• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 10
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:26 pm

chrisp390 wrote:
Well BBC, CNN, Flight Global and others have lists of sites related to specific topics. They come to this site for aviation info because they think people in the know might post here during events like this. The problem is they post the news as “fact” like they are the ones in the know when in fact it is pulled from places like this initially. However after the blunder that this thread has been in providing information, I imagine BBC, CNN and others will be re-evaluating where they get their facts from.


While it may not have been your intention, I'm hoping that they are reading your comments and taking it as sage advice.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
chrisp390
Posts: 688
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:27 pm

Well BBC, CNN, Flight Global and others have lists of sites related to specific topics. They come to this site for aviation info because they think people in the know might post here during events like this. The problem is they post the news as “fact” like they are the ones in the know when in fact it is pulled from places like this initially. However after the blunder that this thread has been in providing information, I imagine BBC, CNN and others will be re-evaluating where they get their facts from.
 
Jetty
Posts: 945
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 12:27 pm

Re: Plane down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:28 pm

SCQ83 wrote:
Indeed, AA1334 would fit with the time of the crash due to the delay. Hopefully it is not that flight

Hopefully :boggled: Because it's better if the victims aren't American? What an odd thing to say after such a tragedy.
 
User avatar
SierraPacific
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 1:48 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:29 pm

gatibosgru wrote:
Maybe sanctions that prevent reliable aircraft to be sold to certain countries isn't the best thing for all humans.

The Aircraft was a Mexican aircraft, not a Cuban aircraft so sanctions are not a factor.
 
debonair
Posts: 3497
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:50 pm

Re: Plane down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:30 pm

n471wn wrote:
Cubana does fly one leased 737-200


According to different sources and the colours from the fuselage visible it was Global Aerolineas Boeing 737-200 registration XA-UHZ - however some sources say EasySky Airlines of Honduras... Can anyone confirm? :tombstone:
Last edited by debonair on Fri May 18, 2018 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Viper911
Posts: 300
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:29 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:34 pm

CitizenJustin wrote:
D L X wrote:
slvrblt wrote:
AA 1334 is on the ground in MIA. Thankful for that.........hoping for the best for those folks in the actual accident but that big smoke plume doesn't make one feel very confident

Until I hear confirmation of any deaths, I'm going to remain optimistic. Remember this "unsurvivable" crash:



The plane shown in the image you posts is an Air France plane. The accident plane has a solid blue tail.


Thanks for the obvious comment but you should read first the posts you quote.

Viper911
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:36 pm

DUSdude wrote:
The picture shows hard right rudder deflection and the crash location is way off to the right when taking off to the northeast. Correlation?

Impossible Turn after engine failure???
 
Draken21fx
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 10:38 am

Re: Plane down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:37 pm

Jetty wrote:
SCQ83 wrote:
Indeed, AA1334 would fit with the time of the crash due to the delay. Hopefully it is not that flight

Hopefully :boggled: Because it's better if the victims aren't American? What an odd thing to say after such a tragedy.


Yeah this came very strange to me as well. SCQ83 is a known and active member of the forum, do not think he meant it the way we understood it.

RIP to all :( not a good year this year for aviation.
 
KLDC10
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:15 pm

Re: Plane down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:51 pm

Draken21fx wrote:
Jetty wrote:
SCQ83 wrote:
Indeed, AA1334 would fit with the time of the crash due to the delay. Hopefully it is not that flight

Hopefully :boggled: Because it's better if the victims aren't American? What an odd thing to say after such a tragedy.


Yeah this came very strange to me as well. SCQ83 is a known and active member of the forum, do not think he meant it the way we understood it.

RIP to all :( not a good year this year for aviation.


I interpreted this comment simply to mean that such a crash as this involving a major airline like American would be unusual, given their safety record, and the standard of maintenance procedures. I think it would simply be more shocking if an accident right after takeoff involved a major American carrier for that reason; and of course when something happens at a major airline like American, then that might imply either a problem with the aircraft design or with the maintenance regime which covers hundreds of similar aircraft. If the accident involves a little-known charter airline, however, then the likelihood is greater that it is an isolated incident. That's how I read it, anyway.
DC9/MD90/MD11/F70/BAE146
737/738/739/744/748/752/763/772/789
A319/A320/A321/A332/A333/A346/A359
Q400/E170/E175/E190/CS300
 
IADCA
Posts: 1854
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:53 pm

SierraPacific wrote:
gatibosgru wrote:
Maybe sanctions that prevent reliable aircraft to be sold to certain countries isn't the best thing for all humans.

The Aircraft was a Mexican aircraft, not a Cuban aircraft so sanctions are not a factor.


Yes, but ask yourself why CU is leasing 737-200s from Mexican carriers, then understand why the sanctions in fact are a factor. Put otherwise: if Cubana had access to capital to purchase reliable aircraft, would this plane have been operating this flight today?
 
User avatar
SierraPacific
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 1:48 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 9:55 pm

IADCA wrote:
SierraPacific wrote:
gatibosgru wrote:
Maybe sanctions that prevent reliable aircraft to be sold to certain countries isn't the best thing for all humans.

