Yemeni Airliner Down in Comoros (Indian Ocean)

[WhiteKnuckles]

The questions you ask are very easily googleable

Uh-huh. So why should this forum even exist? Can't EVERY subject just be Googled and render this kind of discussion superfluous.

People on technical boards seem to fall so easily into sarcasm and snideness. Is that part of some "geek syndrome"? I'm wondering if people enter technical training equipped for civil discourse and have it beat out of them. Or does the lack thereof predispose people to tech colleges?

Well, whatever. I'm so used to this kind of unnecessary putdown from over 20 years of doing this that I know it comes with the territory.

[TheRealAncientMarine]

Uh-huh. So why should this forum even exist? Can't EVERY subject just be Googled and render this kind of discussion superfluous.

People on technical boards seem to fall so easily into sarcasm and snideness. Is that part of some "geek syndrome"? I'm wondering if people enter technical training equipped for civil discourse and have it beat out of them. Or does the lack thereof predispose people to tech colleges?

Well, whatever. I'm so used to this kind of unnecessary putdown from over 20 years of doing this that I know it comes with the territory.

Have you ever considered WHY you have been "unnecessarily put down" for over 20 years?
Per

[MCM]

WhiteKnuckles -

These boards exist for conversation and discussion about aviation safety.

I think that most people expect that if you are going to discuss issues, you at least do some background reading and understanding.

Even now Germany's navy has no carriers? Or can it really be Germany has no navy? In any case, there's no need for a Lufthansa pilot to be German, right?

This isn't aviation safety, so what sort of answer do you expect? Someone to give you a large discourse on the German navy? Your question was answered, yes, succinctly. It was not rude, but factual.

No-one expects everyone to know the answer to everything, but an answer that was "pithy" or "succinct" seems entirely appropriate to a question that isn't even on topic.

[Evan]

Uh-huh. So why should this forum even exist?

To discuss the Yemenia crash. I make one off-hand remark and suddenly this is the German Naval Inadequacy Discussion Forum. I have to be more careful.

On topic, can anyone provide definite information on what should be known by now. Did the flight reject an initial landing attempt and go around or were they simply on the base leg turn of their initial attempt? Based on where the wreckage was found, and factoring in drift and the six hours it took them to find it, where did the a/c likely go in? What measures are being taken to recover evidence? What were the maintenance issues cited in the past? All I've heard lately is that 10 more bodies have washed up on the shore. Grim. Why did it take them six hours to get to the scene of the crash? Were there in fact eye witnesses, or is that also a ruse? Where, exactly, did it drop off the radar? Before the turn to base or during it? Were the runway instruments working properly? Has the lone survivor been able to provide any useful testimony?

Is there currently an investigation going on? Does the press know this? Where is the coverage? The media is unusually off the case it seems. Are all the forensic minds on the Michael Jackson story? Have we become bored with air disasters this summer? An A310 dropping out of the sky is bigger news to me than the death of a has-been celebrity turned reclusive, selfishly indulgent tycoon cartoon.

[Evan]

The reports I have state the crash happens at 22:50Z and the wreckage was first located at 05:00Z the following morning, six hours later, not two. The wreckage was only 2-3 NM off the coastline. According to the only survivor, there were other survivors in the water after the crash. She claimed to hear voices around her. If the response had been adequate, perhaps there would have been more survivors.

Aren't international airports required to provide fire and rescue equipment? If they are situated with a final approach over water, shouldn't those provisions include search and rescue boats as well, with powerful searchlights, radar, sonar and trained crews on duty while the airport is open?

[WhiteKnuckles]

Have you ever considered WHY you have been "unnecessarily put down" for over 20 years?
Per

You can quote what I say. Can you also read it? I gave a good brief summary of what I think the reasons are. I think you find them unpalateable, so you just pretend they were never said.

Somehow, whenever people take the trouble to learn something a little bit technical, they then approach discussions as if they have to show just how big theirs is. I've seen it repeatedly. I've made a pretty good effort to ignore it and do something I'm actually very good at: problem solve. Instead of being one of the persons who seem to derive a great sense of accomplishment by dismissing possibilities, I try to find what an argument has to offer. I can think of several of those attempts so far. But the herd mentality, the salvoes from the resident gurus, have been pretty uniform.

