A330…an accident waiting to happen???

Are you some kind of communist? 😮

😉

Damn, ratted out!!

I think technically, it is still referred to around the globe as The Times, of London. Anyway, I’m not sure it matter that much.

Are you some kind of communist? 😮

😉

air pockets

i think a lot of what happened to the Air France plane is down to weather
ok i have only flown across the Atlantic baout 6 times, but on one return leg on a BWIA A340 in the middle of the night when most were asleep or dozing the plane what can only called a step in the air, there was a sudden drop, the engines auto throttled back and then powered up again, it was over in 2 seconds, but i would say everyone was then awake, no mention was made of it by the crew and the flight completed as normal.

That’ll be The Times, then. Not the London Times, because there’s no such newspaper.

As owned by that well known patriotic Australian…. er I mean American, Mr Murdoch.

I think technically, it is still referred to around the globe as The Times, of London. Anyway, I’m not sure it matter that much.

Yes, the Times printed in London – the London Times (as opposed to the American edition thereof – I can’t confirm the latter carried the same mouthwatering recipes) as owned by R Murdoch – close chum of T Blair (former PM).

That’ll be The Times, then. Not the London Times, because there’s no such newspaper.

As owned by that well known patriotic Australian…. er I mean American, Mr Murdoch.

Less of the synacism…I’ve had some very good times as a result of celebrity chat up lines :p:diablo:

😀

Do tell !!

Sorry, the cynicism is non-negotiable at the moment – it’s getting me through the day at the moment 🙂 Normal service resumed on 16.08.09 when I return to the northern hemisphere, rain and Guinness.

There’s no such newspaper.

Do you mean “The Times“, which is owned by the same clever unelected person who owns “The Sun“?

Yes, the Times printed in London – the London Times (as opposed to the American edition thereof – I can’t confirm the latter carried the same mouthwatering recipes) as owned by R Murdoch – close chum of T Blair (former PM).

a perusal of today’s ‘esteemed’ Guardian website will reveal an incisive article by Hadley Freeman on ‘Why you never want to fall victim to a celebrity’s chat-up line’…. OMG read it now!!!

Less of the synacism…I’ve had some very good times as a result of celebrity chat up lines :p:diablo:

😀

Oh, and the London Times has three salad recipes from Gordon Ramsey…

There’s no such newspaper.

Do you mean “The Times“, which is owned by the same clever unelected person who owns “The Sun“?

You even have to check the date!

I don’t really see anything that terrible in this report to be honest, certainly not as bad as some of the rubbish I’ve seen lately. Apart from the scarey headline and possible overdramatic descriptions of the Qantas incident, it seems to put its point across in a fairly well reasoned, moderately well backed up way. It’s one of the better media reports I’ve seen to be honest!

Paul

I agree that the article is well balanced and far from hysterical.

It touches on several points which are surely apposite to everyone’s safety –

1. The HCI on commercial airliners can be a vexed area when pilots are presented with unusual or pressured situations – haven’t there been several crashes caused by pilots misinterpreting the information they are receiving/receiving the wrong information from the computers/receiving no information from the computers/receiving too much information from the computers?

2. Modern planes are very smart but their programmed responses aren’t always intuitive to the human brain and the workloads in the cockpit during said abnormal situations can overburden the crew.

3. Commercial aircraft are generally very safe but the wiring and computers are far from infallible and the safety first over cost ethos advertised by airlines is up for debate.

4. The BEA practice the black arts – maybe not, but given their reported behaviour during the Concorde enquiry is the idea of protecting vested interests so easily dismissed?

If anyone can point out inaccuracies in what Block, NASA, Hounsfield et al are reported as saying in this article please share…

I’ve had and continue to have no problem flying on A-330s. I’d more than likely end up at my destination – but if you’re the lucky winner of the raffle it seems you are fecked. And I don’t think it’s any harm for a newspaper to talk around the issue a bit – still what do I know – I’m just the cargo 😉

(…And… there isn’t a newspaper out there that isn’t a tabloid under the skin and a mouthpiece for the political views of the people who write it. Unelected people telling you what to think… some of them are disguised as broadsheets (‘clever’ unelected people telling you what to think)….

a perusal of today’s ‘esteemed’ Guardian website will reveal an incisive article by Hadley Freeman on ‘Why you never want to fall victim to a celebrity’s chat-up line’…. OMG read it now!!!

