Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Aircraft down in residential area of Karachi?

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Aircraft down in residential area of Karachi?

Old 2nd Dec 2010, 21:43
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 54
Posts: 561
Montrealguy:

With these figures in hand, how can you claim that Soviet Aircraft didn't crash because they "spent 20 year parked" ?
Talk about putting words in my mouth!

I NEVER said anything regarding whether or not Soviet aircraft did or didn't crash, or claim they spent 20 years parked. Please show me where I did if you disagree?

What you have done here is simply infer something I did not say. My point is that you have and continue to pick numbers that fit your "point". All I was doing was point out how numbers can be misleading....

.... like the ones you have here again. Sure any one airframe may have been ramped, and carry N hours, but again unless you factor ALL the airframes then any one statistic is MEANINGLESS.

Crash statistics only make sense looking at crashes per departure and/or per 100K miles. Argue away.

- GY
GarageYears is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2010, 22:54
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Montrealguy - I am intrigued by the basic premise of your argument. As I said before, you have an agenda and will not be dissuaded from it. My question is, what is that agenda? Talk of 'Cold War prejudice' etc is all straight from the Pravda world of delusion from where I sit, but I am open to be persuaded. What are you actually saying? Is your argument that people like myself are fundamentally wrong and that non-western aviation is as safe as western aviation? My argument is that when taken together, there are many factors in non-western aviation, that taken together make it significantly less safe than western aviation. That includes the employment of older aircraft, unacceptable operational practices, inadequate training, poor maintainance and unsafe cultural attitudes. Do you dispute that view?
Norman Stanley Fletcher is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2010, 23:41
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West Coast Canada
Posts: 3,575
Montrealguy is just a wind up. I bet this started when while flying his Microsoft flight sim, he noticed he was crashing the Western types at about the same rate as that pirate Antonov download

The truely sad part of this futile arguement is that it has nothing to do with the fact that there are 8 more dead airman this year.....
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2010, 01:57
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
A Georgian-registered IL-76 that belongs to a startup Georgian company no one ever heard of, an aircraft that is not on the Manufacturers' list of aircraft flying with valid Airworthiness documents, crewed by 7 Ukrainians and a Georgian, and that is based at Sharjah, in the UAE, crashes after a 1 AM take-off from Pakistan, on its way to war-torn and arms-embargoed Soudan, and this one poster writes as his hypothesis for the cause of the crash:

Originally Posted by captplaystation
Regretably I think " Russian Cargo Aircraft" is probably enough of an explanation
and all you "experts" stay mum but criticize me for attempting to show that this statement was wrong and baseless. I guess you all agree with him then. It crashed because it was a Russian cargo aircraft. The Pakistan civil aviation authority seems to agree with most of you anyway:

Precaution: Russian aircraft at Pakistani airports grounded The Express Tribune
Montrealguy is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2010, 17:30
  #65 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
A 1968 An-12 with 33,923 TT for 808 hours per year (there are others with as little as 220 hours per year)
You consider 800 hours a year high usage for an airliner?
con-pilot is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2010, 22:53
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by con-pilot
You consider 800 hours a year high usage for an airliner?
First I didn't say it was high usage, just that it was representative of the kind usage similar western aircraft, like the C-130, would have.

Second, its not an airliner. It's a ramped tactical airlifter with military origins, just like the C-130. In the civilian life, it cannot legally carry passenger, like the C-130.



I already posted info on US military C-130/C-141 and C-5 usage earlier.

Now here is a website that has 6 C130s "airliners" for sale:

PlaneCheck Aircraft for Sale - New planes and price reductions

A 1967 C-130A with 11,600 hours
Another 1957 model with 15,700 hours
A 1959 model with 9,759 hours
A 1980 model with 12,000 hours
A 1982 model with 10,298 hours
A 1970 model which does not provide TT.

The Norwegian Air Force also has 5 C-130E for sale. These were built in 1968.

http://media.aftenposten.no/archive/...es_904582a.pdf

They have between 21,000 and 23,000 hours. Thats 523 hours a year.

All I am saying is that these kinds of hours and usage are representative of aircraft of this nature. Its false to claim that eastern built freighters such as the IL-76 have a higher crash rate per 100,000 hours of flight or per take-off, because they spend most of their lives parked on ramps. They fly just as much as any aircraft of that category. Sometimes more.
Montrealguy is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2010, 23:14
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Norman Stanley Fletcher
What are you actually saying? Is your argument that people like myself are fundamentally wrong and that non-western aviation is as safe as western aviation? My argument is that when taken together, there are many factors in non-western aviation, that taken together make it significantly less safe than western aviation. That includes the employment of older aircraft, unacceptable operational practices, inadequate training, poor maintainance and unsafe cultural attitudes. Do you dispute that view?
I'm afraid you are attempting to change the subject since this whole discussion is and was not about "aviation" but about "aircraft". This whole thing began when someone suggested the cause of the crash could be explained by the simple expression
Russian Cargo Aircraft
He was not talking about the airline, since it wasn't Russian. He wasn't talking about the crew which wasn't Russian either. It could't be the location of the crash, which was not in Russia. He was talking about the aircraft itself. I say this is B/S.

