View Full Version : Today Show MH370
Stiff Under Carriage
1st Aug 2015, 23:20
Byron Riley; Apparently Australia's most experienced pilot tells all exactly what happened?
Who is Byron Riley?
Certainly didn't tell exactly what happened but did say all pilots do inflight is drink coffee and talk to Flight Attendants?
Where do the media get these people?
TBM-Legend
2nd Aug 2015, 01:10
Was it Byron Bailey??? If so he is ex-Ian Bailey RNZAF Nav, RAAF Mirage pilot thence corporate flying I believe..
The Reunion Island flap part still doesnt tells us where it broke off, but the shellfish/marine growth will indicate how long it has been a-drifting from....??.
...near the Maldives???
Interesting to see our Chinese friends abstained from the UN Investigation vote, not supporting Australia regarding MH 17...and here we are spending squillions looking for MH 390 at best guesstimate position and mainly full of Chinese passengers.
Perhaps the Australian taxpayers should ask the Government to abstain from the expenditure, and let the Chinese get on with it themselves.
Seems like they are not that interested, or for coughing any coin. :mad:
And Abbott and Co keep telling us we are short of money. Hmmm.
capt.cynical
2nd Aug 2015, 06:00
I saw that interview this morning, he seems to think the a/c ditched and in doing so the engine tore off talking the halperon with it.
Personally I thought he was FULL of it.
Stiff Under Carriage
2nd Aug 2015, 10:07
I saw that interview this morning, he seems to think the a/c ditched and in doing so the engine tore off talking the halperon with it.
Personally I thought he was FULL of it.
Exactly my thoughts CC. Didn't explain a damn thing. Just provide another conspiracy theory about it being hijacked and landing under power and '...as per B777 Flight Manual...'
Load of BS and a waste of time.
As for the name, may have been Bailey. I didn't quite get the full name. Either way I think Today calling him Australia's most experienced pilot is a crock.
gerry111
2nd Aug 2015, 13:15
How come Geoffrey T. wasn't there? :(
How come Geoffrey T. wasn't there?
Rival network maybe?
TOGA Flex
2nd Aug 2015, 18:27
Geez u people are keen, If you really must know. Ex emirates (check and training) B777. Was at EK from the first few delivery of 777's. Fair to say prob one of the most experienced 777 drivers in aus. Now "retired" he flys business jets on a contractual basis.The company I worked used him when we were short on CL604 drivers. Need to know more ??
yr right
2nd Aug 2015, 22:39
Although it hard to see from the pictures on the box. The damage dose not seam consistent with its appearance. Anyone else noted that. And yes aroa spot on. Shell fish size and type must be also consistent interesting times ahead.
Squawk7700
2nd Aug 2015, 23:40
The damage dose not seam consistent with its appearance.
What do you mean exactly by this comment, I'm interested?
yr right
3rd Aug 2015, 00:09
There is no damage. That's the point. I would expect some sort of twisted metal at the attach points. But it is hard to see.
There is no damage. That's the point. I would expect some sort of twisted metal at the attach points. But it is hard to see.
What are you suggesting? The flaperon has been "planted"?
kingRB
3rd Aug 2015, 01:08
Yr Wrong, why would you expect or assume you know anything about how a particular aircraft component should look after a crash or a ditching? Let alone all you can see is ****ty pictures that are on the internet.
I can just as easily speculate that because it's from the trailing edge and had a lot of wing infront of it, it was substantially shielded from impact forces.
yr right
3rd Aug 2015, 02:36
Yr Wrong, why would you expect or assume you know anything about how a particular aircraft component should look after a crash or a ditching? Let alone all you can see is ****ty pictures that are on the internet.
I can just as easily speculate that because it's from the trailing edge and had a lot of wing infront of it, it was substantially shielded from impact forces.
Well for a start I would have forgotten more about aircraft structures that what you would ever know. Please inform me how this item was shielded but still have enough impact force to remove it with out any what looks like visible damage. And I'm not saying anything. It's just that I noted that. But then again I guess you did as well.
