another plane crash

Daisy11

Daisy11

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 February 2008
Messages
2,952
Visit site
workers have reportedly pulled a child alive from the sea where a Yemenia Airways plane crashed with 153 people on board. Skip related content
Related photos / videos
Yemeni plane crash
Play video Yemeni plane crash Play video Toddler survives Yemeni plane crash .Related content
Video: Yemeni plane crash
A doctor in the Comoros, which lies 190 miles northwest of Madagascar and a similar distance east off the African mainland, said the child had been plucked alive from the sea and was being taken to a medical centre.

The manager of the international airport in Moroni - the capital of the main island of the Comoros archipelago and the plane's intended destination - said the child was five. He added that five bodies had also been found.

Debris believed to be from the Yemeni Airbus A310-300 was earlier spotted off the Comoros in the Indian Ocean.

The plane - with 142 passengers, including three infants, and 11 crew - was flying from Sanaa to Moroni, when it went down in choppy seas as it tried to land.

There were 66 French nationals on board and two of the country's military planes and a French ship have left the Indian Ocean islands of Mayotte and Reunion to search for the Yemenia aircraft.

A Yemeni aviation official said there were also nationals from Canada, Comoros, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Morocco, the Palestinian territories, the Philippines and Yemen on the plane.

It is the second tragedy in recent weeks for France after an Air France Airbus A330-200 crashed into the Atlantic off the coast of Brazil on June 1, killing all 228 people on board.

A United Nations official at the airport said the control tower had received notification the plane was coming into land, and then lost contact with it.

Yemenia is 51 per cent owned by the Yemeni government and 49 per cent owned by the Saudi Arabian government. Its fleet includes two Airbus 330-200s, four Airbus 310-300s and four Boeing 737-800s, according to the company website.

France and the Comoros have enjoyed close ties since the islands' independence in 1975. The French Foreign Ministry estimates 200,000 people from Comoros live in mainland France.

The Comoros covers three small volcanic islands - Grande Comore, Anjouan and Moheli - in the
Mozambique channel.
 
these airbusses are nothing more than flying computers. they have to piloted to take off and to land, other than that they virtually can fly themselves so, being as computers can and do often"crash" what then???? a boeing on the other hand has to br piloted, i know which plane i'd rather fly with!!!
 
They need pilots... Engineers design them, but trust me, a plane needs a pilot. The many scenarios that will be tested at every 6 month simulator, are the sorts of things that pilots are needed for. I agree though, the Boeing seems to be the better and more prefered choice of many including myself!
 
Erm Salimali, I think you'll find that ALL airliners fly on autopilot the majority of the time so that's simply not true. The pilot will manually fly the take-off, switch to autopilot then manually fly the later stages of the approach and landing. Airline pilots are almost totally dependant these days on computer navigation systems anyway, and would be unable to land in poor visibilty without them. In fact on the more modern Boeing and Airbus (and other airliners) at certain airports they can land themselves. The purpose of the autopilot system is to relieve the mental fatigue of flying and the pilot inputs the data manually. Primarily heading, height and speed changes. It can't function on its own!! The aircraft follows a route programmed in following beacons and radio signals etc. Long haul would be virtually impossible without autopilot and in fact safety has been massively improved as advances in autopilot have been made.

The A310 is pretty old (launched in the 70's) and does not have the fly by wire systems of the newer Airbus aircraft. From what I've read it crashed on the second attempt to land in a very strong crosswind.

It's pretty rare for a crash to be caused by issues with computer systems due to all the back ups they have. Most of the time it's pilot error, maintenance issues or severe weather (normally take off / landing is affected by this).
A very tragic blow for all those concerned.
 

A very good answer suzysparkle.Both Airbus and Boeing are good solid aircraft and nobody need be afraid to fly on either manufacturers aircraft.It sounds very much like wind shear to me.
frown.gif
 
Or caused more to pilot fatigue! I think the CAA really need to review CAP 371 (I must stress I have little solid evidence for this but it often occurs to me that rosters rarely take into account circadian rhythms which lead to greater fatigue) if it is within legal limits... they can fly. Wasn't there an Airbus incident were the tail sheared off? I appreciate not the older model... Just my own personal musings and not supported by any solid evidence of my own.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Or caused more to pilot fatigue! I think the CAA really need to review CAP 371 (I must stress I have little solid evidence for this but it often occurs to me that rosters rarely take into account circadian rhythms which lead to greater fatigue) if it is within legal limits... they can fly. Wasn't there an Airbus incident were the tail sheared off? I appreciate not the older model... Just my own personal musings and not supported by any solid evidence of my own.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes if its within legal limits crew and flightdeck "can" fly.
We do however have our own minds and can - and do - go fatigued at extreme times of tiredness. ( i have only ever gone fatigued once in 3 and a half years)

Roster systems are always being looked at with new work patterns being sampled to maximise work with balanced rest.

Also fatigue report forms go direct to the CAA who look at reasons why that crew member has gone fatigued.
 
I am confused slightly but are you talking about discretionary time? I appreciate that 'you can make your own mind up' when in discretionary but I am talking about the day to day rostered flying. You are very lucky to have a roster where you have not been fatigued often and kudos to your company. The statistics (when available) do show it to be a big problem. In reality I think rostering maximises profit a lot of the time whilst keeping with the bounds of CAA legality, at the possible expense of flight deck... Again, my opinion only.
 

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that this thread and the inteligent replies regarding fatigue ,is listed alongside
H&H PETITION TO COMBAT DAFT VOSA HORSEBOX RULES.
Rules that are intended to reduce the risk from driver fatigue!
confused.gif
 
There was an incident where a tail sheared off yes but I forget what type of Aircraft it was. I think it was a Boeing 747 classic. It was caused by a repair to a tailstrike done wrongly about 20 years before and the subsequent cracks eventually failed. I remember seeing it on air accident investigation!!
Reading more about this incident it is apparently a notorously difficult airport to land at with lots of mountainous terrain. Windshear is I would have thought the most likely cause but I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.
 
I think losing a tail has occurred on Airbus too but thanks for the info... I am no expert! It does sound likely to be windshear but I haven't had time to route around (usually PPrune) etc. Thanks for the input though as its always interesting!
RIP to all and thoughts for the relatives.
I just tend to be very interested in the 'pilot' error side. Sometimes I ponder on the fairness given the competitive nature of the industry. CRM issues are now expected to be discussed and there is little point in my mind of developing high CRM courses if companies then ignore the advice (if they indeed do)or legislators who don't fly planes make duty hours long and unsustainable, or have no poor regulation of rostering those hours. Many are recommendations and are as such not liable to legal enforcement.
 
Im not talking about discretion - if you file a fatigue report it is looked at by the CAA not the company employing you - so therefore you cannot be disiplined for the absence.

I agree with you that crew and flightdeck are worked to the bare minimum though - as u say it maximises profits.

I know that none of our flightdeck would risk up to 220 lives (airbus 321) by being over tired.

I obviously cannot speak for other airlines though.
 
I'm always interested in these things. My career plan was to be a commercial pilot (on the 777 of course) but it got too expensive!! I have a private pilots licence with quite a few hours and instructed on gliders for a few years but I also did all the ATPL exams (the ones you need to pass to be an airline pilot). So, married a fast jet pilot, got a boring job and a Horse instead. I'm sure there will be plenty speculation on PPrune!!
The one I saw may well have been an Airbus but I just seem to remember it being a 747. Tailstrikes are pretty common in the larger aircraft so a fair chance it has happened more than once.
 
Ahhh Suzy that explains a lot! Yes training is crippling it has risen so much in even the last 10 years . My hubby is RAF too and I feel for many bailing out with dreams to join the airlines. There are limited jobs, poor chance of command, and spend all their pension on gaining an ATPL oh and then if and when they get a job you are bonded unless made of money! I would be chuffed even to have a PPL ... I am a nerd and a nato potato but that is as far as my airworthy-ness goes. My bent is from the legal side of things I am training to hopefully be a barrister and aviation law facinates me!...

