and why would French Citizens be flying on a banned aircraft?
I'm not sure what you mean by that comment. In this case they flew from France on a 'safe' aircraft and transferred in Sanaa onto one that was banned from French (EU?) space.
Just feel like it's a way for the airline to beat the system. If for some reason an airline has planes that are banned from the EU, than all the planes of that airline should be banned from the EU.
Where is Ralph Nader when you need him? Famous US consumer advocate....
Yeap Razoray...but it happenned the same with PIA in UK...No 747 or 313 but only 777's allowed...Strange indeed! However and returning to this very accident at Comoros, IMHO this has lots of similarities with the 320 of Gulf Air and more recently with the Armavia 320 at Sochi by Black Sea...All at night, after succesfull Go-Arounds/Orbits, and specially this one with Armavia like the Comoros, on poor bad weather... All of them too without any distress call nor malfunction advises to the ATC.
... if one aircraft of a company is suspected to be so dangerous that it is banned, wouldn't it make sense to apply the ban to all aircraft of that company, given that the same standards of maintenance probably apply?.
Quote:
'Papa, we saw the plane going down in the water. I was in the water, I could hear people talking, but I couldn't see anyone. I was in the dark, I couldn't see a thing on top of that, Daddy. I can't swim well and I held on to something, but I don't really know what'
—Bahia Bakari in telephone conversation with her father
.
.
. she held on to a piece of the plane from 1:30 a.m. Tuesday to 3 p.m.
.
.
. Sgt. Said Abdilai told Europe 1 radio that Bahia was too weak to grasp the life ring rescuers threw to her, so he jumped into the sea to get her.
so, there you are making an approach in tough conditions ...maybe you have the autothrottles working to keep the speed right...and then you go around...good move, TOGA pull up clean up and off you go
but now you come back again...might you have not properly set the autothrottles up again for the approach speed? could you have disconnected the AT and forgot to hook them up again?
now you are circling in tough conditions looking out the window trying to find the runway and you are losing airspeed...but you aren't watching as you think the autothrottles will keep a safe speed and bang!
never flew the A310 or any bus...I think the throttles move on that one, right????
French Junior Minister for Transport Dominique Bussereau told i- tele TV news that French civil aviation authorities had kept Yemenia Airways under close surveillance and had detected "very many defects" on the aircraft. The plane "disappeared from French skies" after these defects were found," Bussereau said."
This statement, which I find rather smug, suggests that, rather than fix the defects found by the French civil aviation authorities, Yemenia simply kept it out of French airports/airspace.
There has been no evidence put forward that the defects were not fixed. Nor do we know how serious the defects were - obviously not serious enough to ground the aircraft in France until the problems were fixed.
but now you come back again...might you have not properly set the autothrottles up again for the approach speed? could you have disconnected the AT and forgot to hook them up again?
now you are circling in tough conditions looking out the window trying to find the runway and you are losing airspeed...but you aren't watching as you think the autothrottles will keep a safe speed and bang!
I have no knowledge of the contractual agreements that exist between lessors and airlines apart form the wet and dry etc, but apparently this airbus was owned by ILFC.
Is the leesee not obligated to keep service and maintenance to the regulated standards and do the lease companies perform periodic checks and audits to ensure their equipment is servicable.
Interesting indeed, they suffer one hull loss and now face banning but other carriers, have a worse record when it comes to hull loss and continue to be acceptable. Double standard??????
I heard the very tail-end of a report on the wireless tonight that talked about an airline that crammed so many people on-board its aircraft that (reportedly - by a passenger) some passengers had to stand in the aisles...(ie there were no seats left to accomodate them)! Anyone else hear this report on the ABC (Australian Broadcasting) Thus nite, after the 6 pm news?
Interesting indeed, they suffer one hull loss and now face banning but other carriers, have a worse record when it comes to hull loss and continue to be acceptable. Double standard??????
Ok, I'll bite.
(And note that I have no info on this and am merely playing "Devil's Advocate")
Maybe it's because there has been other, repeated, breaches of ramp checks, possibly with the same aircraft, over a period of time? After all, enough "black marks" turn into a "red flag". It would have to be over more than just "one hull loss".
yes, But it smacks of double standards. Most of the EU's 'banned carriers' are only to make it look like the EU are doing something - they are local airlines that never plan to fly to the EU anyway. Who cares if a local indonesian airline is on the banned list - but the EU think it makes them look like they are doing something! And lets not forget that Air France now have one of the worst hull loss records in the world (as do Turkish) so why are they not under EU investigation? Its all politics people. Nothing do do with public safety.
Location: FR | IC luftballons | Page 20 - photo thread: there be PPRuNe's most beautiful woman...
Posts: 297
Rollingthunder wrote:
Quote:
Yemenia is owned 49% by Saudi Arabia, who have money dripping out their ears. Mainteneance should have been to the highest calibre, not a cause for an aircraft to be banned from French airspace.
Anything less than 50% is still a minority interest though...
Coincidentally, this BBC report "Page last updated at 11:56 GMT, Thursday, 2 July 2009 12:56 UK" announces the award of a $2.27 billion contract by the Saudis to EADS, who I believe have more than a passing interest in Airbus.
According to Wikipedia, Yemenia also have code sharing agreements with the following:
EgyptAir Felix Airways Etihad Airways Kuwait Airways Middle East Airlines Qatar Airways Royal Jordanian Airlines Saudi Arabian Airlines Syrian Air
PS. The lone survivor (the 14 year old) was apparently flown back to France to rejoin her father. Indeed, if the picture in the BBC report is anything to go by, they didn't use an Airbus, rather a Dassault Falcon trijet as I surmised in a previous post since deleted by our peers...
Like another poster here, I too flew in and out of Moroni in EK's 310s in the 90s. The visual approach at night to 20 has to be one of most challenging I have ever flown.
You take a 310 with it's very high power to weight ratio when it's light and do a go-around on a dark night....plus the possibility of a pilot pushing forward against the autpilot pitch command (possibly as a result of a somatographic illusion) the next thing you know the autopilot disconnects when the stabilizer reaches the stop and you are left with an uncontrollable aircraft which then decides to go vertical.
On the 310s and 300s unlike other similar aircraft, the autopilot does not disconnect if you override it in pitch until the stab reaches the stops, this has resulted in at least two hull losses and three loss of control in flight situations that I can remember.
We don't know yet what happened to these unfortunate people, and it may have nothing to do with what I have just mentioned, however I do know that they were dealt a poor deck of cards to start with.
And lets not forget that Air France now have one of the worst hull loss records in the world (as do Turkish) so why are they not under EU investigation? Its all politics people. Nothing do do with public safety.
Linear Mode
