SLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4126 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 15596 times:
I highly doubt that AC would consider such a move. I'm certain they are making the effort to replace the tubes (as is DL/NW amongst other North American operators of the A330), if they haven't already. Not certain if AC uses any of these on southern hemisphere routes from YYZ to the likes of GIG etc...
[Edited 2009-06-10 10:43:22]
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
NA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10807 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 15520 times:
Quoting BA319-131 (Reply 6):
Quoting Smeagol (Thread starter):
Although Air Canada has a relatively small A330 fleet (8 a/c as I remember), after the AF447 disaster, I am curious whether AC will ground the A330?
- You are kidding right?
This looks like a one in a billion type accident, just remind me, how many accident free cycles have AC & it's A330 had since they entered service? - And the rest of the A330 for that matter?
Yeah, its rubbish to think AC would park their A330s because of the Air France accident. There is no reason so far to think it was a technical cause that brought down AF447. But it was a technical cause that brought down BA´s 777 last year. Did AC or anyone else one ground their Triple Sevens because of that even if other 777s were affected by the same problem? No.
Par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7503 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 15224 times:
Quoting BA319-131 (Reply 6): This looks like a one in a billion type accident, just remind me, how many accident free cycles have AC & it's A330 had since they entered service? - And the rest of the A330 for that matter?
Since we are being technical, has anyone stopped to consider that the problem with the pitot tubes could be related to age and wear, in which case, the fact that the a/c has already flown countless hours without incident could be a negative and not a positive? I take the OP question to be related to the issue already reported, AF is now ensuring that all their a/c have the "proper" part installed, other airlines are doing the same thing, if they have to be grounded while they replace or simply replace during a regular maintenance cycle is up to the airlines, so a client can be justified in asking the question.
Until a interim report is released, all is open to speculation, so far the first item for speculation has been the a/c speed, now that remains have been recovered, we will pretty soon know whether the terrorist angle is officially off the agenda, no one suspected that and the authorities advised as such, but that was also speculation on their part.
LXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 14599 times:
Quoting Smeagol (Thread starter): Although Air Canada has a relatively small A330 fleet (8 a/c as I remember), after the AF447 disaster, I am curious whether AC will ground the A330?
Threre is still a lot of speculation out there but one thing for sure the A330 is one of the safest planes out there! Yes there seemed to have been an issue on the A332's with the pitot (speed sensors) nevertheless airlines were informed and also if issues arised the plane is still capable to be flown in a controlled matter not jepordizing the safety of passengers. Therfore at the momment it looks like that the final reason for the crash was human error. Again this is all speculation and no body knows what really happened in those last minutes of this AF flight therefore we need to wait and see. But one thing I am very certain about is that the reason for the crash was not because something is wrong with the fleet type Airbus A330-200!
SeaBosDca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5768 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 14556 times:
I think any airline with the number of high-volume TATL services that AC flies would be very happy to have A330-300s in the fleet. They will be the best aircraft for those services for a long time to come.
It's a fair question however improbable. Beyond the problems with cockpit systems, if I were an investigator, I'd be paying attention to the vertical fin seperation, a curious event in this accident. If something found there ,grounding is possible since it may be first time with type but I'll bet by design the fin box is the same as the A300. But I do agree these days groundings are rare if at all...would have to be a strong case.
Vio From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 1446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 12399 times:
Maybe a little off topic...
Air Canada uses the A333 on the YVR-NRT-YVR route, correct? Well if they do that, why do they use the Boeing 767 for the YVR-ICN-YVR route?
(a) Is it because of load factors (demand of passengers)?
(b) Because the Boeing 767 is more efficient on that route... though I'm a little confused about that part... I thought the A333 is better on fuel than the 767.
Superior decisions reduce the need for superior skills.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5044 posts, RR: 44
Reply 23, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 11949 times:
Quoting Soon7x7 (Reply 19): if I were an investigator, I'd be paying attention to the vertical fin seperation, a curious event in this accident. If something found there ,grounding is possible since it may be first time with type but I'll bet by design the fin box is the same as the A300.
1) There was nothing wrong with AA587's fin box design, it failed beyond ultimate load. As has been pointed out to you on several previous occasions;
2) There are NO indications at this point that AF447 crashed because the fin broke off. The fin being found relatively intact means very little, and isn't even that uncommon (look at the unrelated NZ A320, where the fin was found basically intact floating in the water as well, even though it had nothing to do with the crash).
Look, we know you don't like the idea of composite fins. You've made that clear. But it looks like that dislike is causing you to ignore evidence / findings or things numerous others, with more knowledge on the subject than you, have pointed out to you, only to repeat the mantra ("it was the composite fin") ad nauseum, in several threads. That sort of thing doesn't do anybody any good.