It is now 10 hours since the latest tragedy to hit NY took place. Speculation in the UK media naturally turned towards an act of terrorism - but was it? On the face of what I have heard so far, this A300 Airbus had an engine blow up over Queens. No doubt the doom and gloom merchants within our hallowed halls will speculate to the worst scenario possible but this time I think it was just what it appeared to be, a tragic accident. My condolences to the people of NY - you have had it rough my friends.
Latest NY Tragedy
- Thread starter Red Devil
- Start date
spankyface
Registered Senior Member
Remember the possible significance of today's being Veteran's Day observed...
blonde_cupid
Registered Senior Member
Other NY plane crashes...
Chagur,
Maybe Bobby Lee was talking about other planes that fell apart in the air over NY and crashed in the same general vacinity as yesterday's Airbus crash.
Do you remember TWA flight 800, the Boeing 747, that broke apart in the air over Long Island, NY and crashed into the sound on July 17, 1996? Witnesses reported seeing a missile hit the plane. In its public report, the FBI theorized that witnesses mistook the back half of the plane falling into the water as a missile.
Most recently, in the aftermath of the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks, many people "in the know" slipped up and included the TWA flight 800 crash on their list of terrorist acts. If you're interested, more about TWA flight 800 can be found at http://www.twa800.com.
Chagur,
Maybe Bobby Lee was talking about other planes that fell apart in the air over NY and crashed in the same general vacinity as yesterday's Airbus crash.
Do you remember TWA flight 800, the Boeing 747, that broke apart in the air over Long Island, NY and crashed into the sound on July 17, 1996? Witnesses reported seeing a missile hit the plane. In its public report, the FBI theorized that witnesses mistook the back half of the plane falling into the water as a missile.
Most recently, in the aftermath of the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks, many people "in the know" slipped up and included the TWA flight 800 crash on their list of terrorist acts. If you're interested, more about TWA flight 800 can be found at http://www.twa800.com.
Bobby Lee
Quote: Ntsb statistics on air safty doesnt favor the accident theory, the chances of three planes crashing in the same area is slim and none!! Unquote.
Sorry Bobby but wrong, so wrong. There have been the following accidents to A300 airbuses.
June 88 A320 crashes on French Swiss border 8 dead. Demo flight.
Feb 90 A320 crashes India. 90 dead.
Jan 92 A320 crashes Strasbourg on approach. 87 dead.
July 92. A310-300 crashes Kathmandu. 113 dead.
Sept 92. A300 crashes Kathmandu. 167 dead.
Mar 94. A310 crashes Siberia. 75 dead.
Apr 94. A300 crashes Toulouse. Crew doing engine failure tests. 8 dead.
Sep 97. A300 crashes Sumatra. 234 dead.
Feb 98. Taipei airport. 196 dead and 7 on ground.
Jan 00. A310 crashes Adidjan. Just after takeoff. 179 dead.
Aug 00. A320 crashes off Bahrain. 143 dead.
American Airlines has 35 Airbus 300 planes. 250 are flying with 27 airlines worldwide. The A300-600 variant all built in France.
One point: Ops and Safety editor of Flight International, David Learmount, says "For the engine to detach following engine failure is extremely unlikely". I suppose that could fuel some more debate about possible causes but my "accident" theory still holds good.
http://www.skynews.co.uk/skynews/storytemplate/storytoppic/0,,30000-1035006,00.html
Quote: Ntsb statistics on air safty doesnt favor the accident theory, the chances of three planes crashing in the same area is slim and none!! Unquote.
Sorry Bobby but wrong, so wrong. There have been the following accidents to A300 airbuses.
June 88 A320 crashes on French Swiss border 8 dead. Demo flight.
Feb 90 A320 crashes India. 90 dead.
Jan 92 A320 crashes Strasbourg on approach. 87 dead.
July 92. A310-300 crashes Kathmandu. 113 dead.
Sept 92. A300 crashes Kathmandu. 167 dead.
Mar 94. A310 crashes Siberia. 75 dead.
Apr 94. A300 crashes Toulouse. Crew doing engine failure tests. 8 dead.
Sep 97. A300 crashes Sumatra. 234 dead.
Feb 98. Taipei airport. 196 dead and 7 on ground.
Jan 00. A310 crashes Adidjan. Just after takeoff. 179 dead.
Aug 00. A320 crashes off Bahrain. 143 dead.
American Airlines has 35 Airbus 300 planes. 250 are flying with 27 airlines worldwide. The A300-600 variant all built in France.
