Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Continental Airlines and mechanic guilty in deadly Concorde crash

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Foreign accident investigation is a joke. But what about when the B737 had a known flaw? The single PCU rudder hard overs which caused four fatal accidents.

Boeing never accepted guilt and instead agreed to a long term 10 year fix which took till 2008 to complete. The A330 pitot tube flaw will play out the same way.

The NTSB also does a poor job of finding real issues and correcting the problems.
 
Last edited:
Yea, it never was a design flaw of the aircraft. Just a matter of time before it cut a tire then turned into a fireball. Sad, but true.
 
Foreign accident investigation is a joke. But what about when the B737 had a known flaw? The single PCU rudder hard overs which caused four fatal accidents.

Boeing never accepted guilt and instead agreed to a long term 10 year fix which took till 2008 to complete. The A330 pitot tube flaw will play out the same way.

The NTSB also does a poor job of finding real issues and correcting the problems.

I'm only aware of two.
 
Any plane that cannot safely continue with a simple blown tire is not airworthy.

A tire burst, as referred to in FAR Sec. 25.729(f), is a sudden, sometimes violent, venting of the pressure from within a tire, usually associated with a flaw in the tire, foreign object damage, or tire overheat/overload. The FAA assumes that tire bursts will occasionally occur, given the severe operating environment of airplane tires, and the fact that certain tire damage may go undetected until tire failure. Analyses and laboratory tests are performed to identify critical areas, and design changes are often made to ensure that a single tire burst will not cause loss of critical functions.
 
Boy, where do I start? Once in a while parts are going to fall off an airplane. No way around it. So it's Continentals fault CDG can't keep it's runways clear for later operations? How about (like a previous poster said) designing an aircraft to take a catastrophic tire failure, protect rest of aircraft from said failure and being able to continue the T/O and give the crew time to decide what to do.

It just the French courts trying to make Continental a scapegoat. I hope CAL fights this to the end.
 
"The charges had said the engineers could have acted much earlier to correct well-known design flaws in the plane."

yeah but it's OK to still blame a randome mechanic and airline, whatever.
 
The crew also shut down the remaining engine on the left side with the other only producing little power. Concorde fixed the tire burst problem with Kevlar plates under the wing tanks and non-burst tires. If you do that after a crash, you gotta know that it was flawed from the beginning.
 
Did anyone really think a French court was not going to find fault with a US carrier? Do you really think they would find fault with a French carrier & French (also British) plane?
 
Actually the NTSB does a great job in finding the real issues. It is the FAA that does a lousy job of taking those recommendations and making them law.

Correct!! By law, the NTSB can only make recommendations to the FAA, they have no power to enforce anything. Its up to the FAA to take action, which if they do anything, it usually takes decades for them to change a problem.....
 
Last edited:
Now there is a surprise, blame someone else.


Did you even read the article? It assigned 30% of the blame to EADS.


As for some of the other posts in this thread, I knew it wouldn't take long for some idiots to mindlessly post anti-French rhetoric along the lines of "Freedom Fries":rolleyes:
 
someone needs to let the Germans loose again

Now that is an idea that is easy to get behind. 1 problem, as there would be a significant number of ROPers (Religion Of Peace) annihilated, it would be claimed another Crusade and much lefty whining would ensue.

Ooh, we already have one right above my post!
 
Last edited:
Did you even read the article? It assigned 30% of the blame to EADS.


As for some of the other posts in this thread, I knew it wouldn't take long for some idiots to mindlessly post anti-French rhetoric along the lines of "Freedom Fries":rolleyes:

EADS is wot, 15% French? So they blamed 0.045% on the French. Sacre bleu! Me thinks you loves your women unshaved and your cheese stinky. Perhaps both being both?

"Holdings
Germany doesn't directly own shares in EADS, whereas France owns 15 percent. Holdings in EADS are evenly balanced between the two countries. When the company was created in July 2000, Stuttgart-based DaimlerChrysler AG owned 30 percent, the French state 15 percent; and Lagardere SCA, a French media company, 15 percent"
 
Every policy written by the FAA is written in BLOOD! Without a catastrophic crash or loss of life, they won't/don't change a thing.

It's pretty lame that they are blaming CAL and the mechanic. We fly planes, things go wrong and unfortunately, people die! Nuf said. Quite trying to blame someone else...just learn everything you can from the tragedy and fix it!!

Now PUT YOUR HANDS DOWN! :laugh:
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom