Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Cebo29 wrote:The fact that nobody died in this accident is a real miracle.......Praying did.......work!
spacecadet wrote:aa87 wrote:Given everything already known, anyone think cause was something other than windshear ?
As I alluded to earlier, the cause these days is never just "windshear". Windshear is a known quantity; we understand it, we have instruments to detect it (if installed, but if not, then that's potentially the root cause). If a plane crashes due to windshear in 2018, then windshear is probably not the cause any more than square windows or unattended baggage would be. It's just not an unknown thing at this point; it's something that everybody in aviation understands. Lack of proper equipment to detect it, a decision to take off in known windshear conditions beyond the airplane's capabilities, a mechanical issue that coincidentally happened in windshear conditions, or other issues would be the root cause.
We'll see... clearly they were taking off in bad weather, but lots of planes take off in bad weather. Something caused *this* plane to crash. Whether they really shouldn't have been taking off (which would be the cause in itself) or something else happened coincidentally, we'll still have to see.
“It’s not a miracle,” he said. “This is a design-based accident that should be survivable. We’ve worked long and hard in the industry to ensure that an event like this is something that people can walk away from, that the seats don't slide forward on impact, that limbs are protected. The safety of passengers is no accident.”
He added: “The grassy area you see around an airport is not just wasteland, it is deliberately kept free of obstacles such as ditches or power lines. It is designed to allow a landing that people can walk away from.”
INFINITI329 wrote:Cebo29 wrote:The fact that nobody died in this accident is a real miracle.......Praying did.......work!
Prayers didnt save lives...
AR385 wrote:One of the F/As remained on board the plane until she made sure no one was staying behind. She was the last to leave. Reminds me of The Costa Concordia,,,
AR385 wrote:The Captain is still in the hospital because even though the doctors were able to decompress the marrow. The doctors have warned him sternly that any movemennt of his neck will result in rendering him a paraplegic. The girl will be discharged soon, her injuries are not that severe. She has 1st. and 2nd degree burns in her legs.
The EMT who got him out said he was literally underneath what remained on the cockpit. He also mentioned that he kept asking "How many people did I killed" He oly stopped saying that until he was sedated in one of the hospitals.
aerolimani wrote:[quote="AR385"
I hope you're not trying to insinuate that the pilots ran away in a cowardly fashion. Reports indicate that the cockpit did not fare well in this crash. The captain remains in hospital with serious neck injuries, and a risk of paraplegia. In fact, without the help of passengers, he might not have escaped at all.
AR385 wrote:Once again, A.net raises to the ocassion and one finds himself having to justify what one wrote. If you would haven the time to read the thread, you would have found the above. But nooooooo, you chose to accuse me of having an intention of writing something pretty ridiculous and offensive, frankly. You are esentially telling me I wrote some crap, in the likes of going all the way saying the captain left every one behind and left running towards safety (by the way, your info. is wrong, not only the part you dedicated to me) I wish next time you are going to accuse and insult someone of writing something so callous and cruel you at least read the thread beforehand. Or maybe you are someone who assumes the worst in every person and then pounces in without thinking. And, newsflash! I never insinuate. When I want to write something I write it. Period. I don´t go around finding ways of inserting passive-aggresive crap likw you say I do.
And people are asking why posts are down or why we don´t get the posts from the experts we used to get. anymore. It´s exactly because of this. Franky one thinks why bother? I really never get angry on forums, never in A.net. This is the first time some baseless accusation sets me off, Again, why bother posting?
trnswrld wrote:^^^^relax man. I don’t think his post was anywhere near like you make it out to be. He was in a way just ensuring that you didn’t mean anything against the captain who was likely near death under a rubble of cockpit debris. I’m pretty sure this is just a misunderstanding.
D L X wrote:Engineering saved these lives. Now, if you want to say God gave these engineers the skill to create a plane that would withstand this punishment, I'd agree. But seriously, let's not turn a.net into the prayer hour when it's simple physics in control here.
atsiang wrote:D L X wrote:Engineering saved these lives. Now, if you want to say God gave these engineers the skill to create a plane that would withstand this punishment, I'd agree. But seriously, let's not turn a.net into the prayer hour when it's simple physics in control here.
There are a lot of things in life that cannot be explained merely by “physics”. It is a miracle that there was no fatalities. When things go wrong, God is blamed but things go well, God is never acknowledged...
reffado wrote:Brazilian media reporting E190 aircraft, XA-GAL. Terrible.
atsiang wrote:D L X wrote:Engineering saved these lives. Now, if you want to say God gave these engineers the skill to create a plane that would withstand this punishment, I'd agree. But seriously, let's not turn a.net into the prayer hour when it's simple physics in control here.
