Air France crash at YYZ (Merged)
Rockhound
Re "ask the pilots", crisis management. All parties in the industry and particularly AF, Airbus and Toronto, will want this accident quickly forgotten by the traveling public. Best way to accomplish that is keep news to the bare minimum of soothing words. Thirty, forty years ago it might have been quite normal for a pilot to talk, get it off his chest, discuss, immediately after the event, with peers or perhaps with anyone who'd listen. Today it seems more the norm to keep those involved "sterile" until they can be interviewed in a formal environment. And to keep the results of those interviews reserved until the final report's issued.
I say this with a little trepidation because it's been a looong time since I've been directly involved in aviation. But I've seen the trend very much first hand in a related area of transport, marine. One thing US style litigation has taught us is to keep our traps tightly shut.
And you can bet your boots the Toronto accident litigation will last for years. Ironically, probably longer because everyone survived.
p.s. edited to note Rockhound's comment below re the FO being interviewed by TSB. I'd expect everything in that interview to have been recorded and signed off by all involved!
p.p.s. edited again to note 747focal's quoting (on a new thread which will probably be merged here) an article that comments on some of the slides not deploying. The article mentions a $62 million lawsuit brought by one of the passengers against AF and the airport for negligence. Here we go...
Re "ask the pilots", crisis management. All parties in the industry and particularly AF, Airbus and Toronto, will want this accident quickly forgotten by the traveling public. Best way to accomplish that is keep news to the bare minimum of soothing words. Thirty, forty years ago it might have been quite normal for a pilot to talk, get it off his chest, discuss, immediately after the event, with peers or perhaps with anyone who'd listen. Today it seems more the norm to keep those involved "sterile" until they can be interviewed in a formal environment. And to keep the results of those interviews reserved until the final report's issued.
I say this with a little trepidation because it's been a looong time since I've been directly involved in aviation. But I've seen the trend very much first hand in a related area of transport, marine. One thing US style litigation has taught us is to keep our traps tightly shut.
And you can bet your boots the Toronto accident litigation will last for years. Ironically, probably longer because everyone survived.
p.s. edited to note Rockhound's comment below re the FO being interviewed by TSB. I'd expect everything in that interview to have been recorded and signed off by all involved!
p.p.s. edited again to note 747focal's quoting (on a new thread which will probably be merged here) an article that comments on some of the slides not deploying. The article mentions a $62 million lawsuit brought by one of the passengers against AF and the airport for negligence. Here we go...
Last edited by broadreach; 7th Aug 2005 at 05:01.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Rolling Thunder - it is very curious. Of course, Paul Koring of the Globe and Mail might say, what's the point of interviewing the pilots, the answers to the crucial questions will come from the flight recorders.
Actually, to be fair, PK did write that the lead investigator for the TSB stated that the co-pilot had been very frank in his discussions with the TSB team.
Rockhound
Actually, to be fair, PK did write that the lead investigator for the TSB stated that the co-pilot had been very frank in his discussions with the TSB team.
Rockhound
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probe: Half of jet's doors didn't work (Air France Flight 358)
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html
TORONTO, Ontario (AP) -- Investigators trying to determine why an Air France jet skidded off a runway said Saturday that only four of the aircraft's eight doors and emergency exits were used to escape the burning jetliner, and that two emergency slides malfunctioned.
Real Levasseur of Canada's Transportation Safety Board said one of the four exit doors used by the 309 passengers and crew in their rush to disembark was difficult to open, and that the fire after the crash last Tuesday may have prevented access to the other doors.
Levasseur also said two of the slides used failed to work, even though they are supposed to automatically unfold when the emergency doors are opened.
The discovery confirms comments by many passengers and witnesses who said some of the slides and emergency exists were not functioning, forcing people to jump from as high as 4 or 5 yards.
Some aviation experts have surmised that the impact of the Airbus A340, which slammed into a ravine, might have damaged the exit doors and chutes.
Levasseur said two experts from the U.S. manufacturer of the chutes, Goodrich Corp., and one from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board were on site looking at why the slides and doors failed to work.
Air France Flight 358 landed at Lester B. Pearson International Airport amid heavy thunderstorms, skidding off the east-west runway some 218 yards and then slamming into a ravine.
