MK Airlines B747 crash at Halifax
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
csomesense,
Nobody around here is going to give you much credit with rantings and ravings like that, but if you really want to meet I should be in London within 2 weeks.
Nobody around here is going to give you much credit with rantings and ravings like that, but if you really want to meet I should be in London within 2 weeks.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: West of ZULU
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone here remember NationAir Canada with the 'accident' in Jeddah?
Here is a great website that accounts the many doings of the owner of this company.
http://www.nationair-canada.com/
Here is a great website that accounts the many doings of the owner of this company.
http://www.nationair-canada.com/
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: european union
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
When I see the reaction of FUEL 100 about MK airlines, it really makes me
furious. The accident in Halifax is to be considered the first real accident
for MK airlines.
Swissair crashed in 1996 in the same area, was Swissair also a tin pot airline?
The 3 previous crashes of MK airlines happened ALL in Nigeria. I assume FUEL100 has never ever flown in Africa, but I can assure him that sometimes You cantrust more the Almighty One , rather than the controltowers over
there.
In 2003, Hydro Air from South Africa, crashed in Lagos because the control
tower had sent them into a closed runway, hitting several pieces of construction
equipment, with luckily no fatalities but a written off airplane.
For what is concerned the crash in Halifax, shouldn't it be better to just wait and
have the results of the investigation, rather than inventing all kind of hipotesis.
Thanks to FUEL 100, actiongroups in Belgium already use his opinion to fight
against MK airlines, really disgusting...
I hope everybody in this professional forum respects our job, at the end of the
story, it is making our living...
Luckily there are still some people like csomesense who act professional.
AL TAYARA
When I see the reaction of FUEL 100 about MK airlines, it really makes me
furious. The accident in Halifax is to be considered the first real accident
for MK airlines.
Swissair crashed in 1996 in the same area, was Swissair also a tin pot airline?
The 3 previous crashes of MK airlines happened ALL in Nigeria. I assume FUEL100 has never ever flown in Africa, but I can assure him that sometimes You cantrust more the Almighty One , rather than the controltowers over
there.
In 2003, Hydro Air from South Africa, crashed in Lagos because the control
tower had sent them into a closed runway, hitting several pieces of construction
equipment, with luckily no fatalities but a written off airplane.
For what is concerned the crash in Halifax, shouldn't it be better to just wait and
have the results of the investigation, rather than inventing all kind of hipotesis.
Thanks to FUEL 100, actiongroups in Belgium already use his opinion to fight
against MK airlines, really disgusting...
I hope everybody in this professional forum respects our job, at the end of the
story, it is making our living...
Luckily there are still some people like csomesense who act professional.
AL TAYARA
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AL TAYARA,
I don't agree with Fuel 100's rant either but you cannot claim this is MK's first real accident. Bent airframes with casualties or fatalities are accidents, real ones!
Yes, I know all about Africa, particularly Nigeria but MK are not the only freighters flying from Europe to Africa. Yes, there are accidents related to operations in Africa but 3!!! in a relatively small fleet such as MK's, I've heard of bad luck but this is taking the biscuit.
You cite a landing on a closed runway, none of MK's accidents were due to this, many African accidents are from the 'one hit wonder' airlines operating a ropey B707 or similar, MK should be better than this, unfortunately they are somewhat lacking.
I don't agree with Fuel 100's rant either but you cannot claim this is MK's first real accident. Bent airframes with casualties or fatalities are accidents, real ones!
Yes, I know all about Africa, particularly Nigeria but MK are not the only freighters flying from Europe to Africa. Yes, there are accidents related to operations in Africa but 3!!! in a relatively small fleet such as MK's, I've heard of bad luck but this is taking the biscuit.
You cite a landing on a closed runway, none of MK's accidents were due to this, many African accidents are from the 'one hit wonder' airlines operating a ropey B707 or similar, MK should be better than this, unfortunately they are somewhat lacking.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Age: 51
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An-124 yes but along with all Ghana registered operators. This has nothing to do with MK , as I understand Ghana Airways failed an FAA inspection in the US last week approx and they immediately banned all Ghana registered aircraft. Totally unconnected to MK or this accident.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Asia
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WST527 Facts please.