DynaBolt
3rd Aug 2015, 04:51
I think Byron Bailey has more than enough experience to be commenting on this.
Dynabolt
rodney rude
3rd Aug 2015, 05:14
Capt Cynical, Stiff Undercarriage et al
Guarantee Byron has more credibility in his little toes than you guys who get on here and bag him.
He is a fantastic bloke, exceptionally experienced, especially on the 777, very knowledgeable, and he can back it all up by the fact that he is still exceptionally talented at putting an aeroplane where it needs to be.
I fly with him a bit and it is always a great day out.
ramble on
3rd Aug 2015, 06:45
That does not reflect my experience......
susier
3rd Aug 2015, 07:46
Duncan Steel | Space Scientist, Author & Broadcaster (http://www.duncansteel.com/)
Mike Exner has written a response to the discovery of the aircraft part.
He suggests that the damage to the trailing edge may indicate that the AC broke up in flight.
Worth a read. (I can't post on the main thread so apols for putting it here)
rodney rude
3rd Aug 2015, 07:58
Ramble On
And if that's your view from personal experience then that's fine. And my view is from personal experience, and that too is fine. We are both well entitled to our own views. I just get sick of the Australian way of throwing **** at people they've never met.
Stiff Under Carriage
3rd Aug 2015, 12:37
Thanks TOGA. Would have been nice for Today to make mention of this.
Apologies but my 'bagging' is directed at Today show and not Byron.
They announced him with no qualifying details of his experience.
He cannot back anything that happened to MH370 with fact FYI. It's all speculation.
Another link above tells another story than his so the media drumming up these 'experienced' pilots should be doing so with full knowledge that these are all opinions.
Like the news later that day showing and VA ATR72, A320 and a 737 with quote '...this is the aircraft that had (said problem, can't remember exactly) in LA...' You put the pieces together with that one.
Good on Byron for having the experience he has id love to be in said position but never will, but the media portrays this all as fact when it's not, and then to go on National TV and say all pilots do in flight is drink coffee and talk to FA's?? Does nothing for the industry does it.
I'm sure he is a fantastic guy and he looks like he is by the overly relaxed way he conducted the interview. Didn't instill confidence of his experience hence the thread start.
kingRB
3rd Aug 2015, 13:10
Well for a start I would have forgotten more about aircraft structures that what you would ever know.
You work on / maintain / investigate 777 airframes do you?
And I'm not saying anything.
Looks like you've said a fair few things actually, hence it drew my attention. A lot of speculation and assumptions looking at a photo of something half a world away, but with the conviction of an expert. At least i'm aware I don't know anything about crashed 777 parts :ok:
yr right
3rd Aug 2015, 20:26
You work on / maintain / investigate 777 airframes do you?
Looks like you've said a fair few things actually, hence it drew my attention. A lot of speculation and assumptions looking at a photo of something half a world away, but with the conviction of an expert. At least i'm aware I don't know anything about crashed 777 parts :ok:
I checked the pic m/m srm yesterday. The part in question is held on by a special tape loctite 408 glue. Honestly shows you no nil about aircraft manufacture. It is simple basic manufacturing. Relationships between a c150 to a b777 can be drawen. Just because you don't know anything dose not mean we are all dills. I just noted that there appears to be little or no damage. That is a fact. You and everyone else can draw their own conclusion. Just remember the fdr in the A320 crash and what they brought to court.
kingRB
4th Aug 2015, 01:08
I see reading comprehension is not your strong suit, and confirming that you do not actually have any specific engineering expertise when it comes to wide body transport category aircraft.
If we need any opinions on washed up 150 parts i'll know who to come to.
yr right
4th Aug 2015, 02:06
Ummm incorrect I do have wide body exp. fact is that big med small all rely on the most part on the same principle. Only size is the variance.
Stiff Under Carriage
7th Aug 2015, 22:56
And there we went again.... Another TODAY Show interview with more rubbish and unverified statements.
Conspiracy theory's now.... About all governments.
Desert Flower
7th Aug 2015, 23:06
And there we went again.... Another TODAY Show interview with more rubbish and unverified statements.
