Hmmm... BA5390...pilot released the shoulder harness...we all know what happened...
Using offensive terms and call your SLF idiots will not help your cause...will only make it worse...because if you write it here, means you think it and therefore you deal with your PAX as you are dealing with idiots!
Electronic interference, my foot. Care to speculate that they hit the top of a storm cell and tumbled...........like all those who speculated that the CAL plane tumbled near Bali because the pilots obscured the windshields with papers? Years ago ( well b4 911 ) when flying from old Halim airport to Syd on QF, the flight deck door was opened and I could see charts and other odd newsprint covering the windscreen too...........hey not only the Taiwanese do it! Oh dear, that cannot be, better swear on gramp's grave that we skygods never ever do that!!! Deny it a trillion times, spin it like those yankie spin doctors, swear again on great great gramp's grave a quadrillion times that only the Asians do such thing.......now the people really believe only the Asians do it! Any tumbling out of the skies by a western airline must be due to electronic interference.....wow, a so damn high tech explanation! Bah!
If you knew anything about the A330 flight deck, you would realise that it has some of the best and most effective window shades installed. There would be little need to put charts up as sun blockers.
This is off topic ... but I think this thread is pretty much done anyway !
This was letter written in to the Sydney Morning Herald .. It could not be put any better ....
Just belt up
Regarding the Qantas passengers seeking compensation (smh.com.au, October 10) , this aircraft thing is pretty simple. It flies at 10,000 metres. It flies at nearly 1000 kilometres an hour. It gets you to the opposite side of the world in less than a day for about a grand (unless you are in business, where it seems your life and your seat are worth more). It's called an aeroplane. Wear a seatbelt, you muppets.
you call these passengers intelligent for fly with out wearing the Seatbelt? I call them Idiots, sorry..In addition to that there passengers will call to court the airline for damages. Sorry, I do not want to insult anybody but can them labeled differently?
I'm sure y agree...Soon we will read something like this: "Our airline insurance policy will no cover injuries by not compliance of the crew safety recomendation during this flight."
Care to speculate that they hit the top of a storm cell and tumbled
I don't think so. Before you speculate any further, read the Australian Transport Safety Bureau Media Release here. No mention of tumbling off the top of a CB there.
AHhhhhaaa. In RVSM airspace if the autopilot starts taking you down-uncommanded-shouldn't you disconnect and fly manually. If you were asleep for the first 200 foot excursion you should have been focused by then to disconnect for the next 650' excursion! And even more focussed after that for the next 400' excursion. Believe it or not you can disconnect the autopilot in cruise on a 'bus.
Quote:
Why on earth is a police investigation underway..
It is standard procedure in Oz for the State Police (or the Feds in major ports once they've arm-wrestled control from the Staties) to assume command in any aircraft emergency, so as a Mayday was declared this would be following the protocol.
I'm not sure of the demarcation for any following investigation, but presumably the ATSB (Aviation Transport Safety Board) will take it on at some stage.
if the autopilot starts taking you down-uncommanded-shouldn't you disconnect and fly manually. If you were asleep for the first 200 foot excursion you should have been focused by then to disconnect for the next 650' excursion! And even more focussed after that for the next 400' excursion. Believe it or not you can disconnect the autopilot in cruise on a 'bus.
That's a pretty smart comment from a professional pilot... The crew didn't have control of the aeroplane. It was doing it's own thing. The captain told me he was sh!t scared about what was going on. This was not a case of a simple autopilot disconnect and wandering off altitude while both pilots were engrossed in the paper. Don't you realise the first bunt was so violent 50 people got slammed against the ceiling? Do you reckon a pilot would have done that?
If you'd bothered to read the media release, you would have read that the aircraft climbed, then went back to level flight at the assigned level for one minute before doing the first bunt.
Care to speculate that they hit the top of a storm cell and tumbled...........like all those who speculated that the CAL plane tumbled near Bali because the pilots obscured the windshields with papers? Years ago ( well b4 911 ) when flying from old Halim airport to Syd on QF, the flight deck door was opened and I could see charts and other odd newsprint covering the windscreen too
Hmm what crap mate - Singapore to Perth...roughly south. It was the middle of the day. It's the southern hemisphere - the sun's in the north BEHIND the aircraft. You'd only be putting the SMH up there if you were scared of heights.
Interested in your thoughts on the Qantas plunge and chance that a laptop might have interfered with nav/flight control gear. Just for background. No attribution. No recriminations. Check out stories at this link: http://tinyurl.com/qantas1
Just a thought but the behaviour of QF72 brought back to mind the Turkish A340 in the mid-Atlantic airprox of Oct 2000
Very interesting report GobonaStick, thank you for bringing it up !
From what I can see, this event did not bring any important negative G, at least nothing close to what experienced QF72.
But it should be a report to be read by any bus pilot, and most importantly by any pilot riding close above an Airbus.
Strategic Lateral Offset over the NAT tracks seems to be a very wise move ... and Airbus "protections" should be studied and understood much more carefully by their operators.
Linear Mode
