UAEflyer From United Arab Emirates, joined Nov 2006, 1255 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 11 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 24556 times:
I was on the site 30 minutes ago, it is really shocking, the aircraft is totally burned and impossible to find survivors.
Sharjah civil defence and Police should be appreciated, they are working so hard, a further support expected from the army of UAE.
Jetfuel From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 11 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 23161 times:
Azza Transport Boeing 707-330C ST-AKW crashes
Azza Transport Company (Khartoum) has lost its Boeing 707-330C ST-AKW (msn 20123) minutes ago on takeoff at Sharjah. The classic airliner has crashed and burned. The airframe was originally delivered to Lufthansa as D-ABUJ on February 27, 1969. Since then it has also served with Condor, United Arab Emirates (A6-DPA), Sudan Airways (ST-AKW) and Ibis Air Transport (P4-AKW) as well as other carriers. The crash has closed the Sharjah Airport and several Air Arabia flights (and others) are being diverted. The six crew members have died in the crash.
Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
Trystero From Portugal, joined Oct 2008, 251 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 11 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 22170 times:
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 15): Then why mention it? Although Sudan is obviously not in posession of a great aviation safety record, we all know perfectly well that older aircraft can be operated perfectly safely.
Not saying this was the cause, but not excluding. We have seen excess of use being the cause of some crashes.
AndrewUber From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2528 posts, RR: 38
Reply 18, posted (5 years 11 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 22086 times:
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 15):
Then why mention it? Although Sudan is obviously not in posession of a great aviation safety record, we all know perfectly well that older aircraft can be operated perfectly safely.
Obviously what he's saying is that a 40 year old frame is more likely to have a failure than a brand new aircraft. A perfectly valid point. This is - after all - a discussion forum.
RIP to those lost, and it is sad to also lose another 707.
RussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7790 posts, RR: 20
Reply 21, posted (5 years 11 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 19747 times:
Quoting QatarA340 (Reply 20): DXB and SHJ should ban the use of dangerous planes, like this one! The airports are located very near residential areas and it is dangerous operating these old, unsafe planes near them.
Good, so we know it was because of the plane's age and condition do we? Could we have your source on that please?
Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 18): Obviously what he's saying is that a 40 year old frame is more likely to have a failure than a brand new aircraft. A perfectly valid point
Out of interest, if (for argument's sake) we were to assume that this plane was well-maintained (again, not asserting that it actually was), would it necessarily have a greater risk of failure than a new plane? Do new planes operating to the same standards definitely have fewer failure than older ones?
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