Air France A-340 down in YYZ

[Flying Illini]

My take is let the CTSB investigate and determine what happened. That is why they make the big bucks.

Why? I thought the media and their "experts" had already determined the caused and that the case was closed.

 

[EuroWheenie]

Steveair

What a fantastic idea. Never mind the impact it'll have on aviation. While we're at it, how about grounding all 747s and 737s, or is it only European built aircraft (with around 40% of the components manufactured in the US by the way) that should be subject to your infantile ideas? Let's also ground all the CRJs and CL600s. And the Diesel-8s, 9s, 10s and their MD offspring. And the TriStars. We deffo also need to ground all them pesky Russian aircraft, for reasons various. In fact, let's just ground every flying machine ever conceived and go back to living in the caves.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, I heard that the last guy to leave the ship was the skipper, having done a sweep of the cabin. How about that for guts and living up to the honourable marine tradition of being the last to leave. Well done Captain!

 

[Steveair]

Airbus's are underpowered, maintenance headaches, and designed to take the pilot out of the cockpit. What exactly is there to like about them??

 

[SennaP1]

Airbus's are underpowered, maintenance headaches, and designed to take the pilot out of the cockpit. What exactly is there to like about them??

As opposed to your CRJ?

I bet it'll outclimb, go faster, ....and has a better dispatch reliability record than your Canuck Clipper.

 

[Flyingdutchman]

I agree with Euro.

The captain did a great job. Yes, I would do the same thing. But, you'll need some balls to go out and do it.

FD

 

[C601]

Airbus's are underpowered, maintenance headaches, and designed to take the pilot out of the cockpit. What exactly is there to like about them??

Little grasshopper here thinks he knows all about Airbus aircraft.... but yet the biggest acft he has flown is a little CRJ... Funny

 

[hyper]

"......jet plowed off the runway at Pearson International Airport, Toronto, Canada, as it landed during a fierce storm."

http://www.cnn.com/

"Lackey said take-offs had been halted and the storm moving across the airport at the time of the crash was "definitely an extreme storm. It was something we haven't seen here for some time. ... It was definitely different, much more severe."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/08/03/airfrance.crash.ap/index.html

Am I missing something in this thread? If the weather was in fact as it was reported, then I'd see the cockpit crew as anything than heroic. Reckless comes to mind as a matter of fact. The cabin crew, yes; the rescue crew, yes; but the crew in the nose is lucky that no lives were lost. It sounds as though they shouldn't have been in that position as it was. Hold or go somewhere else.

American in Arkansas comes to mind, but maybe they weren't heros because lives were lost.


"I want to pay homage to the crew," Spinetta said at a news conference at Air France headquarters. "I don't know if we should speak of a miracle, but we can certainly speak of the training of the crew, above all the professionalism of the crew."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/08/03/airfrance.crash.ap/index.html

Leave it to the French to start blowing their own horn about how great their skills and training. It would appear to me that LUCK was as important a factor.

 

[BornAgainPagan]

Leave it to the French to start blowing their own horn about how great their skills and training. It would appear to me that LUCK was as important a factor.

Leave it to the imbeciles to play into the hands of the media and knee jerk reactionary non-flying public to speculate and assign blame before the investigation is completed. Not to mention the imbeciles that are prejudiced based on nationality.

 

[Cpt. Underpants]

You all amaze me with your ignorance.

Don't believe all you read. I have 3000+ PIC hours on the A340-300. There is nothing wrong with it. It's a fine aircraft, more than suited to the transatlantic market it primarily serves. We (at CX) have flown the A343 HKG-YYZ nonstop (14+ hours) without any problems. Sure, we don't have a lot of gas left at the end, but in full compliance with ICAO reserves.

• Sure, it doesn't climb like a twin - it's not supposed to.
• It's acceleration isn't stellar - it's not supposed to be.
• It doesn't go straight to FL350 - it's a 275000kg (606 300lbs to you) airplane that has a 16 hour endurance, for Pete's sake.
• It has a superior flight control system - better than Boeing.
• It flies on the smell of an oily rag - accountants love them (what's oil at today?)
• It's significantly quieter on the flight deck than any Boeing I have ever flown (727, 737, 747, 757, 767 - typed on all, BTW)
• I feel better (physically) after a ULH on the Bus than I ever felt on the B744 - the air circulates better and has a higher RH.
• It's system integration is amazing.
• It's redundancies are impressive.
• It's MEL/CDL is far less restrictive than Boeing due to the above.
• I could not imagine 400 hour JFO's in the RHS of a B744, yet I see them quite regularly in the A343 doing a fine job.

Stop this senseless speculation on something you know NOTHING about. Wait for the investigators to do their jobs and stop embarrasing yourselves.

(spelling)

 

[Occam's Razor]

Steveair wrote: "Airbus's are underpowered, maintenance headaches, and designed to take the pilot out of the cockpit. What exactly is there to like about them??"

I don't care if you stayed in a Holiday Inn last night...

Just because you've seen one taxi doesn't mean you know anything about them.