One point: Ops and Safety editor of Flight International, David Learmount, says "For the engine to detach following engine failure is extremely unlikely". I suppose that could fuel some more debate about possible causes but my "accident" theory still holds good.
http://www.skynews.co.uk/skynews/storytemplate/storytoppic/0,,30000-1035006,00.html
Last edited:
Oh well ...
blonde_cupid
Do believe Bobby Lee was referring to the three recent incidents.
As for flight 800, I'll still go with the fuel tank explosion.
Red Devil
I think you're mixing apples and oranges ... and different sized oranges at that.
And, thanks for the 'Sky News' link.
kmguru
I think I'll stay with your possible bird strike idea for now.
Particularly since the engines were GE.
blonde_cupid
Do believe Bobby Lee was referring to the three recent incidents.
As for flight 800, I'll still go with the fuel tank explosion.
Red Devil
I think you're mixing apples and oranges ... and different sized oranges at that.
And, thanks for the 'Sky News' link.
kmguru
I think I'll stay with your possible bird strike idea for now.
Particularly since the engines were GE.
Last edited:
I vote: "Accident" due to mechanical failure
Look, the damned airplanes weren't built right to begin with...too many Airbus A300 series have had problems for this to be considered anything but a mechanical failure. The quality of the materials used to make the parts may be bad or the design was faulty to begin with, the quality of construction may be bad, something is wrong with the A300 series and the industry will learn from this...they may want to consider grounding all A300 airplanes until all pass inspections and new ones being built are thoroughly checked by the FAA.
Look, the damned airplanes weren't built right to begin with...too many Airbus A300 series have had problems for this to be considered anything but a mechanical failure. The quality of the materials used to make the parts may be bad or the design was faulty to begin with, the quality of construction may be bad, something is wrong with the A300 series and the industry will learn from this...they may want to consider grounding all A300 airplanes until all pass inspections and new ones being built are thoroughly checked by the FAA.
It could have been resonate vibration. Resonate vibration is hard to detect and requires that sensors be put in the right places to detect it and will not usually show up unless in flight or under actual load conditions that cause it. Over time the vibrations cause metal fatigue which weakens the strength of the metal. I believe that there was a incident where it was attributed to the pressurization of the passenger cabin over and over throughout the life of the aircraft. The end result was that the passenger cabin top seperated and came off in flight.
Markx ...
The incident I was referring to was:
ALOHA AIRLINES, FLIGHT 243
BOEING 737-200, N7371I,
NEAR MAUI, HAWAII
APRIL 28, 1988
Bowser
Looks like another government site blocked. Couldn't access the NTSB's Accident Synopses to check out the final determination. The closest I could come re. the corrosion aspect was:
The incident I was referring to was:
ALOHA AIRLINES, FLIGHT 243
BOEING 737-200, N7371I,
NEAR MAUI, HAWAII
APRIL 28, 1988
Bowser
Looks like another government site blocked. Couldn't access the NTSB's Accident Synopses to check out the final determination. The closest I could come re. the corrosion aspect was:
Last edited:
kmguru
Staff member
A large number of planes are old. While, no one knows how long they will last. Two years ago, I was on a plane that had a 1974 date stamp on it. Boeing has a longer history than Airbus. May be a major review is needed so that a dozen planes dont fall from the sky in one year...
Any good company....
follows FAA guidelines....and has all their aircraft inspected....not only inspected but every "so many" miles the aircraft engines need to be replaced. Also parts of the airplane are routinely replaced....haven't you seen old airplanes that have different looking "patches" all over the fuselage? They are different looking because some are newer than others. Pilots write up the airplanes for maintenance and in some cases aren't supposed to fly (for your safety and their own) the aircraft if it has mechanical problems....any little light that comes on that shouldn't come on...any little thing that isn't working that should be working...they have a preflight checklist that they have to go through and a checklist for every emergency possible....it's all standardized. That is why we shouldn't complain so much when our flight is delayed or when we have to switch airplanes...it's for our own safety. Time vs. Safety.....the old "I'd rather loose one minute of my life than my life in one minute" saying.
follows FAA guidelines....and has all their aircraft inspected....not only inspected but every "so many" miles the aircraft engines need to be replaced. Also parts of the airplane are routinely replaced....haven't you seen old airplanes that have different looking "patches" all over the fuselage? They are different looking because some are newer than others. Pilots write up the airplanes for maintenance and in some cases aren't supposed to fly (for your safety and their own) the aircraft if it has mechanical problems....any little light that comes on that shouldn't come on...any little thing that isn't working that should be working...they have a preflight checklist that they have to go through and a checklist for every emergency possible....it's all standardized. That is why we shouldn't complain so much when our flight is delayed or when we have to switch airplanes...it's for our own safety. Time vs. Safety.....the old "I'd rather loose one minute of my life than my life in one minute" saying.