The FAA issued Ghana Airways with a directive not to fly their aircraft to the US on or about the 23 July. MK continued operating to the US so it was not all Ghana registered aircraft as you assert. I do not know if MK are allowed to operate there now.
http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePag...l.php?ID=62872
The FAA issued Ghana Airways with a directive not to fly their aircraft to the US on or about the 23 July. MK continued operating to the US so it was not all Ghana registered aircraft as you assert. I do not know if MK are allowed to operate there now.
http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePag...l.php?ID=62872
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: north of the harbour
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, had to come back to ask (and anxiously awaiting comments from all those who so kindly commented on my exit)
Phileas,
"Yes, I know all about Africa, particularly Nigeria but MK are not the only freighters flying from Europe to Africa...in a relatively small fleet such as MK's"
I might be mistaken, but I often hear a MKA callsign south bound from Europe to somewhere in Central/West Africa - so maybe I don't fly there as often as you or they do, but they sure seem to go there a lot. Maybe three hull losses in Nigeria is a large number to look at initially, but how many other airlines have recorded the same number of landings in the same amount of time in that lovely part of the world? Might be an interesting stastistic to investigate? Plus I've heard that they have seven or eight DC-8's and five or six 747's - is this a small operation, in your opinion? I'm just trying to imagine how many people in this "tin pot" airline would share your views?
Rgds (until another decent response presents itself)
PS
Safety Guy
Just got back, been checking the Sharjah crash. Thank God they all got out okay. Do you know if they happened to be using the same computer data system as those poor souls in MK had - I've heard rumour it was issued by Boeing? Any gen?
Phileas,
"Yes, I know all about Africa, particularly Nigeria but MK are not the only freighters flying from Europe to Africa...in a relatively small fleet such as MK's"
I might be mistaken, but I often hear a MKA callsign south bound from Europe to somewhere in Central/West Africa - so maybe I don't fly there as often as you or they do, but they sure seem to go there a lot. Maybe three hull losses in Nigeria is a large number to look at initially, but how many other airlines have recorded the same number of landings in the same amount of time in that lovely part of the world? Might be an interesting stastistic to investigate? Plus I've heard that they have seven or eight DC-8's and five or six 747's - is this a small operation, in your opinion? I'm just trying to imagine how many people in this "tin pot" airline would share your views?
Rgds (until another decent response presents itself)
PS
Safety Guy
Just got back, been checking the Sharjah crash. Thank God they all got out okay. Do you know if they happened to be using the same computer data system as those poor souls in MK had - I've heard rumour it was issued by Boeing? Any gen?
Last edited by csomesense; 11th Nov 2004 at 20:05.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
csomesense,
At the time those incidents occurred, well some of them anyway, MK didn't have any B747's nor indeed any DC8-60's.
Whilst MK is a larger outfit these days I was making reference to the fleet size at the time(s) of the referred to incidents.
In those days, MK were no more different in fleet size to many similar operators, just the others didn't go around bending airframes.
Such a statistic wouldn't be that interesting though, it's appalling!
Phileas
P.S. You used the description 'tin pot', not I!
At the time those incidents occurred, well some of them anyway, MK didn't have any B747's nor indeed any DC8-60's.
Whilst MK is a larger outfit these days I was making reference to the fleet size at the time(s) of the referred to incidents.
In those days, MK were no more different in fleet size to many similar operators, just the others didn't go around bending airframes.
Such a statistic wouldn't be that interesting though, it's appalling!
Phileas
P.S. You used the description 'tin pot', not I!
Last edited by Phileas Fogg; 12th Nov 2004 at 16:09.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: north of the harbour
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phileas,
My sincerest apologies - it wasn't you who first used that comment "tin pot", it was Fuel100. My mistake. Sorry
Interesting point on the stastics though - why do you think that their crash rated is appaling? In my simple mind, if one company goes into Nigeria once a week, and another goes there five or six times a week, then multiply that over five or six years (when was their first hull loss, and when was the second), then the odds seem to multiply at extreme rates, or is my maths up to bother? Not to put too fine a point on it, but these guys seem to go there when no one else would? I know we wouldn't - at least during the period they would! I don't have the experience to figure out the numbers, I was hoping you might? Accurately?
