Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air Zimbabwe 767 Engine Surge, Tailpipe Flames, Mayday... Continues to Destination

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by ALT
    I exaggerate
    Originally posted by Evan
    3BS
    Indeed.

    I often exaggerate to make a point.

    But alas, getting you to acknowledge any shred of validity is almost impossible.

    Apparently not everyone agrees with your idea of a water-rescue squad...whatever the numbers are.

    I see your 'strong suggestion', I see ALT's exaggeration...

    I also see ALT's advice that "I strongly suggest" is taking a step over the line from parlour talk to misplaced and over-inflated and largely-false expertise.

    Still waiting on a shred of acknowledgement on how a bicycle ride might have insight into human reactions and startle factor.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by 3WE View Post
      I also see ALT's advice that "I strongly suggest" is taking a step over the line from parlour talk to misplaced and over-inflated and largely-false expertise.
      Perhaps I'm just used to more inspired parlours. There are plenty of taciturn and conservative pilot forums about where responses are very measured and nobody wants to take a stand. I don't see this as a pilot forum however. I see this as an aviation safety forum. I see this as a place to express activist thinking.

      On 30 June 2009, Yemenia 626 went down within sight of the airport with 152 souls on board. There was one survivor, a 14-year-old girl found clinging to wreckage, relatively unscathed. She had been floating there, within sight of land, for 13 hours! This was because the nation of Comoros, a resort destination with an ILS-equipped, French-financed airport landing heavy aircraft, having already been the site of a major airliner-ditching disaster, possessed no sea rescue capability. None! There is every reason to believe that more passengers, perhaps many more, survived the crash but perished in the hours following it due to weakened strength or exposure. It's hard not to have a strong opinion about that. I think it's kind of dead-from-the-neck-up to not have a strong opinion that. but that's just my IMHO.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Evan View Post
        ...having already been the site of a major airliner-ditching disaster, possessed no sea rescue capability. None!...
        [Bold added by 3BS]

        Ok Evan, I'll side with you that it seems like they should get a good jon boat, outboard motor, a trunk full of life jackets and maybe even hit Amazon's pool and rafting sections for some life rings and rescue ropes.

        https://www.trackerboats.com/boat/?boat=4599 What say you ALTCrew?

        Getting back on topic, I would hope that the Zimbabwe crew used good CRM and procedures and visited with operations/maintenance via radio and that maybe some investigation was made into what the engine hiccup was. It is mildly interesting to go from flame-belching and emergencies to, "Never mind, we'll be our way now".
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by 3WE View Post
          $ 23,795 !!!!

          --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
          --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
            $ 23,795 !!!!
            No.
            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              $ 23,795 !!!!
              And it doesn't even have a lavatory!
              Be alert! America needs more lerts.

              Eric Law

              Comment


              • #82
                A little more on the off-topic, what exactly does water rescue have to do with aviation? Most civilized countries already have water rescue capability that's used when people in boats find themselves in trouble. And in the context of rescue, an airplane that crashes into the water is effectively a boat.
                Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                Eric Law

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by elaw View Post
                  ***Most civilized[Bolded by 3BS] countries already have water rescue capability...***
                  Indeed.

                  However, Evan states in very black and white terms that the area had no water rescue at all whatsoever, and suggested a full fleet of high-speed rescue boats with a range of 300 miles, helicopters, deep-water submarines and a few hundred, well-trained water rescue individuals with deep-water nitrox diving equipment and decompression chambers and all...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3JyEBM9ovk (See footnote)

                  If there really is no rescue in this uncivilized area, I think the airport or airline should step up to the plate and buy the Jon Boat...I guess they could loan it out for "normal" operations, but then you risk the non-aviational authorities not having the same attention to procedure and letting the gas tank get low, or not maintaining the engine, yada yada…


                  Footnote: AMAZING relevance as the youtube addresses flames out the tailpipe! (and even shows a rather relentless pull up)
                  Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                    Indeed.

                    However, Evan states in very black and white terms that the area had no water rescue at all whatsoever, and suggested a full fleet of high-speed rescue boats with a range of 300 miles, helicopters, deep-water submarines and a few hundred, well-trained water rescue individuals with deep-water nitrox diving equipment and decompression chambers and all...
                    You forgot side-scanning sonar and UAV's

                    Originally posted by 3WE
                    If there really is no rescue in this uncivilized area.
                    There is no such thing as an 'uncivilized' ILS-equipped commercial transport-category airport. But in this case the airport is located near the main port for the island nation, capable of serving the large ships that bring in supplies and the local fishing industry. Certainly some of these vessels and their crews could be trained and outfitted as a rapid contingency response. Certainly such a response could retrieve survivors within an hour or two rather than half a day later. Oh, but I was asking for a fleet of destroyers wasn't I...

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Evan View Post
                      There is no such thing as an 'uncivilized' ILS-equipped commercial transport-category airport.
                      Noted- but conversely, you apparently have a beachfront, commercial, transport-category airport without so much as a jon boat- not on the premises nor an agreement to borrow anything from the local port.

                      To be fully certified as "civilized" I'd think you want something between "nothing" and "side-scanning destroyer fleets"...

                      Just sayin...
                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                        Noted- but conversely, you apparently have a commercial, transport-category airport without so much as a jon boat.

                        To be fully certified as "civilized" I'd think you want something between "nothing" and side-scanning destroyer fleets...

                        Just sayin...
                        Hello...

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Evan View Post
                          Hello...
                          For the record, I have never seen your original comments. Link perhaps?

                          ALT, using exaggeration, indicates that they were rather overstated.
                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                            For the record, I have never seen your original comments. Link perhaps?

                            ALT, using exaggeration, indicates that they were rather overstated.
                            Originally I had DEMANDED at least two naval destroyers positioned at all times within 500 miles of any airport larger than 100m in length, able to respond within 30 minutes (either via many such destroyers or destroyers capable of speeds in the hundred of knots). However, he talked me down from there to only requiring either a contigency plan using existing vessels and crews or a couple of rigid inflatables on trailers crewed by the existing emergency services team (or ideally both). I seem to remember that this was still considered ridiculous.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              With a sufficient increase in budget, maybe they could deploy some of these: https://duckycity.com/products/rubber-ems-duck
                              Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                              Eric Law

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Evan View Post
                                Originally I had DEMANDED at least two naval destroyers positioned at all times within 500 miles of any airport larger than 100m in length, able to respond within 30 minutes (either via many such destroyers or destroyers capable of speeds in the hundred of knots).
                                Ummm….okay...[snarcasm suspected]

                                Originally posted by Evan
                                However, he talked me down from there to only requiring either a contigency plan using existing vessels and crews or a couple of rigid inflatables on trailers crewed by the existing emergency services team (or ideally both). I seem to remember that this was still considered ridiculous.
                                Ummm….OK...Writing specific requirements is a little bit pushy, especially if most facilities to have some sort of plan and equipment- even though you apparently identified one without said plans and equipment.

                                Originally posted by Elaw
                                [***Silliness***]
                                Stop being silly...the Airport 77 YouTube is clear that those rescue capabilities are real! [/color=blue]
                                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X