You call that "an agenda" ?
Montrealguy is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2010, 23:34
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,878
With some inside knowledge these aircraft are not maintained to spec, crew duty time regulations are "make it up as you go along", i.e. 'Commanders Discretion' is persuaded by an X amount dollar bill, I mean I worked for a cargo operator and when I dared to suggest to the charterer, anyone around here named 'Chapman' and/or 'Freeborn'. that a crew be allowed a legal rest period I was flamed regarding and formally complained about by that charterer to my senior management.

Now go figure why such airframes fall from the sky and go try figure how such 'cowboy' charterers sleep in their beds of a night!
Phileas Fogg is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2010, 17:45
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Monetrealguy - we are both changing the subject as this thread is about an accident in Pakistan. If you want an intellectual debate about semantics and terminology then you are probably in the wrong place. Nonetheless, my question to you stands - do you believe that non-western aviation is safer than its western counterpart and that any views to the contrary are merely cultural foolishness on the part of myself and others still stuck in a Cold War bunker somewhere? While you are thinking about that, may I draw your attention to a particularly interesting thread about an accident in Moscow involving a 'Dagestan Airlines' Russian-built aircraft. It does make fascinating reading - a mere coincidence I am sure.
Norman Stanley Fletcher is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2010, 02:10
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Norman Stanley Fletcher
do you believe that non-western aviation is safer than its western counterpart and that any views to the contrary are merely cultural foolishness on the part of myself and others still stuck in a Cold War bunker somewhere?
Sir, in the seventies, eighties and early nineties, there was an area of Miami International Airport called Corrosion Corner. It was home to all sorts of big piston airliners, mostly flying freight. They operated DC-3s, DC-4s, DC-6s, DC-7s, CV-240s, CV-440s, C-46s, L-1049s, KC-97s. I was in that area early in my flying career and flew some of these aircraft. I jump-seated on many others. Some of these aircraft were US registered, others were not, but just about all were US-owned and operated, even when they were registered in the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and other central American countries. These were mostly fly by night operations, with no procedures, bad maintenance, bad conditions. We would often come back with one engine "punched"
One US company at the time, went and got a bunch of Boeing KC-97s from the boneyards, ex-military aircraft that had no business being flown as civilian cargo aircraft, had them registered in the DR and had them approved there at their military gross weights (although the high octane Avgas the military had used to obtain those weights was no longer available) and flew them for years between Santo Domingo and Miami, and all through the Caribbean , all flown by Miami based US aircrews (Here are a few pictures for you : KC-97s in Miami Photo Search Results | Airliners.net) DC-6s in Miami Photo Search Results | Airliners.net

In one famous crash in Mexico, one of these overloaded beasts overan the runway (or flew in ground effect) with a load of horses and crashed in slum, killing 44 people on the ground. The Mexicans hauled the US crew (who all survived) to jail (ASN Aircraft accident Boeing C-97 Stratofreighter G HI-481 Mexico City). I many aircraft like it that ended as balls of metal in or as reefs. I remember one DC-6, I think, that blew up on the ground in Miami, while some poor soul was grinding the inside of one of the fuel tanks with a grinder.
I also knew this pilot (ASN Aircraft accident Lockheed C-121S Super Constellation HI-515CT Levittown, P.R.). The captain was from Florida, and he owned that Dominican Registered Constellation. He ditched close the Beach in Puerto Rico but drowned in the aircraft. The others got out.
Finally, in 1994, after many accidents, incidents and mishaps, the FAA clamped down on these operators and shut the whole lot down. And these were all US built aircraft mostly flown and maintained by US personnel. "Western" as you call them.

Now, Mr Norman Stanley Fletcher, do you find that I replied to your question?
Montrealguy is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2010, 03:03
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Chapel Hill,NC, USA
Posts: 61
Round engine freighter procedures

I knew some pilots who flew DC-6s around South and Central America. That's where I first heard the now familiar story of how they did weight and balance calculations.

They looked at the nose wheel strut. Too high, and the plane's out of balance to the rear. Too low, and there's too much weight forward.

If it looked "normal," they were good to go!

taildrag is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2010, 17:11
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The hairdressers!
Posts: 116
Loadmaster's panic indicator

taildrag,
A lot of Loadies use the nose leg strut as a gross error check - albeit after completing the Load Planner/ Loadsheet!
C o' G
Cee of Gee is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.