Rgds CSS
My sincerest apologies - it wasn't you who first used that comment "tin pot", it was Fuel100. My mistake. Sorry
Interesting point on the stastics though - why do you think that their crash rated is appaling? In my simple mind, if one company goes into Nigeria once a week, and another goes there five or six times a week, then multiply that over five or six years (when was their first hull loss, and when was the second), then the odds seem to multiply at extreme rates, or is my maths up to bother? Not to put too fine a point on it, but these guys seem to go there when no one else would? I know we wouldn't - at least during the period they would! I don't have the experience to figure out the numbers, I was hoping you might? Accurately?
Rgds CSS
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Asia
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CSS,
Using your logic:
If you apply MK’s hull loss rate per landing, in Nigeria, as a percentage of fleet size and then apply that ratio to Nigeria Airways landings, in Nigeria, then Nigeria Airways would probably write off their fleet once a year. They do not. I wonder why?
Using your logic:
If you apply MK’s hull loss rate per landing, in Nigeria, as a percentage of fleet size and then apply that ratio to Nigeria Airways landings, in Nigeria, then Nigeria Airways would probably write off their fleet once a year. They do not. I wonder why?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK & points middle east
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Csomesense:
As far as I know, none of the AAI/Lufthansa Contract aircraft, or crew use any 'Computerised' Boeing data. All of their performance data is compiled by NavTech and all calculations on the flight deck are done using these tables...not a computer!
As far as I know, none of the AAI/Lufthansa Contract aircraft, or crew use any 'Computerised' Boeing data. All of their performance data is compiled by NavTech and all calculations on the flight deck are done using these tables...not a computer!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: north of the harbour
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paladini,
Thanks for the gen - was just a question. Noteably answered. Will have to dig a bit more before answering.
Fuel 100,
I don't get your point. Because Nigerian Airways haven't written off their fleet once a year, that makes them better than MK? I don't know enough about either airline to comment. But.....
Have you ever heard " Wind 340/5 kts, visibility 7000m in dust haze, weather nil, ???????..............clouds- scatttered at 300 meters, broken at 3000m, tunderstorms in the vicinity, temperature 27, dewpoint 25, QNH 1013"? This is the standard Lagos wx issued every single time I have been into LOS in the past 18 months, and it never seems to change - be it day or night, summer or winter. And I think it might be a bit naive to assume that the Nigerian crews might not be able to gleen(?) a little bit of favouritism from the local controllers, and perhaps a bit more accommadation than a foreign crew might? Ask the crew of that sad looking 747 in LOS with no left wing gear left if they were actually cleared to land on 19R? Why do you think they took the CVR to the hotel with them? Don't assume that the MK crews don't know what they are doing, but look at the whole big picture? Things are sometimes loaded against people who don't go there as often as the locals might? A possibility, maybe? Think about it for a bit? Are you being practical, or just slinging the proverbial **** 'cos this is where you think you'll be heard? What happens when it's your airline, or your flight next time - put yourself in those guys shoes? Humour me? Don't just sling it for the simple reason that people might read and believe - put yourself in their shoes for a moment or two.
And might I hazard to add that we digress from the main topic - has anyone heard anything new on the Halifax crash?
Rgds, Css
Thanks for the gen - was just a question. Noteably answered. Will have to dig a bit more before answering.
Fuel 100,
I don't get your point. Because Nigerian Airways haven't written off their fleet once a year, that makes them better than MK? I don't know enough about either airline to comment. But.....
Have you ever heard " Wind 340/5 kts, visibility 7000m in dust haze, weather nil, ???????..............clouds- scatttered at 300 meters, broken at 3000m, tunderstorms in the vicinity, temperature 27, dewpoint 25, QNH 1013"? This is the standard Lagos wx issued every single time I have been into LOS in the past 18 months, and it never seems to change - be it day or night, summer or winter. And I think it might be a bit naive to assume that the Nigerian crews might not be able to gleen(?) a little bit of favouritism from the local controllers, and perhaps a bit more accommadation than a foreign crew might? Ask the crew of that sad looking 747 in LOS with no left wing gear left if they were actually cleared to land on 19R? Why do you think they took the CVR to the hotel with them? Don't assume that the MK crews don't know what they are doing, but look at the whole big picture? Things are sometimes loaded against people who don't go there as often as the locals might? A possibility, maybe? Think about it for a bit? Are you being practical, or just slinging the proverbial **** 'cos this is where you think you'll be heard? What happens when it's your airline, or your flight next time - put yourself in those guys shoes? Humour me? Don't just sling it for the simple reason that people might read and believe - put yourself in their shoes for a moment or two.