Remarkably, none of the 309 passengers and crew members died, though at least 43 people were injured and several remained hospitalized Saturday.
Veronique Brachet, an Air France spokeswoman, said the pilot was still hospitalized with compressed vertebrae.
$62 million lawsuit
Meanwhile, a passenger has filed a class-action lawsuit against Air France, Toronto airport authorities and a Canadian private air navigation service, accusing them of negligence, the Toronto Star reported.
The suit, filed Friday, asks for $62 million. An Air France spokesman declined comment on the lawsuit.
The plane's flight data and voice recorders were found intact, and investigators said they should have details within days to help them determine what caused the late afternoon crash. There have been questions about whether the 9,000-foot runway is long enough, and whether it is safe to have the ravine at its end.
Lucie Vignola, a spokeswoman for the federal transportation ministry Transport Canada, said a plan to require clear, nearly flat runway extensions was under consideration before Tuesday's accident.
She said Transport Canada decided to go ahead with the plan after it became clear that international standards are shifting to require additional room at the end of runways. The department has not determined how long the safety areas would be, Vignola said.
The Air Line Pilots Association said Pearson does not have sufficient safe areas at the end of runways, including the one on which Flight 358 attempted to land.
"This runway is not as long as what you find at most international airports, so the important of an adequate overrun is increased, and this accident is an example why," said Capt. Tom Bunn, a retired commercial airline pilot of 30 years for Pan and United Airlines, who now runs fear-of-flying courses.
The gully at the end of the runway has also been a source of contention. A coroner's jury recommended filling in the gully, or extending a causeway over it, after a 1978 incident in which an Air Canada DC9 aborted takeoff and ended up in the gully, killing two passengers.
Steve Shaw, a spokesman for the Greater Toronto Airports Authority, said that after the 1978 accident, the gully was graded so the slope was not so severe, but it was not filled in.
TORONTO, Ontario (AP) -- Investigators trying to determine why an Air France jet skidded off a runway said Saturday that only four of the aircraft's eight doors and emergency exits were used to escape the burning jetliner, and that two emergency slides malfunctioned.
Real Levasseur of Canada's Transportation Safety Board said one of the four exit doors used by the 309 passengers and crew in their rush to disembark was difficult to open, and that the fire after the crash last Tuesday may have prevented access to the other doors.
Levasseur also said two of the slides used failed to work, even though they are supposed to automatically unfold when the emergency doors are opened.
The discovery confirms comments by many passengers and witnesses who said some of the slides and emergency exists were not functioning, forcing people to jump from as high as 4 or 5 yards.
Some aviation experts have surmised that the impact of the Airbus A340, which slammed into a ravine, might have damaged the exit doors and chutes.
Levasseur said two experts from the U.S. manufacturer of the chutes, Goodrich Corp., and one from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board were on site looking at why the slides and doors failed to work.
Air France Flight 358 landed at Lester B. Pearson International Airport amid heavy thunderstorms, skidding off the east-west runway some 218 yards and then slamming into a ravine.
Remarkably, none of the 309 passengers and crew members died, though at least 43 people were injured and several remained hospitalized Saturday.
Veronique Brachet, an Air France spokeswoman, said the pilot was still hospitalized with compressed vertebrae.
$62 million lawsuit
Meanwhile, a passenger has filed a class-action lawsuit against Air France, Toronto airport authorities and a Canadian private air navigation service, accusing them of negligence, the Toronto Star reported.
The suit, filed Friday, asks for $62 million. An Air France spokesman declined comment on the lawsuit.
The plane's flight data and voice recorders were found intact, and investigators said they should have details within days to help them determine what caused the late afternoon crash. There have been questions about whether the 9,000-foot runway is long enough, and whether it is safe to have the ravine at its end.
Lucie Vignola, a spokeswoman for the federal transportation ministry Transport Canada, said a plan to require clear, nearly flat runway extensions was under consideration before Tuesday's accident.
She said Transport Canada decided to go ahead with the plan after it became clear that international standards are shifting to require additional room at the end of runways. The department has not determined how long the safety areas would be, Vignola said.
The Air Line Pilots Association said Pearson does not have sufficient safe areas at the end of runways, including the one on which Flight 358 attempted to land.