The Aircraft was a Mexican aircraft, not a Cuban aircraft so sanctions are not a factor.


Yes, but ask yourself why CU is leasing 737-200s from Mexican carriers, then understand why the sanctions in fact are a factor. Put otherwise: if Cubana had access to capital to purchase reliable aircraft, would this plane have been operating this flight today?


I am 100 percent on board with letting Cubana buy new aircraft, I am just saying that this specific crash was not caused by that rather some type of maintenance or training issue.
 
Austin787
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 10:01 pm

gatibosgru wrote:
Maybe sanctions that prevent reliable aircraft to be sold to certain countries isn't the best thing for all humans.

Too early to claim a problem with the aircraft caused the crash.
 
AR385
Posts: 6923
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 10:02 pm

This is an official comuniqué from Mexico´s Ministry of Transport. Hopefully it will clarify many doubts here:

http://www.gob.mx/sct/prensa/accidente- ... yo-de-2018
 
trnswrld
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 2:19 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 10:10 pm

DUSdude wrote:
The picture shows hard right rudder deflection and the crash location is way off to the right when taking off to the northeast. Correlation?


Remember though this aircraft just crashed. Just because you see the rudder in a position like that in the wreckage is probably little to no indication whatsoever what that flight control surface was actually doing while still in flight. That’s when the black boxes come into play.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 8779
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 10:15 pm

All users are reminded to keep to the topic. Those that have engaged in off topic and personal commentary, those posts have been removed.
Forum Moderator
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 2111
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 10:44 pm

AR385 wrote:
This is an official comuniqué from Mexico´s Ministry of Transport. Hopefully it will clarify many doubts here:

http://www.gob.mx/sct/prensa/accidente- ... yo-de-2018

That communiqué puts the crash site at "between the airport and the town of Las Vegas 10 kms from the airport". So, as one of the comments in the Avherald article states, the crash site right next to the runway on the photo in that article seems to be incorrect.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 11:06 pm

IADCA wrote:
SierraPacific wrote:
gatibosgru wrote:
Maybe sanctions that prevent reliable aircraft to be sold to certain countries isn't the best thing for all humans.

The Aircraft was a Mexican aircraft, not a Cuban aircraft so sanctions are not a factor.


Yes, but ask yourself why CU is leasing 737-200s from Mexican carriers, then understand why the sanctions in fact are a factor. Put otherwise: if Cubana had access to capital to purchase reliable aircraft, would this plane have been operating this flight today?


"Cuba's last fatal commercial accident occurred in 2010, when an Aero Caribbean ATR-72 crashed while en route to Havana from Santiago, Cuba, after encountering icing conditions, Aviation Safety Network data show. All 68 people onboard were killed."

http://atwonline.com/safety/cuban-chart ... 75fdb9e6fa

Did sanctions kill those people too?
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
WkndWanderer
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 6:36 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 11:08 pm

MalevTU134 wrote:
AR385 wrote:
This is an official comuniqué from Mexico´s Ministry of Transport. Hopefully it will clarify many doubts here:

http://www.gob.mx/sct/prensa/accidente- ... yo-de-2018

That communiqué puts the crash site at "between the airport and the town of Las Vegas 10 kms from the airport". So, as one of the comments in the Avherald article states, the crash site right next to the runway on the photo in that article seems to be incorrect.


The crash site on the photo in that article is between the airport and Las Vegas, and the position is consistent with the of the smoke plume taken from the terminal and the location of the high school that is reportedly near the crash site, it looks pretty spot on.
 
WkndWanderer
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 6:36 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Fri May 18, 2018 11:10 pm

WkndWanderer wrote:
MalevTU134 wrote:
AR385 wrote:
This is an official comuniqué from Mexico´s Ministry of Transport. Hopefully it will clarify many doubts here:

http://www.gob.mx/sct/prensa/accidente- ... yo-de-2018

That communiqué puts the crash site at "between the airport and the town of Las Vegas 10 kms from the airport". So, as one of the comments in the Avherald article states, the crash site right next to the runway on the photo in that article seems to be incorrect.


The crash site on the photo in that article is between the airport and Las Vegas, and the position is consistent with the of the smoke plume photos taken from the terminal, it seems pretty spot on.
Last edited by WkndWanderer on Fri May 18, 2018 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Brachiopod
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 11:54 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 12:44 am

Hullo, (yes, new user, but been following this site for years, and not just for the crashes)

If we are confirmed it's (B-737-200) XA-UHZ (MSN 21816), then Airfleets (and others) has it as EasySky since 2014 ?


Forgive my ignorance - but what's the connection with Global Air and EasySky - subsidiary?

If so, it's a sub-sub-lease and then Wet Lease to Cubana??
 
DUSdude
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 4:20 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 12:58 am

trnswrld wrote:
DUSdude wrote:
The picture shows hard right rudder deflection and the crash location is way off to the right when taking off to the northeast. Correlation?


