Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Do Things Happen One Right After The Other?  
User currently offlineCometII From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 302 posts, RR: 0
Posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1184 times:

I read on a CNN site that another Alaska Airlines plane made an emergency landing at SFO. The flight was coming from Puerto Vallarta, scary indeed. The plane seemed to have problems with the engines.

Why is it that when an aircraft goes down, it seems that there are scares almost every day after the accident with other planes for a couple of weeks? Do you think that Alaska has these kinds of problems regularly, but because the media had not focused on the airline prior to the crash, that it now seems almost odd that so many problems arise in one airline in such a short time? I will try to find an article for this story in English.

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCometII From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 302 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1145 times:

http://cnn.com/2000/US/02/08/alaska.airlines.landing/index.html

February 8, 2000
Web posted at: 3:03 a.m. EST (0803 GMT)

SAN FRANCISCO (CNN) -- An Alaska Airlines MD-80 jetliner made an emergency landing at San Francisco International airport after reports of sparks coming from the aircraft's tail Monday night.

Alaska Airlines Flight 289 was flying to Seattle from the Mexican resort of Puerto Vallarta. It landed in San Francisco about 7:45 p.m. Monday (10:45 p.m. EST), airport duty manager Dennis Neves said. There were no injuries.

A Northwest airlines crew following the plane warned the Alaska Airlines crew that sparks were coming from the back of the aircraft, CNN has learned. Airline officials had no explanation for the sparks early Tuesday.

The pilot of Monday's flight declared an emergency in order to get first priority to land, Alaska Airlines spokesman Jack Evans said.

"The pilot would not have declared an emergency if not for air traffic control issues in San Francisco," said Evans. He said the MD-80-series aircraft and Alaska Airlines are safe.

"I think the thing that people need to keep in mind is that this aircraft is one of the safest aircraft ever built in the history of aviation," Evans said.

It was unclear what caused Monday's problems: Evans speculated that something, such as a bird, may have been sucked into one of the engines. Pilots had no indication on their gauges that there was anything wrong with the engine, said Evans.

The flight was following the same route as the Alaska Airlines MD-83 that crashed off Los Angeles on January 31, killing all 88 aboard.

Investigators suspect a problem with the horizontal stabilizer -- a part at the rear of the plane -- caused the fatal crash.

Since then, three other jets from the MD-80 series have aborted flights due to problems with the stabilizer. But some airline officials fear pilots concerned about the Alaska Airlines crash may be inadvertently overheating the motors on airplane stabilizers by repeatedly testing them before takeoff.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.




User currently offlineB717 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1142 times:

I don't know about the rest of you but ever since Alaska 261 the media has made sure to cover anything wrong on a MD80. They just like sacrying people. I sure by clicking a couples of times you can find how many MD80/90's are flying out there right now with no problems. The aircraft has had such a clean record until now. People who are scared to fly and MD80 are scared because of media...sure if you couldn't tell I love the MD's/B717...but anyone out there that knows anything about aircraft/safety and such can concur with me that the MD80 are not planes that should be considered unsafe...at least until it is proven otherwise. But doubt it.

My point is...if an A320/30/40 or B767/57/47 was to crash I'm sure that media would try to find any kind of incident(s) involving that particular aircraft and it's safety. Every time something horrible like this happens...people start questioning the safety of that aircraft or the airline. Media media media....crap crap crap. I have flown Alaska many times and they are nothing but a great airline...sure they've had their ups and downs but who hasn't.

It's media...my 2 cents!
Nick


User currently offlineNKP S2 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1714 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1135 times:

I concur Nick. We just hear more about small events now,whereas before they went unreported or were on page 57. If MD80's really were "acting up" all of a sudden,it would be nothng short of supernatural...but hey,sooner or later the media will try to cook THAT angle up! I better not give 'em any ideas!  

User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4304 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1137 times:

Obviously, I think that some strech of bad luck has hit Alaska Airlines & the MD-80, it is odd that they would malfunction all at the same time.

On the other hand, like the article CometII says, maybe pilots are also a little wary, & maybe doing things with those horizontal stabalizers that they would not generally do, like try them more than the norm before takeoff.

But the MEDIA is sure to blame!! Last year in Argentina, following the LAPA Airlines 737 crash in AEP, Buenos Aires, the media reported every single problem with airliners in Argentina, there were like five (5) in a week!!
Coincidence? NO!! It was the media scaring everyone as usual. They even reported one incident with LAPA were one of the tires of a 737 were punctured by a small piece of debris on the runway! If that incident happens today, I can bet you that they would not cover it like they did right after the crash. The media is out of control, & needs to be reigned in to inform, not to MAKE THE NEWS!

Love & be happy,
Derico



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
2 AC B767-300ERs Taking Off One After The Other? posted Sat Aug 5 2006 00:01:19 by AirCanada014
3 PIA 747's At Manchester - One After The Other! posted Sat Jul 7 2001 16:04:20 by GF-A330
What Will Happen To ATR After The -42 And -72? posted Thu Dec 9 2004 22:29:21 by Capital146
Why Do Aircraft Have Their Reg's On The Wings? posted Tue Nov 12 2002 04:23:35 by Bigmo747
Why Do You Like To Go To The Airport And "Spot"? posted Mon Feb 7 2000 04:10:10 by ATA757
Why Do Airlines Cover The Titles After An Incident? posted Wed Feb 2 2005 19:33:12 by MADtoCAE
How Can One Airline Do It And Not The Other? posted Sun Jul 22 2001 17:32:26 by Mirrodie
Pictures Forbided On One Flt But Ok On The Other posted Fri Dec 1 2006 07:31:51 by HAMAD
Why Do Airlines Still Use The 732 posted Tue Jul 25 2006 19:12:07 by Curious
Why Do Airlines Use The Dreamliner Livery? posted Mon Mar 6 2006 15:14:04 by RichM