"This runway is not as long as what you find at most international airports, so the important of an adequate overrun is increased, and this accident is an example why," said Capt. Tom Bunn, a retired commercial airline pilot of 30 years for Pan and United Airlines, who now runs fear-of-flying courses.
The gully at the end of the runway has also been a source of contention. A coroner's jury recommended filling in the gully, or extending a causeway over it, after a 1978 incident in which an Air Canada DC9 aborted takeoff and ended up in the gully, killing two passengers.
Steve Shaw, a spokesman for the Greater Toronto Airports Authority, said that after the 1978 accident, the gully was graded so the slope was not so severe, but it was not filled in.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A disclaimer - all this is second hand info, so maybe someone in the know can verify or shed light on the substance of it:
When QF damaged a door on its A330, it merrily sent the jet to the hangar, took the door off, rang airbus and said how do we fix it. The response "what do you mean you have taken the door off? The door is part of the structure of the aircraft"
The reason I raise this is that if the door is part of the structure then in a moderate aircraft prang, I assume the fuselage will be distorted to some degree, thereby making door operation harder to impossible. Of course if the aircraft is in a smoldering wreck the door design is irrelevant.
is there a difference in design philosphy between Airbus and Boeing in doors (aside from the obvious A vs B differences) or because Airbus (like boeing) has to satisfy the FAA they should have similar standards?......
Does the evacuation aspect consider door and fuselage strength (i know boeing door frames are sigificantly re-enforced) or merely door size, assisted opening operations and escape slides?
When QF damaged a door on its A330, it merrily sent the jet to the hangar, took the door off, rang airbus and said how do we fix it. The response "what do you mean you have taken the door off? The door is part of the structure of the aircraft"
The reason I raise this is that if the door is part of the structure then in a moderate aircraft prang, I assume the fuselage will be distorted to some degree, thereby making door operation harder to impossible. Of course if the aircraft is in a smoldering wreck the door design is irrelevant.
is there a difference in design philosphy between Airbus and Boeing in doors (aside from the obvious A vs B differences) or because Airbus (like boeing) has to satisfy the FAA they should have similar standards?......
Does the evacuation aspect consider door and fuselage strength (i know boeing door frames are sigificantly re-enforced) or merely door size, assisted opening operations and escape slides?
Combine Operations
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K.
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
"Captain is still in hospital with undetermined back injury. Still has not been interviewed. One wonders why not?"
Medical reasons - he has a back injury. At the moment, the hospital authorities are in command, which is as it must be.
Nobody knows the reasons yet, probably not even the crew. The Captain is going through hell, and on top of that he has a back injury.
He's one of us, guys. Let's show a bit of compassion.
"Captain is still in hospital with undetermined back injury. Still has not been interviewed. One wonders why not?"
Medical reasons - he has a back injury. At the moment, the hospital authorities are in command, which is as it must be.
Nobody knows the reasons yet, probably not even the crew. The Captain is going through hell, and on top of that he has a back injury.
He's one of us, guys. Let's show a bit of compassion.
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: 5530N
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just my bit...this thing about half the doors not opening.
well when a fuselage is buckled on top of plug type doors, frightening as it is this is to be expected. Certification is done on useable doors not on ones that have stressed from a fusealge that has buckled.
The one frightening thing for me on Airbuses and I'm in the game a long time is there have been numerous incidents of brake failures. Does it mention it in the QRH? No. One is expected to memorise the action of feet off the brakes, select NWS/Anti skid off and then apply alternate brakes. My company had this happen a 321 on a short rwy....the crew were grey post flight.
The smoke checklist is a shambles also.....rant over.
Whatever the outcome of the A340 rwy excursion, there will be lessons for us all to learn.
well when a fuselage is buckled on top of plug type doors, frightening as it is this is to be expected. Certification is done on useable doors not on ones that have stressed from a fusealge that has buckled.
The one frightening thing for me on Airbuses and I'm in the game a long time is there have been numerous incidents of brake failures. Does it mention it in the QRH? No. One is expected to memorise the action of feet off the brakes, select NWS/Anti skid off and then apply alternate brakes. My company had this happen a 321 on a short rwy....the crew were grey post flight.
