;)
-
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
-
Well, if the pilot had a valid windshear alert and he complied with tower instructions, two things should have happened. The pilot should have been issued a violation and the tower controller should have been issued a violation.
You can't ignore a windshear alert; it's a mandatory go-around.
Aviation regulations aside, any pilot that allows a tower controller fly his airplane should be fired. IMO. 'Nuff said.
-
Proper response:
XXXX IS going around. YYYY Tower IS replacing the controller on duty.
-
i live about 15 mins south of the airport. during that time of day the weather here was very severe, large down bursts and acorn sized hail.
have some 60' maples in the backyard they were blowing around like blades of grass.
-
It doesn't pay to make early guesses. That said, I'm thinking weather is going to be of MAJOR interest when the investigators begin. I'm also thinking I wouldn't want to be either one of the crewmembers trying to explain this one to the investigators UNLESS there's an extenuating factor like a system failure of some kind.
-
I'd definately like to hear more about the lightning speculation. If there was a strike on short final, and if it knocked out some of the fly by wire controls, how long is the reset cycle before stuff comes back? Or are there manual reset steps that need to be taken?
-
Shouldnt there be cameras pointed at runway? Hell with all the terrorism issues Id place a camera at every possible place that has people enter and leave. I havent been able to find any recordings of the landing though, or how they escaped with minor injuries when in only a short ammount of time the plane became an inferno, or even how the pilot may have saved 300+ lives. If anyone knows more about security cameras in areas like this please let me know.
-
What is most curious is that all the lights went out moments before it touched down.
-
Originally posted by FuBaR
Shouldnt there be cameras pointed at runway? Hell with all the terrorism issues Id place a camera at every possible place that has people enter and leave. I havent been able to find any recordings of the landing though, or how they escaped with minor injuries when in only a short ammount of time the plane became an inferno, or even how the pilot may have saved 300+ lives. If anyone knows more about security cameras in areas like this please let me know.
That was my job man. I cant get into specifics, but we watched EVERY movement. Taped every movement. And all i can say about security cameras is.....200 feet, your passport...we saw your gray hair
-
thank you very much, The thought was buggin the hell out of me, I couldnt let myself believe there are no cams, but just supprised they havent shown any footage. You think they keepin it quite till they have more answers?
-
Originally posted by FuBaR
thank you very much, The thought was buggin the hell out of me, I couldnt let myself believe there are no cams, but just supprised they havent shown any footage. You think they keepin it quite till they have more answers?
All footage i imagine is property of Pearson Airport Authority. Prolly wont be released
-
I think these two pilots will be looking for new employment.
On Sunday, he said the jet landed about 1,200 metres into the 2,700-metre runway before it overshot and slammed into a wooded ravine in a crash that injured 43 people.
Should have been down no later than 900 metres from the threshold. Coupled with the decision to approach and land in those weather conditions, I think this will get them fired.
Tough way to end a career.
-
Originally posted by Toad
I think these two pilots will be looking for new employment.
Should have been down no later than 900 metres from the threshold. Coupled with the decision to approach and land in those weather conditions, I think this will get them fired.
Tough way to end a career.
I can remember a United flight on a DC-10 at SEA where the pilot had just enough room (in heavy fog) to make the very last taxi way off the runway, at about 40 mph, and everyone was leaned waaaaaay over in their seats...scared the crap outta everyone...the alternative dropped us down 100 feet into a golf course. (North end of Seatac)