Remember though this aircraft just crashed. Just because you see the rudder in a position like that in the wreckage is probably little to no indication whatsoever what that flight control surface was actually doing while still in flight. That’s when the black boxes come into play.


Thanks. That's gloriously obvious. You might have noticed the question mark in my earlier post. ;-) Apologies if the tentativeness of my observation wasn't clear from my shorthand writing. Cheers.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2211
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 12:59 am

FlyingElvii wrote:
DUSdude wrote:
The picture shows hard right rudder deflection and the crash location is way off to the right when taking off to the northeast. Correlation?

Impossible Turn after engine failure???


The "Impossible Turn" relates solely to single engine aircraft.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
MO11
Posts: 1142
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 5:07 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:08 am

Brachiopod wrote:
Hullo, (yes, new user, but been following this site for years, and not just for the crashes)

If we are confirmed it's (B-737-200) XA-UHZ (MSN 21816), then Airfleets (and others) has it as EasySky since 2014 ?


Forgive my ignorance - but what's the connection with Global Air and EasySky - subsidiary?

If so, it's a sub-sub-lease and then Wet Lease to Cubana??


No, Global does a lot of ACMI work. It can change from week-to-week.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3183
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:20 am

D L X wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:
Oh boy....

Image

What are we looking at in this photo? Is that the left and right wings charred and tinted blue?

That's a lot of intact pieces of plane that has burned out. Hopefully an indication of survivability!


It's the tail fin & rudder. Look up Global Damojh 732 pics and you will see.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3183
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:24 am

DUSdude wrote:
trnswrld wrote:
DUSdude wrote:
The picture shows hard right rudder deflection and the crash location is way off to the right when taking off to the northeast. Correlation?


Remember though this aircraft just crashed. Just because you see the rudder in a position like that in the wreckage is probably little to no indication whatsoever what that flight control surface was actually doing while still in flight. That’s when the black boxes come into play.


Thanks. That's gloriously obvious. You might have noticed the question mark in my earlier post. ;-) Apologies if the tentativeness of my observation wasn't clear from my shorthand writing. Cheers.


True. Once the hydraulic fluid pressure goes the rudder will push up if it's laying on trees or other objects or fall downward if there nothing under it.
 
trnswrld
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 2:19 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:44 am

DUSdude wrote:
trnswrld wrote:
DUSdude wrote:
The picture shows hard right rudder deflection and the crash location is way off to the right when taking off to the northeast. Correlation?


Remember though this aircraft just crashed. Just because you see the rudder in a position like that in the wreckage is probably little to no indication whatsoever what that flight control surface was actually doing while still in flight. That’s when the black boxes come into play.


Thanks. That's gloriously obvious. You might have noticed the question mark in my earlier post. ;-) Apologies if the tentativeness of my observation wasn't clear from my shorthand writing. Cheers.


Well then let me rephrase.......no! I would say at this point in the investigation there is no correlation between how the rudder happened to come to rest after a extreme impact and the location of the wreckage in relation to the departure runway. Like I said, the black box would be the best resource for finding flight control positions and pilot inputs.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3442
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:45 am

a/c dxer wrote:
There was incidents on takeoff but the accidents happened on approach though. Also the issue was finally figured out with the Eastwind flight into Richmond. Supposed to have been fixed but who knows if this aircraft was.


What incidents happened on takeoff?

The rudder hardover problem on the 737 was caused by thermal shock, which happened as the airplane descended from cruise altitude and its -50C temps and the PCU was put into use with hot hydraulic fluid during approach maneuvers. I can't see how thermal shock would happen on takeoff, especially in Cuba. It was 29C (84F) there today.

I strongly doubt it's the same issue.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14233
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 3:26 am

There seemed to be a lot of confusion of what happened in this crash as well as to the aircraft involved due to the layers of the operator, owner, and Cubana who it was operating for as to this aircraft as well as limits on communications due to government controls and limited facilities with the world outside of Cuba.

As noted, the FDR will be critical here, hopefully it is an updated model so has lots of info. It could be a failed engine, fuel problem, a hydraulic control surface failure, a fatigue/structural failure, maintenance issue, stuck flap, or a botch by the pilots. Still no matter what or where such a loss of 100+ people and an aircraft occurs is a sad event and hopefully we learn from the investigation how to reduce the risks of a similar crash in the future.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 7850
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 6:16 am

Brachiopod wrote:
Hullo, (yes, new user, but been following this site for years, and not just for the crashes)

If we are confirmed it's (B-737-200) XA-UHZ (MSN 21816), then Airfleets (and others) has it as EasySky since 2014 ?


Forgive my ignorance - but what's the connection with Global Air and EasySky - subsidiary?

If so, it's a sub-sub-lease and then Wet Lease to Cubana??


EasySky is a Honduran low-cost carrier. At one point, Global painted this frame in the EasySky logo and provided wet-lease (ACMI) service to EasySky under contract. At some point, it seems that the aircraft was returned to Global, i.e. it wasn't being wet-leased to EasySky any longer, and instead was being wet-leased to Cubana. It is quite possible that this particular teensy detail wasn't picked up by Airfleets or Planespotters (the latter of which is much-more-reliable, in my experience, on the more under-the-radar operations).

