Afriqiyah Airbus 330 Crash
As a mere SLF with a keen interest in the aviation industry, I often lurk but rarely post on this forum, preferring to hear what professionals have to say about such incidents as what has tragically occured in Tripoli.
I am somewhat puzzelled at why the moderator's on this occasion have not yet removed posts by a user calling themself 'sharksandwich' that are sweeping, unsubstantiated general statements that in no way contribute to the discussion here. A quick search of the ASN database reveals that one model of the boeing 737, the -200, has been involved in some 95 accidents resulting in hull loss and 2446 fatalities since introduction into service in 1967 (i stand to be corrected on the year).
The A330, introduced in the mid 1990s has been involved in 4 hull loss accidents resulting in 339 fatalities. approx 600 A330s have been built and just over 1100 732s. The A330 has a passenger capacity 2.5-3 times larger than the 732. Based on these numbers I fail to see how the A330 is a particularly dangerous aircraft that should be withdrawn from service.
I suggest sharksandwich you research the history of the DC-10 if you would like to see a disproportionately high number of accidents/incidents. And even the DC-10 is still safely operated today. Even the trusty old 727 found heavy criticism in early service following some high profile accidents attributed to high sink rates due to the design of the aircraft, and it too continues in service today without a redesign...
Apologies for the thread drift to the real professionals out there. I respect your opinions because you back them up with real world knowledge and experience.
I am somewhat puzzelled at why the moderator's on this occasion have not yet removed posts by a user calling themself 'sharksandwich' that are sweeping, unsubstantiated general statements that in no way contribute to the discussion here. A quick search of the ASN database reveals that one model of the boeing 737, the -200, has been involved in some 95 accidents resulting in hull loss and 2446 fatalities since introduction into service in 1967 (i stand to be corrected on the year).
The A330, introduced in the mid 1990s has been involved in 4 hull loss accidents resulting in 339 fatalities. approx 600 A330s have been built and just over 1100 732s. The A330 has a passenger capacity 2.5-3 times larger than the 732. Based on these numbers I fail to see how the A330 is a particularly dangerous aircraft that should be withdrawn from service.
I suggest sharksandwich you research the history of the DC-10 if you would like to see a disproportionately high number of accidents/incidents. And even the DC-10 is still safely operated today. Even the trusty old 727 found heavy criticism in early service following some high profile accidents attributed to high sink rates due to the design of the aircraft, and it too continues in service today without a redesign...
Apologies for the thread drift to the real professionals out there. I respect your opinions because you back them up with real world knowledge and experience.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chester, Cheshire, UK
Age: 68
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
someguyonthedeck,
I'm also SLF and come here hoping to find a balanced, professional, view of the facts of aviation incidents. Sadly, as you have found, while there is a lot of real factual detail in here from the majority who are truely intelligent, professional and knowledgeable people (not just aircrew but also ground and other SLF like ourselves) I find myself having to sit through what are often little more than schoolyard arguements from a minority of egotistical idiots.
Fortunately the good generally outweighs the bad, you just have to persevere.
I'm also SLF and come here hoping to find a balanced, professional, view of the facts of aviation incidents. Sadly, as you have found, while there is a lot of real factual detail in here from the majority who are truely intelligent, professional and knowledgeable people (not just aircrew but also ground and other SLF like ourselves) I find myself having to sit through what are often little more than schoolyard arguements from a minority of egotistical idiots.
Fortunately the good generally outweighs the bad, you just have to persevere.
SomeGuyOnTheDeck, JustaWanab, Cleared Visual;
Not mistaken...you're just seeing what usually happens immediately after a serious/fatal accident. One or two have contributed something worth reading. There are a few who clearly have their biases and are well worth ignoring. Most in between know nothing and aren't shy about proving it.
For obvious reasons you won't find professional pilots, safety specialists or accident investigators offering their thoughts on this thread. Not at the moment anyway.
However look around PPRuNe; there are many threads, the AF447 one for example, where a high degree of professionalism, knowledge and experience have been offered by serious contributors who know what they're talking about, that are truly worth spending time reading on.
At present, experienced, knowledgable members know that their contributions won't even be read or valued. The signal to noise ratio is far too high. Perhaps check back in a while. In the meantime, please don't consider the level of discussion here, especially the usual conspiracy and standard anti-Airbus agendas an indication of the kind of thinking that can actually go on in a serious discussion between those who do the work and know stuff.
I don't get the feeling that this outcome had anything to do with the airport, the navaids, ATC or the country the accident occurred in.
PJ2
Originally Posted by SomeGuyOnTheDeck
I registered (as SLF) on this forum a week or two ago, under the impression that professional pilots used this forum. Having read the ludicrous conspiracy theories, pointless speculation, and egocentric self-promotion that passes for 'argument' on this forum, I can only hope I was mistaken...