The smoke checklist is a shambles also.....rant over.
Whatever the outcome of the A340 rwy excursion, there will be lessons for us all to learn.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Canadian Press (CP)::
I guess the tires didn't burn in the ensuing fire.
From AFP
Indeed, it is even more remarkable that passengers and crew were able to safely evacuate the plane so quickly with so many non-functioning exits.
On American television, there were interviews with a civilian who, with a friend, rushed to the plane after the crash. These two individuals managed to hoist themselves into the cabin and apparently did a sweep down both aisles from back to front to be sure everybody was out. If this happened as described, this may suggest a longer time interval before the post-crash fire took hold.
[edited to remove comment on a post by vfenext re: Airbus-Boeing which was subsequently deleted.]
.....Two experts from the manufacturer of the slide and one from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board were on site looking at why the slides didn't work as advertised, Levasseur said.
As well, one runway expert from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration is working with the Canadian team, looking at tire marks on the runway at Pearson International Airport to determine if the Airbus A-340 hydroplaned in the severe rain storm Tuesday.
But at this point in the investigation, the plane doesn't appear to have hydroplaned, Levasseur said.
"If there was hydroplaning, it didn't last very long."
He reasoned that there wasn't enough damage done to the plane's tires to indicate the four-engine jet skidded along because of the water. Hydroplaning, he said, usually causes the water underneath a plane to boil, melting parts of the tire.
Levasseur also said he didn't think a sudden storm-produced microburst - a very small cell of intense downward wind - caused the plane to crash.
"If an aircraft was close to the ground and passed a microburst it could crash," he said. "But I was told that there was no microburst that day."
Only two members of the crew, the captain of the plane and a flight attendant, remain in Toronto.
As well, one runway expert from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration is working with the Canadian team, looking at tire marks on the runway at Pearson International Airport to determine if the Airbus A-340 hydroplaned in the severe rain storm Tuesday.
But at this point in the investigation, the plane doesn't appear to have hydroplaned, Levasseur said.
"If there was hydroplaning, it didn't last very long."
He reasoned that there wasn't enough damage done to the plane's tires to indicate the four-engine jet skidded along because of the water. Hydroplaning, he said, usually causes the water underneath a plane to boil, melting parts of the tire.
Levasseur also said he didn't think a sudden storm-produced microburst - a very small cell of intense downward wind - caused the plane to crash.
"If an aircraft was close to the ground and passed a microburst it could crash," he said. "But I was told that there was no microburst that day."
Only two members of the crew, the captain of the plane and a flight attendant, remain in Toronto.
From AFP
...Air France chief executive Jean-Cyril Spinetta said the captain was "in excellent physical condition" after visiting him in hospital Thursday, but added the crash may have left some crew and passengers psychologically traumatized.
....Passengers Carla Sbrugnera and her husband Enrico Giacomuzzi Moore suffered the worst injuries in the crash -- she fractured three vertebrae and he fractured one, doctors said.
....The couple were sitting in the first row in first class at the front of the plane when it fell into a gully. Giacomuzzi Moore put his head between his legs and his knee was thrown up and broke his nose, Knipping said.
The couple were still able to exit the aircraft on their own, but Sbrugnera hit other passengers crowded at the bottom of the chute during her escape, he said.
....Passengers Carla Sbrugnera and her husband Enrico Giacomuzzi Moore suffered the worst injuries in the crash -- she fractured three vertebrae and he fractured one, doctors said.
....The couple were sitting in the first row in first class at the front of the plane when it fell into a gully. Giacomuzzi Moore put his head between his legs and his knee was thrown up and broke his nose, Knipping said.
The couple were still able to exit the aircraft on their own, but Sbrugnera hit other passengers crowded at the bottom of the chute during her escape, he said.
On American television, there were interviews with a civilian who, with a friend, rushed to the plane after the crash. These two individuals managed to hoist themselves into the cabin and apparently did a sweep down both aisles from back to front to be sure everybody was out. If this happened as described, this may suggest a longer time interval before the post-crash fire took hold.
[edited to remove comment on a post by vfenext re: Airbus-Boeing which was subsequently deleted.]
