Yemeni airliner crashes in Indian Ocean (150 People Reportedly On Board; Fate Unknown)

Reuters ^ | June 29, 2009

[Steelfish]

Yemeni airliner crashes in Indian Ocean 150 people reportedly on board; fate unknown

BREAKING NEWS o MORONI, Comoros - An airliner belonging to Yemeni state carrier Yemenia Air crashed in the Comoros archipelago in the Indian Ocean with 150 people on board, a senior government official said Tuesday.

"We don't know if there are any survivors among the 150 people on the plane," a senior government official told Reuters.

[2CAVTrooper]

“Airbus planes also have a nasty history of the tail coming off with Airbus rushing to bury the problem instead.”

And your proof of this is?

[2CAVTrooper]

“I wonder if they have made something that looks like a laptop and can zap the Airbust computer.”

You watch too many movies.

[Spktyr]

AA587 and AT961 should be enough, plus FedEx’s experiences with uncommanded rudder inputs.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2005/mar/13/theairlineindustry.internationalnews

[2CAVTrooper]

I fully agree with what you say.

I’ve been battling these Boeing cheerleaders since the tanker flap last year.

As far as Boeing’s union, the AFL-CIO which Boeing’s union falls under is headed up by a full blown, card carrying, America hating communist who supports 0bama.

[Spktyr]

Also, I can’t find it now, but there was a press photo of the recovered vertical tail from the Airbus that went down between South America and Africa. Looked almost exactly like the AT961 tail - no rudder and the vertical tailplane had separated from the aircraft.

[2CAVTrooper]

“There have been 4 or 5 to this point [counting Air France].”

BS!

Let’s see the info that supports your claim of “4 or 5” incidents.

And FYI, the Air France crash is still UNDER INVESTIGATION which means NO CAUSE for the crash has been found yet.

[2CAVTrooper]

Well that’s two of the “4 or 5” that was claimed.

In the case of the American Airlines flight, it was found that the tail fin failed well in EXCESS of design and certification specs. Meaning that it took a lot more load forces than what it was designed to handle before the part failed.

It is a well known fact that Airbus and Boeing aircraft alike are tested to 150 times the stress limits they are expected to experience in service.

So the MYTH of “design inferiority” as spewed by Boeing cheerleaders is just that A MYTH.

[Spktyr]

I didn’t claim four or five, just a history.

Also, the AA587 investigation is thought to have been corrupted/compromised by Airbus - according to one of the lead investigators, no less.

Thing is, they could blame AA587 on the pilot and “forces beyond spec”. They couldn’t bury AA961, which happened in straight and level flight with no rudder inputs whatsoever.

[Spktyr]

Er, AT961, that is.

They couldn’t bury it because AT961 made it back to the airport and everyone survived.

[2CAVTrooper]

And I could find photos of Boeing aircraft where the tail was found intact after a crash.

And just because the tail of the Air France jet was found X distance from where they think it crashed, doesn’t support your claim.

First of all it floats, second any portion of it above the water surface will act as a sail and would be pushed by the winds just like any portion of it below the surface of the water would be influenced by the ocean currents.

Now factor in the facts that there were storms in the area which would influence movement of the part as well as the fact it was several days after the crash before they even found it.

The only way such a part would not move from the crash site is if it was anchored to the sea bed.

If it were several days before they got to TWA flight 800’s crash site then you would find debris miles away from where it crashed too. Same goes for the American Airlines flight.

[2CAVTrooper]

“the AA587 investigation is thought to have been corrupted/compromised by Airbus - according to one of the lead investigators, no less.”

Thought to have been corrupted is hardly a fact.

[Magnatron]

“It’s good to put the number of failures in perspective as you have done, but it would be a lot more meaningful if there were information on the total number of planes that were produced and put into service.”

Okay, here you go, the numbers of planes manufactured are as follows:

A300 561 0.019% incident rate
A310 255 0.027% incident rate
A320 3893 0.003% incident rate
A330 616 0.005% incident rate
A340 365 0.005% incident rate

Total Airbus aircraft manufactured = 5690
Total overall incident rate = 0.006%

737 6000 0.014% incident rate
747 1416 0.025% incident rate
757 1050 0.009% incident rate
767 975 0.009% incident rate

Total Boeing aircraft manufactured = 9441
Total overall incident rate = 0.015%

So, by my calculations, Boeing has more than twice the failure rate of the Airbus equipment.

(total manufacture figures through May 2009 taken from Wikipedia, incident rates taken from airdisaster.com)

Please note, I have no dog in the fight other than being a frequent business traveler.

[Magnatron]

Here’s another way to look at it - total number of fatalities.

In all of the classes of aircraft I listed above, there were:

A300 1416 fatalities
A310 645 fatalities
A320 443 fatalities
A330 235 fatalities
A340 0 fatalities

Total Airbus Fatalities = 2739

737 4444 fatalities
747 3550 fatalities
757 576 fatalities
767 850 fatalities

Total Boeing Fatalities = 9420

So Airbus represents 22.5% of all of the fatalities in the above equipment classes, whereas Boeing represents 77.5% of fatalities.

(as you can see by my previous several postings, I obviously am not working this week and have way too much time on my hands)

[Texan Tory]

Thanks, this is excellent information. Looking at the incident rates, it’s striking just how safe the Airbus A320 is, far safer than any other plane (whether Boeing of Airbus). It’s also striking how much less safe the A310 is than the A320, although the Boeing 747 still comes in last place by a slight margin.

[JMKirnan]

Well, I’ll keep you in my prayers & hope you have a lot of fun & nothing to worry about! Watch a movie or read a book & time will fly while you do!

[conservative cat]

"I was very fond of the A330 to but recent incidents have made me a bit gun-shy." What recent incidents? There has been only ONE crash of a A330 in commercial service which is the Air France flight that went down in the South Atlantic. The only other crash on record for the A330 was during a flight test and that was 10 years ago. And since the A330's introduction to commercial service they've racked up over 12 million flight hours.

The 2 QANTAS ADIRU problems (Oct, Dec 08) and then these two recent incidents: http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1246011377.html . I am aware of the fatal accident rate on the A330, as I studied their safety record before setting foot on one in December. (I do that for every model/airline I fly on.)

[SteamShovel]

Another perspective:

Airbus fatalities are 0.481 per aircraft

Boeing fatalities are 0.998 per aircraft

Of course, this is skewed by the 9-11 atrocity

[dixiebelle]

Thanks. It’s medical missions so prayers are greatly appreciated. I’m headed to the bookstore to stock up on in- flight reading...

[Shyla]

Is this another one since this morning?

[blackminorca]

“ASIDE FROM THE MOST BASIC AVIONICS,”
Its obvious that an EMI/RFI generating laptop would be designed to cripple the basic avionics.

What, do you think it would target the “in use” light on the johns?