Oh, and the London Times has three salad recipes from Gordon Ramsey – say goodbye to dull BBQs!!!!

Pay your quid and take your choice…

Steve Rowell
I take it by your cynicism, we’re talking about a less the reputable tabloid here!!!

You even have to check the date!

1) The reality is that the A330 is an extremely safe aircraft. In terms of number of departures/hull loses, the only plane that is on a par with it is the 777. Nothing else comes close to it.

2) The same type of article could be written about the 777. We have one case where its engines stopped running and caused a crash landing, followed by several cases of engines going into iddle in midflight. The fact that the article focused solely on the A330, without any comparison with other makes, is in this regard telling. Frankly, I do not know any model that does not have weaknesses, and the 330 has among the fewest.

3) The fact that the articles tries to build its case by adding instances where man and certainly not the plane is responsible (like for the Etihad 340) does nothing to improve the credibility of the article.

At least, how good are its pages to wrap the fish & chips? 😀

We have a lot of local rubbish over here, which had a repulsive behaviour after the Spanair crash.

That really doesn’t say much for the standard of the competition, then. :p

I agree but it’s still one of the least speculative, more well informed articles I’ve read in recent times!

Paul

The ETIHAD incident was due to human error… had nothing to do with the design or the software…. You cant help stupidity on the part of the engineers.

They also say “Australia’s Transport Safety Bureau, which is still investigating QF72, isn’t yet sure why the aircraft plunged so violently. But the plane’s survival means the incident can be reconstructed from the cockpit – in this case, the black boxes were recovered.”

So in other words how can they compare anything in relation to the Air France crash? Also consider that the FDR wasnt recovered, so its all… speculation….

“For four years from 1999, Block was a member of a special investigation group set up by the FAA that stripped down six ageing passenger aircraft, including a Kapton-wired Airbus A300, the predecessor of the A330. It found widespread evidence of wire bundles that had become charred, cracked, brittle and prone to arcing, as well as contaminated by dust, lint and fluid from leaking toilets. Yet when its report was produced, the Bush White House took no action.”

OMG the white house took no action!!!!!!
Im a little lost here. Doesnt the FAA make the rules when it comes to aviation safety etc? Or is the article saying the FAA was blocked by the White House when it came to enacting new legislation?

These sorts of articles where a few “facts” are intertwined with speculation are simply designed to make headlines and cause fear in the travelling community. Its also a good way to drive down share prices too…

It’s one of the better media reports I’ve seen to be honest!

That really doesn’t say much for the standard of the competition, then. :p

I don’t really see anything that terrible in this report to be honest, certainly not as bad as some of the rubbish I’ve seen lately. Apart from the scarey headline and possible overdramatic descriptions of the Qantas incident, it seems to put its point across in a fairly well reasoned, moderately well backed up way. It’s one of the better media reports I’ve seen to be honest!

Paul

The Mail is a half-way house between the tabloids and the broadsheets. At least people know the tabloids are junk and that is why they buy them, the scary thing is, people believe the biggoted rubbish that The Mail prints 😮

Hear, hear!

I will take this article with a pinch of salt.
The Mail on Sunday is a fervently Euro-sceptic tabloid dressed up as a middle-market paper and Airbus, as a shining example of pan-European co-operation, is seen as fair game.
If you look down to the comment section below the article, there is a chap called Oliver from Brighton who asks where the report is on Boeing accidents.
I think he’s cracked it.

I take it by your cynicism, we’re talking about a less the reputable tabloid here!!!

The Mail is a half-way house between the tabloids and the broadsheets. At least people know the tabloids are junk and that is why they buy them, the scary thing is, people believe the biggoted rubbish that The Mail prints 😮