Two Pakistan passenger jets nearly collide
 

Two Pakistan passenger jets nearly collide

KARACHI, Pakistan (AP) — Two Pakistani passenger jets on domestic flights nearly collided late Wednesday, and one of the jets abruptly swerved up 700 feet to avoid the other, injuring at least two people on board, an airline official said.

The pilot of an Pakistan International Airlines flight with 179 passengers had to make the emergency maneuver because it was on a collision course with an Air Blue jet, said PIA spokeswoman Samina Pervez.

The near-miss happened over Rahimyarkhan in eastern Punjab province, about 440 miles northeast of the southern Pakistan city of Karachi, the spokeswoman said. The two planes were flying at an altitude of 37,000 feet at the time.

On board the PIA plane, one female crew member sbroke an arm, and a male passenger injured an arm and an ear, Pervez said. The plane, flying from Islamabad, landed safely with emergency teams on standby at Karachi airport around 9 p.m.

It wasn't clear if anyone was hurt on the Air Blue jet, which was on a flight from Karachi to Lahore.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2...tan-jets_x.htm

Very easy solution!
 

Don't fly with a third world airline!

Why? Simple! Go to a third world country, hire a car and try driving on their roads!! If they can't get that right how do you expect them to fly airplanes??

I never did, don't and won't - call me prejudice if you like but just have a look at the safety records and I think most sane people would agree.

Or read the editorial in the S A Flyer magazine, lates issue about the S A CAA it will make your eyes water!!

Oh yes! I am prejudice! Happy Christmas !!:ok:

Faheel - I am not pointing fingers nor placing blame on something I know nothing about. I made a statement; If you want to fly on the safest airlines, with the best trained crews and the best maintenance -DONT FLY THIRD WORLD!

Having said that Ali , RK is one of the busiest intersections in that part of the world. ATC does a good job keeping things apart for the vast majority of the time!!

Don't be too quick to judge whose error this is, please.

G'day ;)

That really is such a silly statement Ali.

For a start there is nothing in the above post to suggest either airline is to blame. It could easily have been a controller problem.

Err was'nt the last fatal collision over Switzerland?
:confused:

Mercenary Ali - what you said is either a wind up.... or a foolish remark of some one who uses something else to think with!

Ali
 

Hmmmm......third world airlines eh? so no "first world" airliners have incidents and accidents and more to the point I cannot see from the article presented that it was the airliners fault, so there could be many other factors and if ATC is a contributing factor then will you remain clear of "third world" airspace as well, because fiirst world ATC units never have incidents do they????!!!!

Your travels will become quite limited based on your "prejudice".
:ugh:

Besides, how third world are they with a nuclear capability??????
:hmm:

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/N...639520,00.html

Warning signals were given to both pilots after they found themselves in the same air corridor over Rahim Yar Khan district in central Punjab province, PIA spokesperson Samina Paracha said late on Wednesday.

"One was asked to dip off, the other was directed to go high but both dipped down," she said.


I don't know how accurate this article is but did "BOTH" dip down when one should have gone up???

"Dip up, Dip down, Dip off" New TCAS commands perhaps?

Fox3snapshot says: Besides, how third world are they with a nuclear capability??????

Fortunately very few have this capability. And Pakistan is a third world country wether you like it or not.

MercenaryAli. You are spot on. Just looking at statistics will show that as a PAX one is at most risk flying on a third world carrier. This is a statistical fact. Not to say that first world carriers or ATC do not have accidents or incidents.

Regarding ATC. There are places where the procedural ATC procedures work well like over Libya, however in areas like Myanmar with poor VHF as well as HF communications make it a nightmare. Amount of traffic that crosses LSO East and Westbound every day is mind numbing.

AD

I am pretty sure PIA have TCAS on their machines, dont know about the other guys.

Mishaps do Happen and will Happen.

Bechara Mr Mercenary, sounds like you need to go to school a little longer to understand Avaition !

Be it 1st world, 2nd World or 5th world, you're just Lucky to be where you are !

Ali,

That reminds me of a typical American reaction - what you are really saying is "fly American carriers".