Everybody needs to chill about the age of the aircraft and maintenance history/quality. Most accidents result from pilot error. It is certainly possible that there was some kind of mechanical issue, but those issues usually don't cause accidents if handled properly by the crew. Maybe this was straight-up pilot error (took off too heavy, didn't set thrust correctly, improper flap configuration, etc.) or maybe it was a problem (e.g. loss of airspeed indication) followed by some mishandling of the aircraft, or maybe it was a mechanical problem that snowballed and simply wasn't capable of being overcome. The latter are pretty-rare these days, but certainly possible. We will have a sense of what happened soon enough.

There was some talk that the aircraft was turning back to the airport, but I think that is just speculation at the moment, maybe as the result of some witness accounts of the aircraft's wing dipping hard to one side.

In better days: Image

Photo by: Bernal Saborio G., dated 13 Aug 2016, uploaded to wikipedia. His (very cool) Photostream: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
 
CrawleyBen
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:22 am

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 7:51 am

It's been reported that one of the 3 survivors has now died from their injuries. I have posted the link to the article below

https://news.sky.com/story/cuba-plane-c ... n-11378122

Ben
 
User avatar
airkas1
Head Screener
Posts: 7796
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 8:30 am

wjcandee wrote:
[...]

 
Alexdk
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:08 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 10:41 am

wjcandee wrote:
Brachiopod wrote:
Hullo, (yes, new user, but been following this site for years, and not just for the crashes)

If we are confirmed it's (B-737-200) XA-UHZ (MSN 21816), then Airfleets (and others) has it as EasySky since 2014 ?


Forgive my ignorance - but what's the connection with Global Air and EasySky - subsidiary?

If so, it's a sub-sub-lease and then Wet Lease to Cubana??


EasySky is a Honduran low-cost carrier. At one point, Global painted this frame in the EasySky logo and provided wet-lease (ACMI) service to EasySky under contract. At some point, it seems that the aircraft was returned to Global, i.e. it wasn't being wet-leased to EasySky any longer, and instead was being wet-leased to Cubana. It is quite possible that this particular teensy detail wasn't picked up by Airfleets or Planespotters (the latter of which is much-more-reliable, in my experience, on the more under-the-radar operations).

Everybody needs to chill about the age of the aircraft and maintenance history/quality. Most accidents result from pilot error. It is certainly possible that there was some kind of mechanical issue, but those issues usually don't cause accidents if handled properly by the crew. Maybe this was straight-up pilot error (took off too heavy, didn't set thrust correctly, improper flap configuration, etc.) or maybe it was a problem (e.g. loss of airspeed indication) followed by some mishandling of the aircraft, or maybe it was a mechanical problem that snowballed and simply wasn't capable of being overcome. The latter are pretty-rare these days, but certainly possible. We will have a sense of what happened soon enough.

There was some talk that the aircraft was turning back to the airport, but I think that is just speculation at the moment, maybe as the result of some witness accounts of the aircraft's wing dipping hard to one side.

In better days: Image

Photo by: Bernal Saborio G., dated 13 Aug 2016, uploaded to wikipedia. His (very cool) Photostream: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


Old aircrafts may crash more often (however there may be no significant dependence on age) because airlines that use cheaperold aircraft (I mean really old, older than say DL) also employ cheaper, a bit less reliable pilots.
Last edited by Alexdk on Sat May 19, 2018 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
Alexdk
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:08 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 10:41 am

wjcandee wrote:
Brachiopod wrote:
Hullo, (yes, new user, but been following this site for years, and not just for the crashes)

If we are confirmed it's (B-737-200) XA-UHZ (MSN 21816), then Airfleets (and others) has it as EasySky since 2014 ?


Forgive my ignorance - but what's the connection with Global Air and EasySky - subsidiary?

If so, it's a sub-sub-lease and then Wet Lease to Cubana??


EasySky is a Honduran low-cost carrier. At one point, Global painted this frame in the EasySky logo and provided wet-lease (ACMI) service to EasySky under contract. At some point, it seems that the aircraft was returned to Global, i.e. it wasn't being wet-leased to EasySky any longer, and instead was being wet-leased to Cubana. It is quite possible that this particular teensy detail wasn't picked up by Airfleets or Planespotters (the latter of which is much-more-reliable, in my experience, on the more under-the-radar operations).

Everybody needs to chill about the age of the aircraft and maintenance history/quality. Most accidents result from pilot error. It is certainly possible that there was some kind of mechanical issue, but those issues usually don't cause accidents if handled properly by the crew. Maybe this was straight-up pilot error (took off too heavy, didn't set thrust correctly, improper flap configuration, etc.) or maybe it was a problem (e.g. loss of airspeed indication) followed by some mishandling of the aircraft, or maybe it was a mechanical problem that snowballed and simply wasn't capable of being overcome. The latter are pretty-rare these days, but certainly possible. We will have a sense of what happened soon enough.