And might I hazard to add that we digress from the main topic - has anyone heard anything new on the Halifax crash?
Rgds, Css
Last edited by csomesense; 14th Nov 2004 at 19:56.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Investigation update: Overloading has been ruled out as a cause of the crash. By the calculations, the 747 was within one percent of the planned weight. TSB's Bill Fowler:
http://canadaeast.com/apps/pbcs.dll/...4/CPN/31935022
The big issues is . . . the aircraft took off with the engines set at substantially reduced power from that required to take off at that weight with this runway in those conditions.
What scenario is the most plausible? Is it mechanical? Is it human error? Is there any other system error that might have led to this?
In the latter portion of the takeoff the thrust went up to maximum. We're confident thrust was available.
What scenario is the most plausible? Is it mechanical? Is it human error? Is there any other system error that might have led to this?
In the latter portion of the takeoff the thrust went up to maximum. We're confident thrust was available.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(Have you ever heard " tunderstorms in the vicinity?)
Only in Ireland!
Csomesense,
You seem to be continuing to make excuses for an airline that you admit you don't know much about.
Regardless of the airport, the weather report etc. other airlines do not going around pranging aeroplanes to the degree that MK have achieved.
Only in Ireland!
Csomesense,
You seem to be continuing to make excuses for an airline that you admit you don't know much about.
Regardless of the airport, the weather report etc. other airlines do not going around pranging aeroplanes to the degree that MK have achieved.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Asia
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok csomesense, I acknowledge the fact that flying in some parts of Africa is more challenging than say, Europe, Middle East, Asia etc. However, rumor has it that MK’s last accident in Nigeria began with a crew modified VOR approach without adhering to the published minima – the aircraft crashed. This kind of behavior cannot be blamed on the country or the continent.
But, as you say, we digress……..
The current rumor is that MK has had their FAA licence revoked (an-124). WST527 said that they have - but the rest of the post was totally incorrect so do not know if to believe even that.
Anyone out there who can categorically refute or confirm the rumor?
But, as you say, we digress……..
The current rumor is that MK has had their FAA licence revoked (an-124). WST527 said that they have - but the rest of the post was totally incorrect so do not know if to believe even that.
Anyone out there who can categorically refute or confirm the rumor?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: north of the harbour
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phileas,
"Tunderstorms" Not trying to pull a fast one, that is they way they say it - 'dem an' de Irish! Also, although I might not know as much about these airlines as you do - I hate to see people being kicked repeatedly while they're down.
Fuel 100,
...Crew modified VOR approach...
Interesting. Any specifics?
Cringe,
Thanks for the update. A bit puzzled by the...
"Fred Chesbro, ....."Some carriers have been known to unwisely suggest to their pilots that they set lower power settings at takeoff and climb in an effort to save wear on the engines," he wrote."
I always thought that was a Boeing recommendation, not the perogative of the carrier to their pilots? Any comments?
"Tunderstorms" Not trying to pull a fast one, that is they way they say it - 'dem an' de Irish! Also, although I might not know as much about these airlines as you do - I hate to see people being kicked repeatedly while they're down.
Fuel 100,
...Crew modified VOR approach...
Interesting. Any specifics?
Cringe,
Thanks for the update. A bit puzzled by the...
"Fred Chesbro, ....."Some carriers have been known to unwisely suggest to their pilots that they set lower power settings at takeoff and climb in an effort to save wear on the engines," he wrote."
I always thought that was a Boeing recommendation, not the perogative of the carrier to their pilots? Any comments?
Last edited by csomesense; 15th Nov 2004 at 20:03.