Last edited by SaturnV; 7th Aug 2005 at 19:20.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sun, August 7, 2005
Crew of doomed flight returns home
By VERONICA HENRI, Sun Media
Aboard Air France flight 359 -- Peering through the tiny oval windows, crew members tried for one last glimpse of the burned wreckage they walked away from on Tuesday.
They were on their way home to Paris Friday night, the wreckage of Flight 358 still the focus of a meticulous investigation, but their ordeal in Toronto was over.
They sipped champagne and relaxed in luxurious leather seats while scoping out the scene below as they rapidly ascended into the sky.
The crew talked in French about "sadness" and "losing barometric pressure" as they got their last -- and possibly first -- glimpse since amazingly walking away from the crash landing at the end of Runway 24L.
A matronly woman, wearing a conservative skirt and printed blouse, moved from crew member to crew member, looking them in the eyes, and comforting and consoling them throughout the flight.
Wearing their street clothes so they looked like any other passenger, they laughed and used their cellphones to take pictures of each other before getting down to business of filling out endless forms on Air France letterhead.
But afterwards, there was plenty of time to relax on the way home.
They ate meals of duck foie gras terrine, Camembert cheese with baguettes and filet de boeuf as they watched movies on personal screens while sipping wine.
Their uniformed co-workers attended to their every need, often indulging in long conversations, sitting by their sides -- just as they had done to passengers on the flight to Toronto days ago.
After a nap, one male crew member opened the French newspaper Le Parisien.
The headlines read: "Crash de Toronto. Polemique sur l'ouverture de l'aeroport" roughly translated as: Toronto crash: The debate on opening the airport.
A half hour from Paris preparations began for their arrival at Charles de Gaulle airport.
As the gates opened, security forces in bright green jackets filled the plane's exit ramp.
All regular passengers would disembark before Air France's precious cargo -- the crew members of Flight 358 -- were released.
They did not leave with the others. Holding passports in one hand and luggage in the other, they would not be released to face awaiting TV crews, photographers and reporters outside the gate.
Instead, they slipped quietly and unnoticed down a metal stairway directly from the plane to the tarmac, where a bus carried them on the last leg of their journey -- off to waiting families and colleagues who would hail them as heroes, while investigators continue to search for the answers to what happened on that fateful flight to Toronto
Crew of doomed flight returns home
By VERONICA HENRI, Sun Media
Aboard Air France flight 359 -- Peering through the tiny oval windows, crew members tried for one last glimpse of the burned wreckage they walked away from on Tuesday.
They were on their way home to Paris Friday night, the wreckage of Flight 358 still the focus of a meticulous investigation, but their ordeal in Toronto was over.
They sipped champagne and relaxed in luxurious leather seats while scoping out the scene below as they rapidly ascended into the sky.
The crew talked in French about "sadness" and "losing barometric pressure" as they got their last -- and possibly first -- glimpse since amazingly walking away from the crash landing at the end of Runway 24L.
A matronly woman, wearing a conservative skirt and printed blouse, moved from crew member to crew member, looking them in the eyes, and comforting and consoling them throughout the flight.
Wearing their street clothes so they looked like any other passenger, they laughed and used their cellphones to take pictures of each other before getting down to business of filling out endless forms on Air France letterhead.
But afterwards, there was plenty of time to relax on the way home.
They ate meals of duck foie gras terrine, Camembert cheese with baguettes and filet de boeuf as they watched movies on personal screens while sipping wine.
Their uniformed co-workers attended to their every need, often indulging in long conversations, sitting by their sides -- just as they had done to passengers on the flight to Toronto days ago.
After a nap, one male crew member opened the French newspaper Le Parisien.
The headlines read: "Crash de Toronto. Polemique sur l'ouverture de l'aeroport" roughly translated as: Toronto crash: The debate on opening the airport.
A half hour from Paris preparations began for their arrival at Charles de Gaulle airport.
As the gates opened, security forces in bright green jackets filled the plane's exit ramp.
All regular passengers would disembark before Air France's precious cargo -- the crew members of Flight 358 -- were released.
They did not leave with the others. Holding passports in one hand and luggage in the other, they would not be released to face awaiting TV crews, photographers and reporters outside the gate.