For obvious reasons you won't find professional pilots, safety specialists or accident investigators offering their thoughts on this thread. Not at the moment anyway.
However look around PPRuNe; there are many threads, the AF447 one for example, where a high degree of professionalism, knowledge and experience have been offered by serious contributors who know what they're talking about, that are truly worth spending time reading on.
At present, experienced, knowledgable members know that their contributions won't even be read or valued. The signal to noise ratio is far too high. Perhaps check back in a while. In the meantime, please don't consider the level of discussion here, especially the usual conspiracy and standard anti-Airbus agendas an indication of the kind of thinking that can actually go on in a serious discussion between those who do the work and know stuff.
I don't get the feeling that this outcome had anything to do with the airport, the navaids, ATC or the country the accident occurred in.
PJ2
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Africa
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SomeGuy
The intelligent discussion is usually to be found in JetBlast. For some reason, the mods insist on sending this drivel down there when it reaches critical mass. Once there it's usually kicked into shape or ignored and allowed to die.
You could always do what those who know better do - Play Mornington Crescent while they wait for the accident report to be released.
The intelligent discussion is usually to be found in JetBlast. For some reason, the mods insist on sending this drivel down there when it reaches critical mass. Once there it's usually kicked into shape or ignored and allowed to die.
You could always do what those who know better do - Play Mornington Crescent while they wait for the accident report to be released.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For obvious reasons you won't find professional pilots, safety specialists or accident investigators offering their thoughts on this thread. Not at the moment anyway.
The AF447 thread you spoke of, I offered many an informed viewpoint within by the way sir.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The world
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the technology versus raw data
You have a very good point my friend. With the tech, gps and map displays one should think it is the one to use. But the authorities insist on raw data. Having said that ...no one can Monday night quarterback the guys flying. Let's just say a prayer for them. We as pilots live in the soapers' house, meaning we can all slip and slide any day. That is why we must keep our witts.
vapilot2004;
I wasn't referring to your own good work, which I know. I think most who have read this thread have separated the wheat from the chaff; my apologies nevertheless, if you felt my thoughts were in your general direction. I was attempting to reassure a newly-joined poster who describes himself as an "SLF", (dislike the term - too disrespectful of those who pay our salary but I've lost that battle!), and offered a view which I suspected risked being mis-interpreted but which also offered encouragement.
PJ2
I wasn't referring to your own good work, which I know. I think most who have read this thread have separated the wheat from the chaff; my apologies nevertheless, if you felt my thoughts were in your general direction. I was attempting to reassure a newly-joined poster who describes himself as an "SLF", (dislike the term - too disrespectful of those who pay our salary but I've lost that battle!), and offered a view which I suspected risked being mis-interpreted but which also offered encouragement.
PJ2
Originally Posted by nojwod
It's reasonable to assume that if the authorities state that the pilot had called for emergency services prior to reaching the airport then that's what happened.
Wake up! It's Libya we are talking about here. Compared to Libyan official statements, this thread may be considered reliable factual information.
Last edited by andrasz; 13th May 2010 at 07:53.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: When I am there, it is Thistleland
Age: 73
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am in Tripoli now, and I was here yesterday at time of occurrence.
So far it is clear that:
Accident site has been heavily contaminated by hundreds of people wondering around, moving wreckage, picking up evidence, etc. (look at viedos and pictures and if you have ever done an accident investigation you know what I mean)
So called statements about exploding before impact or calling ATC to alert emergency services are from uncontrolled sources (those of you who know this part of the world can figure the situation.... a security officer, who is a cousin of my sister in law has told me that he heard... etc.)
Relative High energy impact and "cartwelling" rather than flat short landing, given the extent of wreckage field.
Good teories to explore:
Pilots Fatigue,
Fuel Starvation,
Pilots short of practice on NPA approaches
Last second ample correction to re-align with centerline
Contributing factors:
Choice of runway
weather, rather visibility at time of impact
status of nav aids
Any other thoughts....?
So far it is clear that:
Accident site has been heavily contaminated by hundreds of people wondering around, moving wreckage, picking up evidence, etc. (look at viedos and pictures and if you have ever done an accident investigation you know what I mean)
So called statements about exploding before impact or calling ATC to alert emergency services are from uncontrolled sources (those of you who know this part of the world can figure the situation.... a security officer, who is a cousin of my sister in law has told me that he heard... etc.)
Relative High energy impact and "cartwelling" rather than flat short landing, given the extent of wreckage field.
Good teories to explore:
Pilots Fatigue,
Fuel Starvation,
Pilots short of practice on NPA approaches
Last second ample correction to re-align with centerline
Contributing factors:
Choice of runway
weather, rather visibility at time of impact
status of nav aids
Any other thoughts....?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: South Africa
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cairndow_123
I might be alone in my way of thinking, but fuel starvation is normally not a cause I consider. Modern jets don't burn as often as you think - with or without fuel on board.