He really bagged the ATSB, didn't he? This guy is going to be either horribly right in his theories or horribly wrong - will be interesting to see which!
DF.
Capt Fathom
7th Aug 2015, 23:12
This guy is going to be either horribly right in his theories or horribly wrong - will be interesting to see which!
We will never know what happened onboard that aircraft.
He is making comments knowing his theory will never be tested!
Stiff Under Carriage
8th Aug 2015, 01:55
He really bagged the ATSB, didn't he? This guy is going to be either horribly right in his theories or horribly wrong - will be interesting to see which!
DF.
He certainly did. I find it extremely irresponsible on TODAY Show's part and Bryon. He is not demonstrating a very professional image of pilots or the industry.
It only highlights my opening statement.
We will never know what happened onboard that aircraft.
He is making comments knowing his theory will never be tested!
Exactly. Who's to say his comments are any more valid than the 'baggage handler' he mentioned. Just because he has never flown an aircraft. The arrogance...
Toluene Diisocyanate
8th Aug 2015, 09:55
I saw him on CH7 this morning. He gave Thomas a serve about his incompetence and lack of credibility (without mentioning his name, but stating his insignificant background). That immediately gave him 100 credibility points IMO. It's about time somebody debunked Thomas.
So he must be a good guy.
Wasn't too keen on the way he played up to the reporter in the interview. It sort of cheapened his argument. He needs to keep his eye on the ball with the tabloids like 7, 9, and 10. Not to mention the ALPBC.
The good thing is that it appears Thomas is on the nose in the public media if 7 have dumped him.:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:
gerry111
8th Aug 2015, 10:39
G.T. reappeared on ABC TV the other night.
F.Nose
8th Aug 2015, 13:27
MH370 investigation | Videos | Today | 9Jumpin (http://www.9jumpin.com.au/show/today/videos/4406612289001/)
Stiff Under Carriage
8th Aug 2015, 13:50
Just watched that again... Don't know why I did it to myself.
"...us pilots believe..." Umm, are you speaking on behalf of me too are you?
"...lot of stupid information out there...they are either very stupid or..." Mmmmm
"...ATSB expert is not even qualified on the B777..." He can certainly still be qualified to identify a B777 part.
"...I've written about 12 articles for the Telegraph..." And?
Need I go on. I'm sorry, but this guy needs to stop ...
ramble on
8th Aug 2015, 14:57
How dare he - so far away from whatever happened to these poor people?
Vainglorious & self aggrandising seem appropriate descriptions.....
Ah, yes - there is a little smiley thingy that also seems appropriate....:yuk:
Stanwell
8th Aug 2015, 18:47
"... but this guy needs to stop.."
Yes he does - and so do those who pay such a far-quit.
And they want to get him back!
He may be experienced, but he really doesn't know how to put 'his' theories forward in a convincing manner, when every sentence contains 'stupid'.
He also doesn't understand accident investigation and why the ATSB have sent an investigator to France.
allthecoolnamesarego
9th Aug 2015, 05:16
Who is this guy?
Where do they find these blokes?
Stiff Under Carriage
9th Aug 2015, 05:27
Who is this guy?
Where do they find these blokes?
Post #2 and #8 apparently.
He leaves them hanging... Of course he'll be invited back.
"...I have more info but I cannot reveal at this stage..."
What a load of BS!
yr right
10th Aug 2015, 03:01
Well I did learn something from him.
If you crash sub sonic it's not a high speed crash. But if it is super sonic it a high speed crash.
But still nothing why there is no apparent damage at the leading edge.
but he did say he knew more but can't say
Squawk7700
10th Aug 2015, 04:17
But still nothing why there is no apparent damage at the leading edge.
Is the leading edge protected by the wing from damage in an impact, or does the whole thing hang low? (Question about hinge design I guess)
yr right
10th Aug 2015, 05:57
It's held on with some heavy hinge points and ram points. Think about the loads that are required. Then look at what damage is there. Not saying anything I think the facts speak for them selfs. Trailing edge damage is what I would expect from hitting rocks on beach !