Instead, they slipped quietly and unnoticed down a metal stairway directly from the plane to the tarmac, where a bus carried them on the last leg of their journey -- off to waiting families and colleagues who would hail them as heroes, while investigators continue to search for the answers to what happened on that fateful flight to Toronto
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tamarama beach
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now folks, how can anyone expect in his own mind that all doors will be operational after such a shock ?? The fuselage as twited and broken as it is I think it a marvel that everyone walked out alive under the circumstances. Forget Airbus / Boeing, it's just a broken airplane twisted and broken in 2 pieces to think that Boeing would have ended up any better is a farce.
By the way, did anyone on this thread praise the cabin crew for their action ?? Cuz at the end of the day, they're the one who did right.
I can't believe the amount of mumbo jumbo and hilarious speculations I have been reading on this site. Like my doctor says, there is always a 99 % chance that the most obvious turns out to be the truth.
Me, I'm just patiently waiting for Mr levasseur statement once he's read the black boxes report. I can already see canadian lawyers druling over it. Like a Xmas present on their practice's doorstep and work for years to come.
By the way, did anyone on this thread praise the cabin crew for their action ?? Cuz at the end of the day, they're the one who did right.
I can't believe the amount of mumbo jumbo and hilarious speculations I have been reading on this site. Like my doctor says, there is always a 99 % chance that the most obvious turns out to be the truth.
Me, I'm just patiently waiting for Mr levasseur statement once he's read the black boxes report. I can already see canadian lawyers druling over it. Like a Xmas present on their practice's doorstep and work for years to come.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now folks, how can anyone expect in his own mind that all doors will be operational after such a shock ?? The fuselage as twited and broken as it is
Have a look at the photos Wally. Most of your posts are confrontational, but what more you we expect from a French flying Australian... you have just been included in my "Ignore list".
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
only four of the aircraft's eight doors and emergency exits were used to escape the burning jetliner
16B
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tamarama beach
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ouch ! Woddie
So be it; I'll cosily nest in your ignore list; feel comfy already.
Let me then transmit blind from my limbo:
Has it occured to you that the cabin crew, given the proximity of the ground, might have disarmed the chute ?? dunno but what would the exit have looked like with an almost horizontal looking chute ? It could almost have looked like a beach party with people hopping out and about on a trampolino !
Only throwing my 2 pence in.
So be it; I'll cosily nest in your ignore list; feel comfy already.
Let me then transmit blind from my limbo:
Has it occured to you that the cabin crew, given the proximity of the ground, might have disarmed the chute ?? dunno but what would the exit have looked like with an almost horizontal looking chute ? It could almost have looked like a beach party with people hopping out and about on a trampolino !
Only throwing my 2 pence in.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hopefully we can leave the Airbus / Boeing and France / UK stuff out of the way and get back to the facts.
I am still trying to work out how two members of the public would have been casually wondering around the crash site. Is this ravine not still within the boundaries of the airport, or am I missing something?
I am still trying to work out how two members of the public would have been casually wondering around the crash site. Is this ravine not still within the boundaries of the airport, or am I missing something?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To comment on Wallabie's query as to whether the cabin crew may have disarmed the doors, I have to say it is highly unlikely. In 8 years as crew, including operating on the A340, the only occassion when we would possibly put a door into manual is in a ditching (and then only certain doors etc).
Having been down to the hangar to blow slides for a C-check on a 737 I can confirm of the 2 doors we opened only 1 slide actually blew. Doesn't suprise me at all that a slide might not blow following an incident such as this.
Having been down to the hangar to blow slides for a C-check on a 737 I can confirm of the 2 doors we opened only 1 slide actually blew. Doesn't suprise me at all that a slide might not blow following an incident such as this.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The "Mass Media" versus "The Truth"?
I agree with wallabie. Even in everyday political or current events news, the media leaves out so much information-obvious information which should be answered - when they present their so-called "news" that it would be a waste of everyone's time to assume that all the "hoopla" we are hearing from the "news" is either accurate or complete.
These "journalists", whose jobs are supposed to present as complete a picture of the facts as possible, without speculation on complete unknowns like we are facing at this stage of the Air France crash, basically just do this to make money and hardly ever inform anyone of anything. Even these "news analyses" or "detailed" reports are a farce.