An example: MCM dismisses the concept that Capt. Ho of China Airlines 006 was operating with severely diminished capacity. But his technical position is that the NTSB did not "just blame it on jet lag". Well, the fact is that they gave several proximate causes of the incident and the only explanation for the elementary mistakes that I can find in the report is the discussion of his failure to get adequate rest in the period leading up to the flight. It is being excessively technical to ignore that much discussion just because it didn't cause the plane to dive. This, in my opinion, is what someone does when they wish to put someone in their place. Rather than argue reasonably, they merely find any method to attack a phrase here or there.

So, yes, I have thought a LOT about the tendencies that I see here that are reminders of every discussion I've been in with someone with either technical credentials or ambitions to be admired for techspeak ability. They are more concerned with self-image than the productive process of problem-solving.

[Spad13]

Hmmmmmmmmm. Pithy. Let me guess. A navy without carriers. But Lufthansa's pilot could be any nationality. Am I getting it?

You are, except that Lufthansa hasn't hired too many expats in the past few decades. They haven't needed to. Germany is no Bahrain.

[Spad13]

People on technical boards seem to fall so easily into sarcasm and snideness. Is that part of some "geek syndrome"? I'm wondering if people enter technical training equipped for civil discourse and have it beat out of them. Or does the lack thereof predispose people to tech colleges?

Civil discourse (at least, quality civil discourse) presupposes equal (or at least close to equal) preparation levels on the part of all parties. When preparation levels are hugely different, quality discussion is hard to maintain, since it becomes necessary to bring things down to the lowest common denominator.

[MCM]

An example: MCM dismisses the concept that Capt. Ho of China Airlines 006 was operating with severely diminished capacity. But his technical position is that the NTSB did not "just blame it on jet lag".

... however I have looked at this accident and have no reason to question the NTSB finding. Fatigue clearly affects the way you can react, and whilst it wouldn't have helped the situation, it wasn't the causing factor.

I have not dismissed the fact he may have been tired. In fact I'm sure he was. I have been there, done that, and yes, it is tiring. The problem is, that if being tired qualifies for true fatigue impairment, then every accident that has ever happened on a longhaul aircraft was caused by fatigue. Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they are casually eliminating evidence... they may well have put serious consideration into it, but come to the contrary position. In this case, I have.

You seem to think that just because I disagree with you, or that I agree with the NTSB, means that I am trying to "put you in your place"?

In general I enjoy reading the thoughts of well considered posts here. There are people from all walks of life with different experience levels, and it leads to some interesting discussion and concepts.

Evan is a good example. Whilst I have certainly had disagreements with him over the necessity/best way to solve an issue, I respect the fact that he comes to a very considered opinion. It doesn't always agree with mine, but it is a considered opinion none the less.

Instead, what you have done is change your tack on every post you've made. You claim one thing, and in the next you claim the exact opposite. You claim the NTSB say one thing, when they in fact say the other.

The snide remark I made, I believe, was perfectly valid... if you are going to report what the NTSB said, then you should have actually read, and understood same.

Discussion is about questions, answers and possibilities. You claim that many here are trying to grandstand by disproving you... and yet you, yourself, have been given answers to your questions and yet continue to argue the point. You are entitled to do so, however to say that the rest of us are just trying to attack a point or two is a bit rich.

This, in my opinion, is what someone does when they wish to put someone in their place. Rather than argue reasonably, they merely find any method to attack a phrase here or there.

I believe that I have given you more than enough detail and information to ALL of the questions I have answered, and I have not been overly selective of which questions I have responded to. Your problem seems to be that you don't like anyone to disagree with you.

Pot, Kettle?

[bobdxb]

Based on where the wreckage was found, and factoring in drift and the six hours it took them to find it, where did the a/c likely go in?

Evan, I have to correct you on this; wreckage (most probably small items) was not found and they believe it is somewhere 300-1200 mtrs below sea level. To understand how search and rescue works in a country like Comoros you have to read a bit about the country itself; I was there in 1996 and believe nothing has changed in a country with GDP of 700USD according to info on the net....