Vicki I have a great deal of interest in CRM but do not teach it. I see its relevance and importance in many walks of life though! It has a lot of worth. Vicki.... no company would risk lives and this would be covered by staying within the legalities of the CAA, however, if you are rostered to do 2 deep night flights then 2 mediums during the next evening, you will feel fatigue. There is an ethos that if it is legal, its ok. I think the real acid test comes when pilots are so fatigued they will pass up lucrative day off payments as they are not fit to fly.... then you know things are bad!
Incidentally, if you don't mind saying, in what sort of depth do your CRM courses go? How would you improve them? Do you find them in your company well received.
Would like to thank you both for a highly enjoyable 'moot' on the topic.
 
My other half is a crew trainer and trains CRM following the CAA suggested 3 modules of CAP 371 and flight deck and cabin crew are put in the same room to combine dangerous goods, aviation security and all aspects of CRM using audio visual aids.

The day focusses on the NTS aspect of CRM inc the pilots session on FDM.

The course is well received by both cabin crew and pilots alike.
 
Thats good to hear Vicki... Would be interesting to see how CRM is delivered in the different airlines. Its nice to hear crew being satisfied with the programme.
 
The loss of the vertical stabaliser on the Airbus some years ago was due to hydraulic oil contamination of the composite material...There was a manufacturing change and round of inspections...issue gone.. The aft bulkhead repair that failed on the JAL 747 was just that...an incorrect repair that failed. However another Boeing model had a tail loss due to a design flaw ...and a Mcdonald Douglas aircraft had tail issues aswell, leaving one behind them... add to that the rudder hardover problems experienced due to a valve issue and it would seem tails are an area ANYONE can have issues with...

As for the anti Airbus rubbish posted above, it shows a complete lack of understanding. Most modern airliners are "fly by wire"...boeing too... and they ALL have autopilot....Otto is a nice guy and a very useful crew member!
smile.gif
They also have autoland and autothrottle.... Otto is a very busy crew member who frees the other two guys in the cockpit up to worry about other things..like safety...and which FA they are gunna hit on...
grin.gif


The "real difference" between A & B FBW systems is the Airbus "envelope protection"... Boeings system basicly lets the plane do whatever the pilot tells it even if it IS stall or rip the wings off, the Airbus sytem says "Hey, I will try and do what you asked...up to a point...I will not let you go toooo far" Of course it's a little
wink.gif
more complex and there are a few other differences, but thats the laymans version....
 
Oh no anti Airbus.... I have flown in both... I prefer Boeing... an informed decision. Thankfully I have people in the know on both sides, people I trust, who bother to explain to me much of the ins and outs of it. I am a layman with a "complete lack of understanding" and so do rely on good friends at the very sharpest end of things to explain to me in Layman's terms the whys and hows.....
I made no comment on the auto pilot system other than planes need pilots... I would like to think a pilot would have a bit more credibility than "to stall or rip wings off!" as said before... How does an autopilot cope with the scenarios thrown at them in a 6 monthly sim check?.....Gekko thank you for your imput... I don't know what airline experience you have whether you are an engineer, pilot, enthusiast, or air accident investigator... either way I don't doubt for one minute you know more than me. I am a housewife/student of law.
 
We also do a combined cabin crew/pilot crm exercise where cabin crew watch a few incidents on a video and try to explain to the pilots, who haven't seen the video, whats happened.The pilots then try and work out whats happened from the cabin crews description. They then watch the video themselves. Its harder than you think.
 
What a great forum name Speedbird and very appropriate to this thread! That sounds like an excellent practice and the sort of thing I imagine epitomises CRM. The fact that there are no barriers to communication from all members of the crew and encourages understanding and the ability to listen... it would eb great to see it done in a Sim environment but I appreciate possibly not ideal. Thanks for that Speedbird. I think a lot more areas of industry should use CRM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top