There was some talk that the aircraft was turning back to the airport, but I think that is just speculation at the moment, maybe as the result of some witness accounts of the aircraft's wing dipping hard to one side.

In better days: Image

Photo by: Bernal Saborio G., dated 13 Aug 2016, uploaded to wikipedia. His (very cool) Photostream: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


Old aircrafts may crash more often (however there may be no significant dependence on age) because airlines that use cheaper old aircraft (I mean really old, older than say DL) also employ cheaper, a bit less reliable pilots.
 
User avatar
CitizenJustin
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:12 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 11:45 am

Viper911 wrote:
CitizenJustin wrote:
D L X wrote:
Until I hear confirmation of any deaths, I'm going to remain optimistic. Remember this "unsurvivable" crash:



The plane shown in the image you posts is an Air France plane. The accident plane has a solid blue tail.


Thanks for the obvious comment but you should read first the posts you quote.

Viper911


Sorry about that. Just thought I was helping. :)
 
Apprentice
Posts: 777
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 1:39 pm

Super88 wrote:
Thats what Cubana operates, what they charter is different....thats just how its posting....sorry to annoy you so much


Hi:
CUBANA operated a 3-x strong fleet of DC-10-30, KSSU’s standard, from 1993 to 2002. Planes were leased to AOM French Airlines..
Technical/Commercial Crew & Mx were listed in AOM french authorization lists, after approving all neccesary, very hard, french requirements.

All necessaries parts had to be bring from Europe. If a small Bolt could not be deferred at least as a “C” MEL, (10 Days), PLANE SHOULD BE GROUNDED.,

In September 2000, reverser to engine attachment bolts were requiered, since most of the originals bolts were out of tolerance. This bolts were speciall one, and the only place we found them available was at GE Cincinatti.
GE refused to sell bolts on a “Embargo Basis” to a French Company for a french’s registered plane, jeopardizing safety!!!! . Bolts were not overstressed. French. & Cubana’s Authorities agree and a/c was grounded, with subsequent revenue lost. Required bolts were removed from an engine in France and sent to La Havana
AOM received plenty of letters complaining to them for “breaking” embargo’s rules. I clearly remember, letter from Sonny, yes SONNY, which videos reproductors came installed for emergency videos display. They just don’t want that their reproductors were used on CUBANA’s equipment!!!

While I did not support them and do not support now, Cuban’Goverment and his policies, I never understood ethical side of embargo that can place simple people live on danger.
These rules are still in force TODAY and do not allow CUBANA’s to buy or lease newer planes, and not only Boeings, Airbus neither, since so many american licences on Airbus. That is the reason why, CUBANA owns only Russian made planes and when lease, can’t get newer versions or lease from renamed international Lesors as ILFC... It’s not fair to blame Cubana for that situation. It’s also very easy to blame Pilots, FA, Mx and other professionals quickly as unprofessional.
Rgds
“An4; IL18; IL6; Tu5; D10; MD11; MD83; B32; B34: B37; B744; B748; B752; B763; B772; B773; B77W; A320; A332; A333; A342; A343.
"A NO" is a positive answer., "DON'T KNOW" is not. My Tutor (a wise man)
“CUBANA” 90 years Flying”
 
wjcandee
Posts: 7850
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:17 pm

Apprentice wrote:
Super88 wrote:
Thats what Cubana operates, what they charter is different....thats just how its posting....sorry to annoy you so much


Hi:
CUBANA operated a 3-x strong fleet of DC-10-30, KSSU’s standard, from 1993 to 2002. Planes were leased to AOM French Airlines..
Technical/Commercial Crew & Mx were listed in AOM french authorization lists, after approving all neccesary, very hard, french requirements.

All necessaries parts had to be bring from Europe. If a small Bolt could not be deferred at least as a “C” MEL, (10 Days), PLANE SHOULD BE GROUNDED.,

In September 2000, reverser to engine attachment bolts were requiered, since most of the originals bolts were out of tolerance. This bolts were speciall one, and the only place we found them available was at GE Cincinatti.
GE refused to sell bolts on a “Embargo Basis” to a French Company for a french’s registered plane, jeopardizing safety!!!! . Bolts were not overstressed. French. & Cubana’s Authorities agree and a/c was grounded, with subsequent revenue lost. Required bolts were removed from an engine in France and sent to La Havana
AOM received plenty of letters complaining to them for “breaking” embargo’s rules. I clearly remember, letter from Sonny, yes SONNY, which videos reproductors came installed for emergency videos display. They just don’t want that their reproductors were used on CUBANA’s equipment!!!