There are a lot of things in life that cannot be explained merely by “physics”. It is a miracle that there was no fatalities. When things go wrong, God is blamed but things go well, God is never acknowledged...
MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:If this was the result of a microburst or thunderstorm induced windshear, the question will be why did the pilots decide to take off in such weather? When there is weather in the area, pilots usually take a look at their onboard radar before taking off. Did the crew do that and if so what did they see? Was this storm one that didnt look so bad when they started the takeoff roll and intensified as they rolled down the runway?
Also, what pressure were the pilots under? Is there a culture at this airline of braving bad weather instead of being conservative and waiting it out?
Erebus wrote:Man,I miss people like Mandala499 and Pihero. They used to bring in some insightful analysis regarding the circumstances of such incidents and accidents.
TheRedBaron wrote:Mandala499 Pihero Captain Barney etc, and countless other great contributors of knowledge and information left due to rude and ignorant armchair aviation judges.
Best regards
TRB
D L X wrote:Engineering saved these lives.
TheRedBaron wrote:Mandala499 Pihero Captain Barney etc, and countless other great contributors of knowledge and information left due to rude and ignorant armchair aviation judges.
Best regards
TRB
trnswrld wrote:TheRedBaron wrote:Mandala499 Pihero Captain Barney etc, and countless other great contributors of knowledge and information left due to rude and ignorant armchair aviation judges.
Best regards
TRB
Ehh that's their loss. This is the internet, you cant really expect the highest quality members and posts all the time. I agree, some of the stuff is annoying, but who cares, when is there not some sort of crap on the internet? The site is still good enough to visit and contribute to.
trnswrld wrote:In regards to some of the posts here regarding lives saved because of technology and engineering and how there have been other similar accidents long ago in much older aircraft that resulted the same with all surviving. So my post here has nothing to do with praying, I don't go there on the internet, but just how much do you guys think is the result of engineering over say just good old luck? I mean lets face it, had the aircraft not had a clear pathway to slow down on and it collided with a structure or significant terrain there would have been fatalities.
So just how many differences could there possibly be between lets say a 727 where all survived and this much newer E190? Both are rigid aluminum structures with seats attached to aluminum rails. I understand they cannot put the kind of safety items in aircraft that they do cars for weight and space reasons to name a couple, but what technology do newer modern aircraft have that was engineered for passenger safety that a 727 for example doesn't? BTW I am not saying that technology and engineering didn't have anything to do with everyone surviving, but I can say it sounds like the LACK of technology certainly did with little to no weather detection as far as the airport goes. Human judgement, and what the pilots saw or info they had available is to be determined.
vahancrazy wrote:Since we do not have the full information yet, I cannot rule ouy there was some luck but definitevily modern design of the aircraft and proper runway were determinant factors.
I am know intrested to know whether the crew was responsible or not.
trnswrld wrote:vahancrazy wrote:Since we do not have the full information yet, I cannot rule ouy there was some luck but definitevily modern design of the aircraft and proper runway were determinant factors.
I am know intrested to know whether the crew was responsible or not.
So that’s my point exactly.....what modern design of the aircraft is it that you speak of that was definitely a determining factor in these people surviving, that say a 30+ year old Boeing would not have?
Again, I am not being sarcastic in anyway. I am truly curious to see what changes over the years have been made to aircraft that give humans a better chance of survival? Other external factors I can see such as designing an airport with plenty of clear room beyond the runways and to me THAT is one I can say definitely was a determining factor in this case, not necessarily aircraft design.
Thanks for the information.
trnswrld wrote:vahancrazy wrote:Since we do not have the full information yet, I cannot rule ouy there was some luck but definitevily modern design of the aircraft and proper runway were determinant factors.
I am know intrested to know whether the crew was responsible or not.
So that’s my point exactly.....what modern design of the aircraft is it that you speak of that was definitely a determining factor in these people surviving, that say a 30+ year old Boeing would not have?
Again, I am not being sarcastic in anyway. I am truly curious to see what changes over the years have been made to aircraft that give humans a better chance of survival? Other external factors I can see such as designing an airport with plenty of clear room beyond the runways and to me THAT is one I can say definitely was a determining factor in this case, not necessarily aircraft design.
Thanks for the information.
luv2cattlecall wrote:trnswrld wrote:vahancrazy wrote:Since we do not have the full information yet, I cannot rule ouy there was some luck but definitevily modern design of the aircraft and proper runway were determinant factors.
I am know intrested to know whether the crew was responsible or not.
So that’s my point exactly.....what modern design of the aircraft is it that you speak of that was definitely a determining factor in these people surviving, that say a 30+ year old Boeing would not have?