Therefore you can imagine that is not same level of SAR we are used to in developed countries; I believe since independence sometime in 1975 they still heavily depend on French living next door....

Why did it take them six hours to get to the scene of the crash?

As I have mentioned before it is not busy airport and to organise SAR could be challenging; it was in the middle of the night when most of people living there sleep. First to be at the scene was a group of fishermen....

[bobdxb]

According to the only survivor, there were other survivors in the water after the crash. She claimed to hear voices around her. If the response had been adequate, perhaps there would have been more survivors.

I doubt she meant survivors; it was dark, and she could only have heard voices (probably fishermen in small boats looking for survivors)....

Aren't international airports required to provide fire and rescue equipment? If they are situated with a final approach over water, shouldn't those provisions include search and rescue boats as well, with powerful searchlights, radar, sonar and trained crews on duty while the airport is open?

In a country with almost no industry and tourism, GDP of 700USD I doubt we are talking of what should "International Airport and proper support" stand for....

To recall again my last visit to Moroni; can't remember of any radar coverage, therefore I doubt it was available...going back to my speculations of how they conducted approach and when they last contacted Moroni Twr I eagerly wait for official records, transcripts of CVR...

[Evan]

In a country with almost no industry and tourism, GDP of 700USD I doubt we are talking of what should "International Airport and proper support" stand for....

I did read the CIA factsheet on Comoros yesterday; it is indeed a very poor country. They have two modern patrol boats, a eurocopter A350 and a large soviet MIL for search and rescue. The main harbor is on another island, so the boats would probably be there and a good 50nm from the crash site. I'm not sure they would want to fly the helos in that wind either.

But let me make a point: The island is also host to several resorts and a major international airline that is landing heavy passenger a/c on their runway. I think any airport servicing such flights should be required to have adequate SAR capability on duty whenever the airport is open. The passengers that travel on these flights place their lives in the hands of the airlines they trust and assume their safety is being looked after, and pax leaving France are never handed a notice telling them that the destination airport has no provision for search and rescue.

The country is poor, but the airline is not. Comoros should finance SAR through landing fees, hotel taxes and grants from the aviation industry.

All the major regulatory agencies should ban major airlines from operating flights to airstrips like this unless they conform to basic safety requirements, or at least provide explicit warning to passengers at booking time that the destination lacks these things and that they travel with increased risk.

Having said that, as a photographer I have traveled to many remote and poor countries and have flown on some frightening a/c. But I knew the risk and opted to take my chances. It goes with the business. I doubt very much these victims, boarding a modern A310 in France, had any idea what risk they were taking.

[EconomyClass]

Actually, wouldn't it be possible for there to be a rescue cooperative? I see no reason why a country that tiny has to divert funds from other necessities as opposed to belonging to a multination cooperative that provides search and rescue for an area. National pride could give way to a more sensible approach to establishing infrastructure for a common need.

[Evan]

Actually, wouldn't it be possible for there to be a rescue cooperative? I see no reason why a country that tiny has to divert funds from other necessities as opposed to belonging to a multination cooperative that provides search and rescue for an area. National pride could give way to a more sensible approach to establishing infrastructure for a common need.

As I stated above, the government of Comoros need not divert funds from other necessities. The aviation and travel industries should provide these things wherever they operate. And they need to be localized. Response time is critical.

[MCM]

No airline around the world provides its own Search and Rescue.

"First World" airlines would not operate to an airport without a certain level of Rescue and Fire Fighting (RFF) service, and I would imagine Comoros has at least limited RFF on these airports. They are not, however, large scale search and rescue for "at sea" and "off airport" crashes.

It is unrealistic to expect these nations to have Search and Rescue. It would be nice if they did, but unrealistic. It is also a rediculous concept that an airline like Yemani has to provide not an on airport, but an off airport rescue service for every airport it operates to! It just can't happen!

It isn't an ideal situation, but if you are going to fly to lesser developed countries, it is unfortunately a risk you take.