So, such a technical and precise matter as an A340 crash is completely beyond the mass media's ability to report or, for that matter, comprehend, without any bias or accuracy in my opinion.
Let's just wait for the true professionals to examine the black boxes and other physical evidence and report back before speculating on open and closed doors, shall we? At least with them, even if they may have their own imperfections, we can be MORE sure of the facts than any jibberish reported by the media.
John
These "journalists", whose jobs are supposed to present as complete a picture of the facts as possible, without speculation on complete unknowns like we are facing at this stage of the Air France crash, basically just do this to make money and hardly ever inform anyone of anything. Even these "news analyses" or "detailed" reports are a farce.
So, such a technical and precise matter as an A340 crash is completely beyond the mass media's ability to report or, for that matter, comprehend, without any bias or accuracy in my opinion.
Let's just wait for the true professionals to examine the black boxes and other physical evidence and report back before speculating on open and closed doors, shall we? At least with them, even if they may have their own imperfections, we can be MORE sure of the facts than any jibberish reported by the media.
John
stick to the facts. The pictures show two of the exits with the doors fully open but no slides, just passengers jumping. I could understand where you were coming from if the doors had not opened with the fuselage "twited and broken" as you put it, but they were open and the slides had not deployed.
What we have to look at and hear is evidence. For the armchair analysts here the facts do require experience and/or analysis and typically follow an investigation looking at all possibilities.
My cursory review of the photos seem to show that chutes are visible under the open doors although by the time the photos were taken the all the chutes appeared deflated.
So as armchair analysts are we to assume that these visible chutes were not deployed, deployed but unusable, or deployed and usable for a period of time. Thankfully the chute designer and other experts are available to examine this evidence for us and to provide facts via the Safety Board.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lomapaseo, from AFP today:
If one prefers the description en francais, the following is from Liberation.
jabird:
The civilians apparently came from the motorway adjacent to the ravine. It is very close. Some passengers also quickly reached this motorway, and were picked up by vehicles that had stopped.
Real Levasseur, the lead investigator for the Canadian transportation safety agency, told reporters that because fire had broken out, just four of eight emergency exits were opened to evacuate the plane.
Out of the four, he added, only two had functioning chutes upon which the passengers could slide down to the ground. Passengers fleeing from the other two exits were forced to leap two metres (six feet) to the ground, resulting in a number of slight injuries.
Out of the four, he added, only two had functioning chutes upon which the passengers could slide down to the ground. Passengers fleeing from the other two exits were forced to leap two metres (six feet) to the ground, resulting in a number of slight injuries.
TORONTO - ....Deux toboggans de l'Airbus d'Air France sorti de piste mardi à Toronto ont mal fonctionné, ont déclaré samedi les enquêteurs, ajoutant qu'ils examinent les traces de pneus pour déterminer pourquoi l'avion a dérapé en fin de piste.
....Ils ont précisé que quatre des portes et des sorties de secours de l'appareil avaient été utilisées pendant l'évacuation d'urgence et que des experts - notamment de Goodrich Corp., fabricant des toboggans - avaient été convoqués pour déterminer pourquoi deux d'entre eux ont mal fonctionné et pourquoi une porte a été difficile à ouvrir.
"Ils sont actuellement sur le site avec l'équipe et ils tentent de voir pourquoi ces toboggans et (la porte) n'ont pas bien fonctionné", a dit Réal Levasseur, du Bureau de sécurité des transports du Canada.
....Ils ont précisé que quatre des portes et des sorties de secours de l'appareil avaient été utilisées pendant l'évacuation d'urgence et que des experts - notamment de Goodrich Corp., fabricant des toboggans - avaient été convoqués pour déterminer pourquoi deux d'entre eux ont mal fonctionné et pourquoi une porte a été difficile à ouvrir.
"Ils sont actuellement sur le site avec l'équipe et ils tentent de voir pourquoi ces toboggans et (la porte) n'ont pas bien fonctionné", a dit Réal Levasseur, du Bureau de sécurité des transports du Canada.
The civilians apparently came from the motorway adjacent to the ravine. It is very close. Some passengers also quickly reached this motorway, and were picked up by vehicles that had stopped.