Again, I am not being sarcastic in anyway. I am truly curious to see what changes over the years have been made to aircraft that give humans a better chance of survival? Other external factors I can see such as designing an airport with plenty of clear room beyond the runways and to me THAT is one I can say definitely was a determining factor in this case, not necessarily aircraft design.
Thanks for the information.
16g capable seats (isn't this one of the reasons Boeing doesn't want to have to get a new type certificate for the 737, because they would have to beef up a bit of the frame and rails?)
AirlineCritic wrote:What do you mean? High tech saves lives day in and day out, say look at cars and how much safer today's cars are. Airplane accidents are fortunately very rare (partially due to that high tech) so there isn't as much direct events to observe. But even there high tech saves lifes.
sccutler wrote:Microbursts develop in seconds - hence the name - and I have a difficult time believing that the cockpit crew saw that on the runway when they started the takeoff roll.
Super80Fan wrote:So.... Have we answered the question of whether this is a Boeing crash or not? My thoughts go with the survivors and captain as they try and recover in the hospital.
1989worstyear wrote:AirlineCritic wrote:What do you mean? High tech saves lives day in and day out, say look at cars and how much safer today's cars are. Airplane accidents are fortunately very rare (partially due to that high tech) so there isn't as much direct events to observe. But even there high tech saves lifes.
Makes me wonder if the results would have been different had this been a pre-1988 aircraft like the 757 or 763..
sccutler wrote:Microbursts develop in seconds - hence the name - and I have a difficult time believing that the cockpit crew saw that on the runway when they started the takeoff roll.
AirlineCritic wrote:What do you mean? High tech saves lives day in and day out, say look at cars and how much safer today's cars are. Airplane accidents are fortunately very rare (partially due to that high tech) so there isn't as much direct events to observe. But even there high tech saves lifes.
AR385 wrote:One of the F/As remained on board the plane until she made sure no one was staying behind. She was the last to leave. Reminds me of The Costa Concordia,,,
hongkongflyer wrote:AR385 wrote:One of the F/As remained on board the plane until she made sure no one was staying behind. She was the last to leave. Reminds me of The Costa Concordia,,,
Although I don't know the FO's status, the captain was seriously injured, can you expect him to inspect the cabin to ensure that everyone has gone?
May be the F/A knew captain was unable to do so so that she decided to perform such checks.
Appreciate the F/A for what she has done, but it is not fair to blame the captain and link with the captain's of Costa Concordia.
aerolimani wrote:hongkongflyer wrote:AR385 wrote:One of the F/As remained on board the plane until she made sure no one was staying behind. She was the last to leave. Reminds me of The Costa Concordia,,,
Although I don't know the FO's status, the captain was seriously injured, can you expect him to inspect the cabin to ensure that everyone has gone?
May be the F/A knew captain was unable to do so so that she decided to perform such checks.
Appreciate the F/A for what she has done, but it is not fair to blame the captain and link with the captain's of Costa Concordia.
Thank you, hongkongflyer, for also not understanding what AR385 is trying to say. AR385 got all upset because I questioned what he/she was trying to say with their Costa Concordia comment. So, I'm glad I'm not the only one who is confused.
rvA340 wrote:For some reason.. this accident reminds me of Spanair 5022 and LAPA 3142 accidents.. couldnt this AM accident be the same scenario or cause.. pilot error? After all.. how many planes land and take off during extreme weather everyday? Personally I dont think in this case, weather is to blame...
rvA340 wrote:For some reason.. this accident reminds me of Spanair 5022 and LAPA 3142 accidents.. couldnt this AM accident be the same scenario or cause.. pilot error? After all.. how many planes land and take off during extreme weather everyday? Personally I dont think in this case, weather is to blame...
AR385 wrote:One of Aeromexico´s landings. This one is a ERJ-145
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh6Bc6j ... ture=share
dcajet wrote:AR385 wrote:One of Aeromexico´s landings. This one is a ERJ-145
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh6Bc6j ... ture=share
Perhaps I am missing something, but how is this relevant to the discussion?
AR385 wrote:dcajet wrote:AR385 wrote:One of Aeromexico´s landings. This one is a ERJ-145
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh6Bc6j ... ture=share
Perhaps I am missing something, but how is this relevant to the discussion?
It is important to the discussion because AM assigns their regional jets to crews that are young and without much experience. Many of my friends who are pilots are baffled by the decision of the pilots to take off in the recent accident. When I questioned him about what that meant. He sent me that video, and I thought I´d share it.
However if you feel it adds nothing to the discussion, and a waste of banwdithd you are welcome to suggest deletions .
It is a serious problem because simpy put, there are no pilots in the country to crew the expected growth of the industry in the coming years. He is worried about that.