While I did not support them and do not support now, Cuban’Goverment and his policies, I never understood ethical side of embargo that can place simple people live on danger.
These rules are still in force TODAY and do not allow CUBANA’s to buy or lease newer planes, and not only Boeings, Airbus neither, since so many american licences on Airbus. That is the reason why, CUBANA owns only Russian made planes and when lease, can’t get newer versions or lease from renamed international Lesors as ILFC... It’s not fair to blame Cubana for that situation. It’s also very easy to blame Pilots, FA, Mx and other professionals quickly as unprofessional.
Rgds


This is very interesting. I did not know this. I take it you worked for AOM, and that these planes were wet-leased. I think it is bizarre that a French carrier would not be precluded from wet-leasing an aircraft to to Cubana, but that the parts to maintain it can/would be embargoed. I would think that the updated rules would not cause this result today, but I could of course be wrong about that, too.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 7850
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:20 pm

airkas1 wrote:
wjcandee wrote:
[...]

(Photo)]


Point taken. I should have checked our database first. It's a different photo by a different photographer, but it does appear to be of the same plane at the same airport.
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:28 pm

Not to speak for others, but when it was said, paraphrased, "thankfully, it not a US carrier", my first thought was not about Cubans dying being a lesser tragedy, but rather, it's much more likely that I do not know anyone involved. The chances of it directly affecting me is not as great.

Unfortunately, I am indirectly affected as there were 10 pastors from the Church of the Nazarene onboard with their wives. All ten couples left behind small children. They also left behind churches full of people who will be affected more than I. Our local church will pray and mourn their loss (and everyone else in this tragedy.) Sad day.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
Aviano789
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 5:00 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 2:43 pm

spacecadet wrote:
a/c dxer wrote:
There was incidents on takeoff but the accidents happened on approach though. Also the issue was finally figured out with the Eastwind flight into Richmond. Supposed to have been fixed but who knows if this aircraft was.


What incidents happened on takeoff?

The rudder hardover problem on the 737 was caused by thermal shock, which happened as the airplane descended from cruise altitude and its -50C temps and the PCU was put into use with hot hydraulic fluid during approach maneuvers. I can't see how thermal shock would happen on takeoff, especially in Cuba. It was 29C (84F) there today.

I strongly doubt it's the same issue.

Can any elaborate if this airplane had the required Rudder Control System Design Enhancement mandated for all US B-737 feet?
 
dcajet
Posts: 4021
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 3:26 pm

Apprentice wrote:
Super88 wrote:
Thats what Cubana operates, what they charter is different....thats just how its posting....sorry to annoy you so much


Hi:
CUBANA operated a 3-x strong fleet of DC-10-30, KSSU’s standard, from 1993 to 2002. Planes were leased to AOM French Airlines..
Technical/Commercial Crew & Mx were listed in AOM french authorization lists, after approving all neccesary, very hard, french requirements.

All necessaries parts had to be bring from Europe. If a small Bolt could not be deferred at least as a “C” MEL, (10 Days), PLANE SHOULD BE GROUNDED.,

In September 2000, reverser to engine attachment bolts were requiered, since most of the originals bolts were out of tolerance. This bolts were speciall one, and the only place we found them available was at GE Cincinatti.
GE refused to sell bolts on a “Embargo Basis” to a French Company for a french’s registered plane, jeopardizing safety!!!! . Bolts were not overstressed. French. & Cubana’s Authorities agree and a/c was grounded, with subsequent revenue lost. Required bolts were removed from an engine in France and sent to La Havana
AOM received plenty of letters complaining to them for “breaking” embargo’s rules. I clearly remember, letter from Sonny, yes SONNY, which videos reproductors came installed for emergency videos display. They just don’t want that their reproductors were used on CUBANA’s equipment!!!

While I did not support them and do not support now, Cuban’Goverment and his policies, I never understood ethical side of embargo that can place simple people live on danger.
These rules are still in force TODAY and do not allow CUBANA’s to buy or lease newer planes, and not only Boeings, Airbus neither, since so many american licences on Airbus. That is the reason why, CUBANA owns only Russian made planes and when lease, can’t get newer versions or lease from renamed international Lesors as ILFC... It’s not fair to blame Cubana for that situation. It’s also very easy to blame Pilots, FA, Mx and other professionals quickly as unprofessional.
Rgds


Thanks - great contribution that helps to put in perspective the issues facing Cuban aviation for decades now.

At the very least, as it relates to commercial aviation, the embargo has to be reconsidered. The need for Cuba to provide a public service such as air transportation, crumbling/ageing infrastructure, lack of resources that in turn lead to having to resort to less than reputable third party providers is a recipe that has never yielded good results. Are Cuban lives somehow less valuable than the rest of us?
"Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
 
Apprentice
Posts: 777
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 3:36 pm

Hi Wjcandee:
No I did not work for AOM, I was managed and pay by CUBANA.
Plane was not wet leased, since all personnel was from Cubana. They only were certificated by DGAC-F standarts..
As long I I understood, embargo is in force. Legally, it is not deactivated.
May be to call GE or ILFC and ask for service as You were from Cubana?
Rgds
“An4; IL18; IL6; Tu5; D10; MD11; MD83; B32; B34: B37; B744; B748; B752; B763; B772; B773; B77W; A320; A332; A333; A342; A343.
"A NO" is a positive answer., "DON'T KNOW" is not. My Tutor (a wise man)
“CUBANA” 90 years Flying”
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14233
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 3:40 pm

One has to wonder how much affect the 60+ year embargo on Cuba may have a part in this crash. Sadly domestic American politics are more important than peoples lives.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 493
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 4:10 pm

I think the embargo needs to be lifted ASAP. Barely touching on politics there are more oppressive countries out there with zero embargo and business as usual.