Leaving aside 11th September 2001, there have been in my recollection many frightening, often fatal incidents involving US carriers too.

Perhaps don't fly is a more logical - though totally irrational mantra. Come to think of it, don't drive, dont walk - in fact better still stay in bed - but hey..., what if the roof of the bedroom falls in!

Ok then.................Prejudice. :rolleyes:

why do these things always move off thread? it was a reported incident between two airliners - the end! Just leave it alone for God's sake:{

<<"One was asked to dip off, the other was directed to go high but both dipped down,">>

Interesting phraseology!

I flew Islamabad - Karachi & back a couple of years ago.

On the outward trip, I flew Shaheen Airways. The plane was a Ukrainian registered wetleased Yak-42 (what fun). In good weather, the plane had a steeper angle of ascent than is common with BoeingBus. Once in cruise, the flight appeared to make continual slight alterations of heading.

The return trip was with PIA, which did not fly the direct route but much closer to the border with India, then altering course.

If not relevant, please feel free to ignore/delete this SLF observation.

answer=42
 

I salute you sir! You are,without doubt, a very brave man - or
a very foolish one!

Have a Happy New Year 2005 and take it from the statistics, if not from me, from a passenger safety perspective you are safer not travelling on a third world carrier!

Unbelievable attitude
 

Fox3snapshot..what has nuclear capability got to do with anything on this site? Inflammatory statements like yours on this thread provide us peace-loving Western people with a justifiable fear of Middle-Eastern hot-heads. You should be ashamed of yourself, making aggressive remarks on third-world nuclear capability. Childish and worrying.

Ali... I've worked with two or three so called third world airlines and charter companies. One a National Carrier that has never killed anybody since they started flying umpteen years ago. In fact I'm proud to have worked for them.

I'd like to endorse Anlimalclub, I too have worked with many a carrier in the Middle East and Asia, including PIA and have nothing but respect for their professional approach to aviation under less than perfect circumstances... and where was ValueJet ?

I hate repeating myself but...
 

"Just looking at statistics will show that as a PAX one is at most risk flying on a third world carrier. This is a statistical fact. Not to say that first world carriers or ATC do not have accidents or incidents."
And as a little proof of my theory hull losses of some third world carriers:

PIA since 1956, 30 hull losses
Air india since 1947, 18 losses
Indian Airlines since 1953, 57 losses
Philippine Airlines, Since 1946, 51 losses
Nigerian Airways had 12 losses between 1969 to 1995


Better 1st world carriers such as Lufthansa has had 9 hull losses since 1959, Air New Zealand 3 since 1966, Austrian Airlines 4 since 1960 and Cathay Pacific 6 since 1948. Finnair forexample had 3 hull losses since 1945 with last loss in 1963. British Airways has had 3losses between 1975 and 1976 all Tridents.

On another note Air France had 89 hull losses since 1945 (Makes you wonder)

A statistic about the accidents aroud the world. Based on ICAO scheduled airline departures and reported fatal accidents.

First number being the precentage of all departures and second precentage of fatal accidents.



North America: 42% / 20,5%

Europe: 29% / 21,4%

Asia-Australia 17% / 26,8%

South & Central America 9% / 16,8%

Africa 3% / 14,5%


Hope this clarifies my stance a bit.

AD

Air NZ figures corrected

Atlanta driver, caution with such statistics, the interesting number is the hull losses versus total number of flown revenue hours divided by the number of aircraft the company has.

Going back as far as 1945 is also totally misleading, as in the years 1945-1955 various odd ex military machines in large numbers were used on routes that were not suited, and airlines such as AF ( as you mention it ) operated in very drastic conditions in Asia and Africa ( already !).
Airlines such as Finnair ( since you mention it ) never had such aircraft numbers and such routes...

If you apply the formula above , and restrict your survey to the last 25 years ( so after 1980 ) you will find that most large airlines in the world have now very similar results with some notable exceptions , ( e.g, Africa , Korea ) and if one takes out hull losses due to terrorist actions, one will find that some of the poorest countries can have very safe airlines operations ( e. Bangladesh biman, Sri Lanka, Ethiopian, etc..) So third world = unsafe is a totally wrong concept.