If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail not by posting to this thread.
Posted on 08/06/2005 11:59:10 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
Ping
ping
CNN once again confounded by no deaths and recumbant backup systems in the guise of extra doors, and they word their article as if they're in mourning over an inability to film body bags. Boo hoo, nobody died.
but there is a lawsuit already!
It turns out that the pilot landed long- touching down in the last third of the runway which is a very generous 9,000 feet!. Human error or weather has not yet been determined
Yeah, I'm certainly no expert but it does seem to me that in a plane crash, some mechanical failures are to be expected.
Sure, look at what happened and see if anything can be improved - but the escape system worked here according to the measure that counts most.
Sorry, when I read that the first person had already filed suit, I just went bonkers.
If this person was badly shaken, slightly injured, and lost personal items in the luggage compartment he should file a friggin lost luggage report with the Airline, or at WORST a small court claim.
And that brings into question CNN's motivating factors for this article's wording.
Sounds to me like everyone in the fly-by-wire-only airplane was a passenger after their power failure.
If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail not by posting to this thread.
Well, any landing you walk away from . . . . .
"It's not too surprising that the airplane's doors, which fit into tight-tolerance openings in the fuselage, get a little difficult to open when the plane's body undergoes a major structural re-adjustment by hitting the ground."
Bingo!
What happens most time in a car accident where the frame is bent - can't open the doors 'cuz they're jamed.
Really no suprise here.
In flight school, they teach that the last thing you do BEFORE the crash, is open the doors.
Well, duh. How many car doors will open after a bad crash? That's why EMTs have the "jaws of life".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the FAA dies uts evacuation test, they assume that half the doors won't open.
Part of the certification process for an airliner is to prove that a full load of passengers and crew can be evacuated in ninety seconds flat, through HALF the doors and slides. That's for situations just like this. You simply cannot expect all the exit doors on an aircraft to work after it takes a hundred-mile-an-hour sled ride off the end of a runway, down six hundred feet of wooded embankment, and into a creekbed. Some will be blocked by fire, some will be bent and unable to open, maybe some just won't work. To assume that eight out of eight doors and slides on that A340-300 would've worked is just comical when considering that the fuselage was broken into multiple pieces.
And before the Airbus-bashers get warmed up...don't go there. The same thing would've happened if you ran a B747 or B777 off a runway. That's not an Airbus vs. Boeing deal, it's just simple physics.
}:-)4
If more airline pilots took their pride out of the way and performed a "go'round" things like this wouldn't happen.
And, things like this:
Correct!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.