Having been to HAV multiple times the past 10 years this country really needs reliable air service. There is very little presence of CU at HAV other than wet leases frames as most of the CU aircraft are stored in or adjacent to the hangars and not in air worthy condition. You have to also account for the fact that intra-Cuba flying is mostly Cuban citizens who don’t make more than $20 a month. So the airfares on those flights are not very high and CU isn’t making fist loads of profits so they have to outsource and wet lease from a more cost effective perspective which means smaller charter carriers with questionable maintenance standards.

But I’ll wait to rush to any kind of judgment on this until the facts come out as to why she fell from the sky. Does any one know if the Cuban govt invited the NTSB or the Mexican equivalent to assist in investigation?
717 727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 742 748 752 753 762 763 772 773 DC9 MD80/88/90 DC10 319 320 321 332 333 CS100 CRJ200 Q400 E175 E190 ERJ145 EMB120
 
User avatar
Gonzalo
Posts: 1821
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 4:35 pm

Aviano789 wrote:
spacecadet wrote:
a/c dxer wrote:
There was incidents on takeoff but the accidents happened on approach though. Also the issue was finally figured out with the Eastwind flight into Richmond. Supposed to have been fixed but who knows if this aircraft was.


What incidents happened on takeoff?

The rudder hardover problem on the 737 was caused by thermal shock, which happened as the airplane descended from cruise altitude and its -50C temps and the PCU was put into use with hot hydraulic fluid during approach maneuvers. I can't see how thermal shock would happen on takeoff, especially in Cuba. It was 29C (84F) there today.

I strongly doubt it's the same issue.

Can any elaborate if this airplane had the required Rudder Control System Design Enhancement mandated for all US B-737 feet?


Hello, I’m just speculating here, but I doubt any pilot or crew will fly a 737 classic without being sure the rudder actuators are in compliance with the last FAA directives and endanger their own lives plus the pax and the aircraft. I’m not aware of any 737 200/300/400/500 flying these days and not complying that. It will be ridiculous since the cost of the fix is not that high and I assume no one wants to be the next US Air 427 just to save a few bucks.
Rgds.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / FH-227 / A318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789 / B788 / A343 / ATR72-600
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 2111
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: 737 down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 4:44 pm

wjcandee wrote:
Apprentice wrote:
Super88 wrote:
Thats what Cubana operates, what they charter is different....thats just how its posting....sorry to annoy you so much


Hi:
CUBANA operated a 3-x strong fleet of DC-10-30, KSSU’s standard, from 1993 to 2002. Planes were leased to AOM French Airlines..
Technical/Commercial Crew & Mx were listed in AOM french authorization lists, after approving all neccesary, very hard, french requirements.

All necessaries parts had to be bring from Europe. If a small Bolt could not be deferred at least as a “C” MEL, (10 Days), PLANE SHOULD BE GROUNDED.,

In September 2000, reverser to engine attachment bolts were requiered, since most of the originals bolts were out of tolerance. This bolts were speciall one, and the only place we found them available was at GE Cincinatti.
GE refused to sell bolts on a “Embargo Basis” to a French Company for a french’s registered plane, jeopardizing safety!!!! . Bolts were not overstressed. French. & Cubana’s Authorities agree and a/c was grounded, with subsequent revenue lost. Required bolts were removed from an engine in France and sent to La Havana
AOM received plenty of letters complaining to them for “breaking” embargo’s rules. I clearly remember, letter from Sonny, yes SONNY, which videos reproductors came installed for emergency videos display. They just don’t want that their reproductors were used on CUBANA’s equipment!!!

While I did not support them and do not support now, Cuban’Goverment and his policies, I never understood ethical side of embargo that can place simple people live on danger.
These rules are still in force TODAY and do not allow CUBANA’s to buy or lease newer planes, and not only Boeings, Airbus neither, since so many american licences on Airbus. That is the reason why, CUBANA owns only Russian made planes and when lease, can’t get newer versions or lease from renamed international Lesors as ILFC... It’s not fair to blame Cubana for that situation. It’s also very easy to blame Pilots, FA, Mx and other professionals quickly as unprofessional.
Rgds


This is very interesting. I did not know this. I take it you worked for AOM, and that these planes were wet-leased. I think it is bizarre that a French carrier would not be precluded from wet-leasing an aircraft to to Cubana, but that the parts to maintain it can/would be embargoed. I would think that the updated rules would not cause this result today, but I could of course be wrong about that, too.