Except for that, there are so many checks and balances built in with airline operations, that (despite what you read about commercial pressures) airlines don't land "on fumes". Pilots will be very worried when projected landing fuel (which the a/c continually updates for you) gets close to minimum diversion fuel. You have to be seriously mentally challenged to let fuel levels get down to where you have no options. Airliners don't do too well landing deadstick on unprepared surfaces.......
With every accident I see the same questions on fuel levels when the wreckage did not burn. They are not necessarily related. Do a bit of homework on these two sites:
Aviation Safety Network >
and The Aviation Herald
and get back to me on accidents with and without fuel where the wreckage burned or not.
Asking a question on PPRuNe does not constitute research!
I have yet to read speculation over the lack of
post impact fire, could it be they were flying on fumes, and had no option but to go for a landing ?
post impact fire, could it be they were flying on fumes, and had no option but to go for a landing ?
Except for that, there are so many checks and balances built in with airline operations, that (despite what you read about commercial pressures) airlines don't land "on fumes". Pilots will be very worried when projected landing fuel (which the a/c continually updates for you) gets close to minimum diversion fuel. You have to be seriously mentally challenged to let fuel levels get down to where you have no options. Airliners don't do too well landing deadstick on unprepared surfaces.......
With every accident I see the same questions on fuel levels when the wreckage did not burn. They are not necessarily related. Do a bit of homework on these two sites:
Aviation Safety Network >
and The Aviation Herald
and get back to me on accidents with and without fuel where the wreckage burned or not.
Asking a question on PPRuNe does not constitute research!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sussex, England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sat in my office yesterday and read with despair the diatribes surrounding this event. Strangely, I am a Brit who works for Afriqiyah; yesterday was a day I could have done without, even after 40 years in The Industry. It called upon all my experience to manage the day. Yet all the speculation and comments from armchair pundits still appears after an incident. I knew all the crew on yesterday's flight from my previous life in flight management, and lost some good colleagues. I wish this speculation would stop. Afriqiyah is a small airline, where everyone knows everyone else - the same spirit of cameraderie as was with Dan-Air or Laker. As you are all aware there is no single cause to an accident, but a sequence of events that culminates in tragedy. To question the crew's competence is uncalled for; the ex-chief pilot of Austrian Airways, and senior pilots from Sabena/SN Brussels also work for Afriqiyah. The sim training is done locally here, in Crawley, not in a Bedouin tent full of hookah pipes in the desert. Furthermore, they possess an excellent command of basic good airmanship - something which I think is disappearing fast. I was racking my brain to remember what inlet was missing - how could someone steal a hole? Actually the port winglet has been missing for a few weeks, and whilst the general handling is not affected, the port-side fuel burn has increased by 4%! No, not really, but that is the sort of comment I could expect. The upside is that Gatwick Airport has done unnecessary runway sweeps looking for a dropped winglet that was not there! I cannot understand how nobody amongst you experts has not commented on the picture of the chap walking through the wreckage in his suit, oblivious to any MMMF particles that may be suspended in the atmosphere.
I have said my piece, and am now returning to hopefully, a normal day's work at Gatwick.
I have said my piece, and am now returning to hopefully, a normal day's work at Gatwick.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Malta
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andrasz, we get it, you are a racist... I have been flying in and out of Tripoli for years and its really not as bad as you paint it. Stick to facts, speculate about possible scenarios but leave out the attacks on the culture. And those pilots were flying Ilyushins etc around the place so the pilots were not all sitting on there butts at home waiting for sanctions to be lifted.
The only thing dumber than not going around when you should is a racist..
The only thing dumber than not going around when you should is a racist..
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: EGCC
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wanting to distract from the tragedy at the core of this thread, there appear to be contributors who seriously regard Libya as a "normal" country. I cannot imagine why anyone would book a flight on an airline that was personally inaugurated by the No. 2 madman in the world Muammar al-Gaddafi (the No. 1 spot is still held by Kim Jong Il). Add to this the comments by people with personal experience of Tripoli airport (see this thread), and the whole concept of Libyan aviation becomes a ridiculous matter.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pleasley, Derbyshire, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been refraining from posting on this forum so far about this, but I have to say:
Uberwang - you have hit the nail on the head. Over 100 people have lost their lives. Regardless of how the culture of Africa is, this is a terrible accident and now is not the time for attacks on another culture simply for the sake of it.
We must wait for the facts to come out.
Uberwang - you have hit the nail on the head. Over 100 people have lost their lives. Regardless of how the culture of Africa is, this is a terrible accident and now is not the time for attacks on another culture simply for the sake of it.
We must wait for the facts to come out.