Whale PFE post 20th July 2008 12:37
Aviation Safety
It is cool to be able to BS back and forth on these websites, because nobody knows who you are and you have a fancy screen name and all. It's cool to speculate and get to be an expert on a certain subject, but the problem, like with this accident, is when sensitive information, pictures, etc. gets leaked. It pisses the NTSB off and they don't have to let other intrested parties be a "party" to the investigation. The NTSB are very qualified and have the expertise and resources to do an investigation and then they publish their findings so everyone can learn from it. That is the whole mechanics behind the NTSB. It is unfortunate that we have some among our own ranks that have jeopardized are ability to be a "party" to another investigation. God willing, it won't be an issue. But, maybe some others should take note, if you find yourself in a similar situation. I hope not!
WhalePFE
Whale PFE, one last post,
Strange, I noticed most of your past posts conversing with me have been deleted again for some reason. You make a good point here again imho. The NTSB, if they are invited by the host country, can in turn invite other interested parties into the investigation. But none of the posters here can control leaks which obviously originated in the host country. Who else had access to the cockpit of this aircraft? Was it secured at night? I noticed daylight in the photos so the authorities should have had time to post a guard. Also the shoes are evident in one of the pictures of the person standing on the roof circuit breaker panel.
Blaming the public for commenting on published news reports or pictures put up available to the public is a little far-fetched. Wouldn't you say?
I mean, what do you recommend? That we pretend we didn't see those those pictures put up? That we not comment until the investigation is over? Is that what you're suggesting?
I do see your point and do not necessarily disagree with you that a hard-working NTSB team might take exception to the photos and info being released before they have even had a chance to chase down all the leads. But how can mere readers prevent this? We can't.
Personally, I think squelching discussion is a futile wish in the internet age. Double engine failures are interesting to many, I think, because they are so rare and unlikely. There have been other boeing aircraft with double engine failures. The "BA038 (777) AAIB Report" thread discussed parallel to this thread comes to mind.
I haven't read all of it, but in that thread an interesting bit of information regarding various Boeing/Pratt engine problems along the line of L-38's "boost pumps off by mistake" hypothetical is in there.
Air Safety Week April 23, 2001:
Yet another pilot recalled his experience in a 747-100 some years ago. Climbing through 20,000 feet, the number 4 engine either flamed out or was shut down after a frighteningly loud compressor stall. In any event, the crew quickly discovered that all the boost pumps were off (the flight engineer had not turned any of them on) and the engine apparently could not suction feed above 20,000 feet.
"Most folks that I've discussed it with have found it hard to believe that the engine would not run on suction feed," this pilot recounted. "I assure you that this was the case..."
This Link starts on page 2 of the article:
Total Loss of Engine Power Mystifies Experts | Air Safety Week | Find Articles at BNET
I (pacplyer) should point out that I'm no expert on anything. I'm just a reader. The above post, just as all my posts are: are strictly my opinion only. I could be wrong about everything and my memory is not very good anymore. This is what happens when you retire. You sit around women and talk about airplanes all the time for some strange reason...
Cheers