No, those DC10s were dry-leased from AOM. I "worked" those aircraft every day back then from the European side, and the stories such as those told by Apprentice were every day stuff for us. When those beautiful machines couldn't be sent to us from HAV, we got the IL62 instead, another beauty, but with 161 seats less... Major headache, of course, as it almost always happened with very little notice.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 7850
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 4:51 pm

Once again, guys who are already blaming maintenance and saying that the embargo should be lifted on humanitarian grounds should just chill.

This was a Mexican aircraft wet-leased to Cubana. Although when Cubana DRY-leased an aircraft, it had difficulty obtaining parts, a WET-leasing carrier (which is like a charter) shouldn't have any difficulty obtaining parts to maintain its aircraft.
 
MalevTU134
Posts: 2111
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 4:53 pm

wjcandee wrote:
Once again, guys who are already blaming maintenance and saying that the embargo should be lifted on humanitarian grounds should just chill.

This was a Mexican aircraft wet-leased to Cubana. Although when Cubana DRY-leased an aircraft, it had difficulty obtaining parts, a WET-leasing carrier (which is like a charter) shouldn't have any difficulty obtaining parts to maintain its aircraft.

Exactly
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4232
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 5:11 pm

wjcandee wrote:
Once again, guys who are already blaming maintenance and saying that the embargo should be lifted on humanitarian grounds should just chill.

This was a Mexican aircraft wet-leased to Cubana. Although when Cubana DRY-leased an aircraft, it had difficulty obtaining parts, a WET-leasing carrier (which is like a charter) shouldn't have any difficulty obtaining parts to maintain its aircraft.


At the same time, I think its worthy to discuss the embargoes. I personally think it's wrong to prevent any country from getting the necessary aircraft and parts to keep their civil and commercial aircraft properly maintained. We have seen alot of crashes attributed to an embargo.

I mean, punish the government with an embargo. But, do not punish the people!

As for this crash? I hope the CVR and FDR are good and able to help find the cause of this tragedy. I am going to speculate some type of catastrophic failure. The latest I have heard is 4 survivors found, but one passed away leaving only 3 survivors.
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
Apprentice
Posts: 777
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 5:29 pm

wjcandee wrote:
Once again, guys who are already blaming maintenance and saying that the embargo should be lifted on humanitarian grounds should just chill.

This was a Mexican aircraft wet-leased to Cubana. Although when Cubana DRY-leased an aircraft, it had difficulty obtaining parts, a WET-leasing carrier (which is like a charter) shouldn't have any difficulty obtaining parts to maintain its aircraft.



I disagree with that statement and the reason is CUBANA is conditioned by Embargo,
CUBANA is not allowed to DRY LEASE ANY a/c and Operated IT and Mainteined IT, under Cubana register/Law
CUBANA may not wet lease an a/c from a company with clear operational/maintenance records, who operated newer planes, for instance an American company,
CUBANA is not allowed to lease a new 737 from the factory, without Rudder snags, with new and more efficients engines to any international Leasor
I’m not blaming anybody, just asking my self, how many of us had listen before about this mexican company?, and how many of Us, will fly on an unknow company, B737-200 today?

And there is a long list, Do You know that CUBANA, even is a/c is leased with all equipment installed, can not offer o/b Internet Wi/Fi service to ix pax, even at not cost for pax, cause embargo prohibites that?


Now, I will repeat, specially for me. I do not agree with Cuban Way of Goverment and the way they rule.
In some way, I consider my self a victim, fired from CUBANA for fakes political complaints. Nevertheless, The Way, not only, Civil Aviation in Cuba is affected by embargo, is not fair.

Rgds
“An4; IL18; IL6; Tu5; D10; MD11; MD83; B32; B34: B37; B744; B748; B752; B763; B772; B773; B77W; A320; A332; A333; A342; A343.
"A NO" is a positive answer., "DON'T KNOW" is not. My Tutor (a wise man)
“CUBANA” 90 years Flying”
 
Apprentice
Posts: 777
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: CU972 operated by Global Air down near HAV

Sat May 19, 2018 5:53 pm

Wcjcandee: CUBANA started operations on 1929. In normal conditions, a so experienced company, flying mainly from La Havana to several cities in Nort America, pleasure flights, with the pax every company dream about. Would be flying it’s own metals, quite new and with top of the line personnel. Should You disagree, please take a look a what CuBANA and their people was doing at the end of 1958

And besides, The Bolts that were not received from GE, were commanded from AOM Logistics Manager, with a dedicated Credit Card, no by Cubana. Plane was, by the way in Mexico DF, after Eng #3 strong vibrated during Start and a check foud several compressor’s blades damaged. And it was WET LEASE, (people were included in AOM list to reduce cubana’s Manpower expenses .

As I already propose, Phone call to GE or PW or Boeing will clarify if they are able to sell a nut to CuBANA.

Rgds
“An4; IL18; IL6; Tu5; D10; MD11; MD83; B32; B34: B37; B744; B748; B752; B763; B772; B773; B77W; A320; A332; A333; A342; A343.
"A NO" is a positive answer., "DON'T KNOW" is not. My Tutor (a wise man)
“CUBANA” 90 years Flying”
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 10

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos