Russia passenger jet engulfed in flames during landing! - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: harnon
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2019, 11:37:22 pm
content: "Oh, I'm sure that's as bad as it looks..... OK its worse than it looks." Seems like the emergency services were just?

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:26:26 am
content: First they said it was 13 dead but now its 40, airline claims technical failures, wittinesses at airport claims lightning!Company already sued, why wait for investigation!Aircraft is a Sukhoi Superjet-100 . Same type slammed into a mountain during promotion , pilots had turned of TAWS!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Mount_Salak_Sukhoi_Superjet_crash

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 03:37:05 am
content: There is another video out showing it not in flames at first contact with the runway, which was quite hard. The plane becomes airborne again and is in flame the second and final time down.Pilot had declared an emergency and was attempting an emergency landing. Whatever was going on things went very badly. In some ways it is amazing how many survived.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 01:36:49 pm
content: Yes, hard bumping, passenger video from inside,apparently jet circled Moscow twice before emergency landing.Ruptured central tank from impact?

author: Ice-Tea
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 01:57:08 pm
content: He landed that?

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:09:57 pm
content: Well the landy bits weren't on fire.Emergency services are totally fucking shit there by the looks. I've seen them at Heathrow and there's piles of vehicles that hit the runway instantly. There's one fire truck in that video which is like "nyet" until he's finished his vodka or something.Remind me never to fly Aeroflot!

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:14:11 pm
content: NOTE: This message has been deleted by the forum moderator Simon for being against the forum rules and/or at the discretion of the moderator as being in the best interests of the forum community and the nature of the thread.If you believe this to be in error, please contact the moderator involved.An optional additional explanation is:

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:21:06 pm
content: I think what I'm saying is justified. This isn't hate. The pilot clearly did his best but the ground support was abysmal. Look at the report when it comes out. Comms were out as well. Where the hell was all the ground support? There was literally NONE until half the plane had evacuated.To note I happen to live under the Heathrow approach and stuff like this crap scares the hell out of me on a daily basis. We occasionally get near misses and bits of planes landing in our gardens. This bugger flew over my house under a minute before it went down:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_38Compare Gatwick for example:

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:38:35 pm
content: BD139 you dont listen to whats said in the video. Its speculated the pilots lost tower contact, besides not on fire on first impact, so ground support cant pre position itself more then told. If you scared on a daily basis what about move house?Anyhow, this crash is going to be politicized just as 737Max went as Superjet100 is a prestige project.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:46:27 pm
content: I have listened to the video. You're right about speculation.Ground support should be aware of the approach pattern even in an emergency situation. That plane had landed and half the passengers had evacuated before they even got there. Even a runway a mile long is less than 2 minutes at 30mph. That had been down way longer than 2 minutes.I have tried to move once already but the chain fell through. I am in the process of trying again.

author: ElectronicSupersonic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:48:32 pm
content: Jet fuel is dangerous. Jet fuel combined with a lot of incoming (under high speed) fresh air is even more dangerous.As far as I can understand (judging from what is left of the aircraft), it could have ended way worst then that (don't get me wrong, it is still a VERY tragic event).

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:58:02 pm
content: Yeah definitely could have ended worse for sure. Most people don't survive that. A lot of the problem with these events is when the aircraft is on the ground, smoke and oxygen deprivation is as much of an issue as the actual fire so they need to get ground support out there which is my point. 41 people died so far but you have to ask how many less that would have been if that ground support was there.Another example of this:

author: Homer J Simpson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 02:59:26 pm
content: Another report on possible lightning strike.https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48174169This is another one that is going to be interesting as to the cause.Did a lighting strike take out electronic / electrical systems ??-k

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 03:26:16 pm
content: I heard on the radio today and this seems to support it, that some passengers tried to get their hand lugage from the overhead lockers and so slowed down the evacuation.https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-plane-crash-survivors-delayed-evacuation-by-reaching-for-hand-luggage-after-jet-was-hit-by-a4134976.htmlSuppose it's possible that people in shock wont think clearly.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 03:38:32 pm
content: Quote from: MT on May 06, 2019, 02:38:35 pm737Max was not politicised and i m still wainting for the relevant people that are basically guilty of manslaughter to be prosecuted! a safety critical system that only works like a safety critical system if you pay extra, jesus fucking christ! it has obviously not politicized enough! I hope to never fly on an aeroplane designed or made in america and that is just my sonse of self preservation.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:02:37 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 06, 2019, 03:38:32 pmThen you must missed the entire reporting about it. It has been politicized over their political ears! Count the money and follow the money.Its all about the money. I don t have any problem flying with a 747 and gladly do so again.Quote from: bd139 on May 06, 2019, 02:46:27 pmGround support should know yes yet fire broke out on second impact to me it looks like central tank burst open.Now reported one of the Russian pilots claims lightning strike at take off caused problems.Lets speculate, lightning takes out radio, they circle Moscow twice decides to land, ground support have no idea they are coming in?

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:12:19 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on May 06, 2019, 03:26:16 pmThat unfortunately matches general behavior of Russian flying public.Even making people follow the correct group assignment is next to impossible. You can attribute it to the fact that there are no groups in Russia, but at this point I don't think it is the only reason.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:12:30 pm
content: Quote from: MT on May 06, 2019, 04:02:37 pmoh I am sure someone tried to make it all about poor america and Trump i am sure had plenty to say but there was not much to actually politicise about the damn thing is dangerous. Yes I have flown 747's and the problem is that we have little choice in the planes we fly. the 737Max was only called a 737 so that pilots could fly it without aditional training neglecting the fact that it was a different aircraft from previous 737'sIn western europe we have fairly stringent safety rules because there is only one way to do flying if you want to get out alive and that is safely.Russia has always been notorious for it's poor approach to safety, that's the only way they got their version of the shuttle into space and they killed more people doing it than america. I am sure the same cavaleir attitude was taken in this crash with 1 thing that sort of looked like a fire truck arriving some time later and clearly no one expected it as no one made way for it.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:24:30 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 06, 2019, 04:12:30 pmI dont think we dissagre on that, the damned thing is dangerous quite clearly so. And thats one of the politicizationwhen Boing CEO et al saying its perfectly safe while whole MCAS software undergoes rewrite, another was the hearings in senate/congress etc, etc.QuoteObviously and the certification is a "con job" and on and on as per the ongoing 737MAX thread on this very forum..QuoteWeeeeeell! Its debatable.QuoteThe Russians as well the Chinese want to sell their jets so they have to comply to international standards.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:28:24 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on May 06, 2019, 02:21:06 pmThat was the first thing I noticed as well - at first I thought it happened by complete surprise and gave no reaction time from the first responders but, hearing that the plane had already reported it was in distress, I found really strange to see how slow the reaction was.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:32:25 pm
content: In the time it took them to touch down the fire truck could have been there. Fire trucks are usually kept close to the runway for obvious reasons.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:33:00 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on May 06, 2019, 03:26:16 pmWhat do you mean "people in shock"? People are idiots, shock or no shock.Every day anyone can see how self-absorbed people are. They have no regard to anything but themselves. People think getting their hand luggage is more important than the life of the person behind them.Add stupidity and they lose their own life.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:34:20 pm
content: Quote from: MT on May 06, 2019, 04:24:30 pmSure it's debatable, the same as I view the ISO certifications my employer has achieved to not be entirely solid but the framework to try and do it right is there, unfortunately people don't always take their jobs very seriously. Our enviromental certification was such a joke that our "training" consisted of watching an advert for wisky.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:37:12 pm
content: Quote from: soldar on May 06, 2019, 04:33:00 pmI think people take flying for granted. I don't and if I could i would never fly. Knowing how stuff works makes you aware of how things can go wrong. Self absorbed people are usually clueless about just about everything and would not survive day to day life if it were not for others that design the technology we use in everyday life.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 04:55:58 pm
content: Quote from: MT on May 06, 2019, 04:02:37 pmI do not know what you would call "politicizing" but I do not see it in the case of the 737 MAX. It seems like a proven fact that they tried to cut corners and the mess is the result of cutting corners. I don't think politics enter into the picture. At least not yet. We shall see if there are serious coverup attempts which would not surprise me.Quote from: MT on May 06, 2019, 04:02:37 pmWhat does the 747 have to do with anything? It is the 737 MAX which is under scrutiny.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 08:51:13 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 06, 2019, 03:38:32 pmAdd "in the 21st century", I don't think American planes used to have that much problems in the past.Quote from: Simon on May 06, 2019, 04:12:30 pmI'm not going to argue that Russians or anyone in Eastern Europe for that matter is nearly as obsessed with safety as Westerners, but AFAIK neither Russian nor Soviet spaceflights have actually killed a crew since the 1970s. Of course neither did the British, but Americans for example didn't fare that well with 14 people dead in the shuttles alone.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 08:54:32 pm
content: Much more important than who built the plane or where, is how well it has been maintained.In this case we don't know yet what went wrong but the fire was apparently caused by a hard landing exceeding the limits of the airframe and rupturing a fuel tank. The slow response of the emergency services likely contributed to the fatality rate. Why the plane landed so hard will not be known for some time.

author: chris_leyson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 11:09:55 pm
content: I think it is quite likely that a lightning strike took out enough of the control systems to make the aircraft somewhat difficult to fly or difficult to land. 1st pass too fast, 2nd pass and "automated systems didn't work" 3rd pass and they're down but that was one hell of a fast and hard landing. Looks like the pilots could still fly the aircraft but not land it safely, we will have to wait and see what the air accident report says. I think they decided not to dump fuel because they were over a populated area.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 11:39:55 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on May 06, 2019, 04:12:19 pmThat's not limited to Russians, pretty much all such evacuations involve some of this. Western flight attendants perhaps do a better job of telling the passengers to not retrieve stuff but it still happens. I will be interested to hear what the passengers that survived have to say about the preparations provided by their flight attendants were.Also, if there was no fire on first contact and then on second contact we get this level of fire the only thing that could cause that size of flair up is a ruptured fuel tank -- a ruptured fuel line wouldn't do that I don't believe.Brian

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 11:41:38 pm
content: Quote from: chris_leyson on May 06, 2019, 11:09:55 pmI'm not sure how long the flight was planned to be, but planes are often marginal to land with full fuel so it's possible that exacerbated whatever problem they had to begin with.Brian

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2019, 11:44:42 pm
content: A ruptured tank is more likely to occur than a ruptured line anyway. Airliners have wet wings, meaning the wings themselves are sealed and used to hold fuel. An impact hard enough to cause the structure of the aircraft to buckle will often tear open the skin and cause a large fuel leak.

author: ElectronicSupersonic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 01:18:38 am
content: Quote from: chris_leyson on May 06, 2019, 11:09:55 pmJudging from the landing approach, pilots were struggling to control the aircraft. Despite the hard landing, fuselage remained relatively intact (moments after the impact at least). Though until some investigation data is released, we can only speculate what actually had happened.In between the wings (in the bottom part of the fuselage) one of the fuel tanks is located. (IMHO) hence the flames since the aircraft hard landed straight on its "belly". Here are some pics from the assembly plant (these are in Russian, but pics are pretty much self explanatory and doesn't need to be translated)https://victorborisov.livejournal.com/246320.html?nojs=1https://russos.livejournal.com/1009845.html?nojs=1Another interesting thing to note, that most of the flight control systems are of non Russian origin (USA/EU made). In general the plane has many non-Russian components/systems, which in itself was/still is a topic of constant "holly wars" in the Russian part of the net. Since it is the first civil aircraft that was designed from scratch in modern days Russia and has no USSR legacy, it is considered as a matter of national pride to be able to produce hi tech stuff domestically (only from domestically made parts). Which is BS (IMHO) since almost everything now days is made of parts produced around the globe.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 01:31:42 am
content: The circumstances and response are reminiscent of another fire, theSaudia 163 disaster.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 01:34:33 am
content: Perhaps the fake diploma management should clean up its actin Russia you don't need a college education to work with complicated design issues that arise in high end aerospace design. more like 1000$ and shady man with a printer and some connections.hey, finish high school, drink yourself retarded for 4-5 years, then pay a grand to get a job at russian lockheed (if they even check to make sure its not a 17 year old with a masters degree).boris, are you sure you placed the turbine facing correctly?? the spinny bit is supposed to be in the back like a boat right?and in most normal countries, there would be 100 fire fighters waiting for that plane to land and they would bumrush it with foam immediately (with a fire truck that drives up to the plane at 40 mph). where is the staff? perhaps those engineers are better suited waiting in a fucking fire station rather then designing planes.they should leave the dead burned bodies in the plane and give the designers a little tour before the investigation occurs. make sure they get a whiff. and I really mean the manager that approved it all.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 03:35:19 am
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on May 07, 2019, 01:34:33 am, pity you at the degree of your mind that is heavily brain washed ... and so much hatred.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 04:38:26 am
content: don't really need to go past eastern poland to know its trash

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 05:05:36 am
content: No sense in feeding the trolls.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 07:02:21 am
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on May 06, 2019, 11:39:55 pmI've noticed people in thu UK don't take notice of the announcements. My bigger concern with flying is the other passengers stupidity than the safety proceedures being effective.I was once delayei by 4 hours because the passengers on a plane rioted.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 07:19:06 am
content: Can we calm the country to country hatred please. This thread is looking ripe to just lock.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 07:59:56 am
content: Quote from: Simon on May 06, 2019, 03:38:32 pmCould you please moderate your language "Global Moderator"?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 08:23:42 am
content: Anyone else want to get banned?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 08:56:08 am
content: I am not a king and understand that I will get some flack but making up false quote from me or any member for that matter earns you a banning. Not the first time someone is banned for it and it was not me that was imposonated last time. Same rules for all here!

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 09:02:36 am
content: nope, none of what is in that quote has anything to do with me.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 09:10:31 am
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on May 07, 2019, 01:34:33 amWhere did you get that information? Or did you make it up on the spot? What a stupid post.

author: Gyro
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 09:12:30 am
content: Quote from: Simon on May 07, 2019, 08:23:42 amMaybe the safest advice would be not to take an active part in any 'controversial' threads that you are moderating. There can be no accusations of bias or whatever then.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 09:56:03 am
content: Quote from: Simon on May 07, 2019, 09:02:36 amYou know, this is what I see and what that guy apparently had an issue with but didn't reproduce in full.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 10:30:01 am
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on May 07, 2019, 01:34:33 am'Hate' BS and insinuations of 'starting political arguments' aside..with the usual trolling ignition that goes with it,is there any -TRUTH- to this backed by facts?are they employing jet printer diploma dumbasses to service the planes?i.e. are some/all/no Russian airlines suss,and or run by 'profit first' suited dirtbags with mental issues, unemployable business college flops masquerading as 'businessmen'buying into companies with the fortunes their expired mums and dads willed over to them ?FWIW: it's no secret (unless you're into bucket of sand head dunking) that MOST current corporats running a company FIX NOTHING till something breaks,to save a bundle on preventative maintenance, bag easy dividends and draw in more share bunnies.When a few more things are about to break, they sell off the company to the next sleaze corporats who buy it cheaper with some sort of apparent money/loan/securities (?!)and fix what's broken and NOTHING ELSE, till sooner or later you get a disaster like this.Is it any wonder most corporats ride around in private jets ?

author: JVR
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 10:50:37 am
content: Quote from: Simon on May 07, 2019, 08:23:42 amYou ban a user for literally quoting you? All hail Simon, long may he reign

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 11:28:58 am
content: Quote from: JVR on May 07, 2019, 10:50:37 amGo back and read, fiund my original text he "quoted"

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 11:30:52 am
content: Quote from: Gyro on May 07, 2019, 09:12:30 amI'm not sure how I am supposed to be biased. A guy pretends to quote something I said that is not what I said. This has nothing to do with the topic at hand, regardless of the topic I will ban anyone that makes up false quotes from anyone.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 11:45:41 am
content: Right it appears that I did say some of what was quoted and for some reason Zucca felt the need to edit it.There are no rules against swearing although we don't expect everyone to swear in every other word. Curiously Zucca has more of a problem with "Jesus" and "Christ" than he does with "Fucking". I have reversed the ban. Thank you to soldar for pointing my original text out to me.As a general rule, please do not modify text you are quoting, it causes confusion and in the past we have had users making up false quotes which will not be tolerated.This thread however is not going well with the east/west bashing and will end up locked if this continues.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 11:52:28 am
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on May 07, 2019, 10:30:01 amAgain, more totally made up BS.It bothers me how sectarian and provincial people can be. A bridge or a building collapses in China or Russia and people come out of the woodwork saying those countries are nothing but corruption and politics but a bridge or a building collapses in America and it is not the fault of the whole country but of a single incompetent architect or engineer. This bothers me.I have worked with engineers in Mexico and in China and I have found excellent professionals the same as I have found incompetent idiots in America and in Europe. I have found corruption and inefficiency everywhere and politics in business is everywhere.There are differences in degree among countries, among industries, among companies. America has plenty of corruption and other faults but whena bridge collapses in Floridaora crooked politician is sent to jail in Chicagowe do not make the thread about how everything is wrong with America. Can we do the same with other countries?

author: Muttley Snickers
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 12:39:10 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 07, 2019, 11:45:41 amI'm not a religious person but can understand where using JFC could perhaps upset some people and rightly so. One of my old girl friends despised the C word and I had a habit of using it frequently, I still say it but I now find that reading it is something else, offensive in fact.

author: JVR
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 12:48:39 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 07, 2019, 11:45:41 amI dont give a shit about swearing, there are browser extensions that fix that. My issue is you reaching for the ban-hammer immediately, without giving Zucca a chance to defend himself. You are a mod, here to keep the peace, and remove spam. Not to just ban users that toe an unwritten rule.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 01:02:33 pm
content: Quote from: Muttley Snickers on May 07, 2019, 12:39:10 pmAll swear words can be considered offensive by definition:QuoteHow people react to them is very culturally dependent. If you said "fuck (knulla)" in Swedish people would consider you very vulgar, if you said "good lord (herre gud)" or "satan (fan)" hardly anyone would raise an eyebrow. What I'm trying to say is that I don't think we have to pay special attention to religious swear words, there is always someone who will find a swear word offensive, that is the point.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 03:41:05 pm
content: Swear words have their uses and I personally don't find them offensive but it does get tiresome when they are used excessively. Some people seem to think that some form of "fuck" is a mandatory prefix to nearly every word in the english language and I've often thought it makes them sound like idiots.I'm more bothered by people ripping on entire countries with baseless accusations. Everywhere has its stereotypes and in most cases they are based on a bit of truth but it should be obvious that not everyone fits those.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 04:11:17 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on May 07, 2019, 03:41:05 pmI would find it odd if someone didn't use a swearword when something really bad happens, it would be as if they didn't care as much. It's needed to express strong emotion, which is also evident by how common swearwords are everywhere in the world. But if you use them too much they just become noise.Quote from: james_s on May 07, 2019, 03:41:05 pmSame.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 04:19:28 pm
content: Did you hear about the airplane crash in Russia? I am watching video of the passengers that got off and it's not one or two but most of them have their hand luggage with them. Those people should be punished severely if it is proven they slowed the evacuation.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 05:01:49 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on May 07, 2019, 03:41:05 pmSame.My comment about American designed and made planes is a logical one. All American plane designs and modifications go through certification by a national body. That national body is clearly corruptable or is not being thorough enough while the American manufacturer is clearly devious, dishonest and puts proffits before lives. Both Boing and the American aviation authority should be investigated. the 737Max has made clear how made in America does not work with regard to planes and is one of the big sticking point with international trade deals because America will want to sell products to other countries that in those countries are deemed substandard. From what i know the American aviation authority employs ex boing employeesI have no idea how other aviation authorities work and so have nothing to say about them because no holes have been blown open by scandelous behaviour by any of them or the manufacturers they regulate.

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 08:22:18 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on May 07, 2019, 05:01:49 pmWhy restrict your ignorance to "other." It's pretty clear you don't know how the American authorities and industry work either.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 08:37:52 pm
content: Well then explain it to me. The 737Max clearly demonstrates the attitude of Boeing to profit or saleability over safety and had the audacity to sell an essential safty feature as an addonthis all was perfectly fine by the aviation authority that let them do it. That is what I base my judgement on, am i wrong in my assesment?As i said i do not have knowledge of such a situation in other countries, if you have examples please share.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 09:59:37 pm
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on May 07, 2019, 08:22:18 pmIgnorance ?https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/02/politics/boeing-faa-investigations/index.htmlhttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/sully-sullenberger-op-ed-boeing-sully-federal-aviation-authority-boeing-737/People from USA sometimes seem to be blind that USA government is heavily lobbied by super rich industrial complex. Military industrial complex is pretty much calling the shots.Boeing being what it is pretty much gets it's own way. FAA will not be allowed to stand in a way of a 60 billion USD a year business. Compromises are being done all the time, above and below the table.Everybody will do the dance, of course, and it will look nice and procedural, but in the end they will get it their way.Supercorporations don't care about moral or even legal, if they end up making money on it. Also, that is same corporation that makes shitload of weapons, and makes tens of billions of USD on that too.Being in the business of making tools to mass kill people means they are not very concerned about human lives. It's only good business.They are only making passengers planes safe because of laws and the fact that safety is one of very important marketing metrics. Safe planes are worth more.If they could make more money selling unsafe planes they would do that. Of course that's not logical and won't happen.But would they hide a "detail" ( Dieselgate style ) that might impede sales of 10 billion USD worth of planes ?If they thought nobody will catch them (again Dieselgate style) and if they had scapegoats ready to take the fall if somebody does, they will do it. And they did it.It just capitalism, too much money was in question...If there was a law that would stipulate that any aircraft manufacturer caught manipulating or falsifying FAA test would loose government contracts for 10 years, then nobody would play with the fire.Or if caught, that FAA would pull permanently pull certification for the plane in question, pending redesign and full recertification...But nobody will get punished, except few puppets, Boeing, will spend less than 10% of what they made with a scam on fines, retributions and marketing campaign to fix their public image and that will be it.And people who made money on it will smile...

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 10:21:56 pm
content: The 737 Max incidents are very similar to some past incidents involving new high tech aircraft, the DC-10 comes to mind here. I think it is less a matter of aircraft designed in this country in general, and more a matter of layers of human error that is obvious in hindsight. Boeing jets overall have an excellent safety record, the 737 is the best selling and most produced passenger jet in history, so many that there are hundreds of them in the air at any given time. Incidents are pretty rare and I don't think it reflects on the entire country or system. I'm more interested in the response to the incidents and what is done to prevent it from happening again. I'm quite confident the plane will be safe to fly when it is allowed back into service.

author: windsmurf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 10:55:19 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on May 06, 2019, 03:37:05 amYa bursts into flames as it bounced twice off of the tarmac.https://youtu.be/Iqd_0VfjXjM

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2019, 11:05:46 pm
content: Quote from: soldar on May 07, 2019, 11:52:28 am"I have found corruption and inefficiency everywhere and politics in business is everywhere."More or less my point above,non "sectarian and provincial" and BS free

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 01:03:07 am
content: Blancolirio takes a shoot at Superjet100 and 737 MAX and Jacksonville 737 overerun and 60min AU vid!Blanco claims jet coming in hard and bounce, but on the video (and 2'nd below) the jet seams to be completely leveled and then nose dive and then making the bounce, blanco also not aware about the 2 roundabouts Moscow that occurred. However points out a possible pilot newbie error made similar that hapend with Fedex crash in Japan.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 01:57:48 am
content: Fedex bounce crash.

author: SkyMaster
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 02:14:06 am
content: Quote from: Simon on May 07, 2019, 05:01:49 pmIn Canada, and in United States, the civil aviation authorities (TC in Canada, FAA in USA) do not have enough personnel to review and analyze every details of new aircraft design. These civil aviation authorities delegate part of the responsibilities to selected engineers employed by aircraft manufacturers (I am using the word engineer loosely, as they are not always engineer in legal term).These selected engineers are not selected randomly; they are chosen by the civil aviation authorities after years of collaboration.Nobody is perfect, and everybody makes error, but I never witnessed, or be made aware, of any cases of corruption between an aircraft manufacturer and the civil aviation authority; either in Canada or in United States.

author: windsmurf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 04:47:40 am
content: Quote from: SkyMaster on May 08, 2019, 02:14:06 amI don't know how accurate is the information below, but I found it interesting (although it kind of sounds like a rant).https://www.thelastboeinginspector.com/the-last-inspectors-blog/corrupt-faa-services-industry-yet-again-with-carelessness-and-corruption-allowing-unsafe-airworthiness-directive-noncompliant-boeing-airliners-to-remain-in-service

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 06:43:25 am
content: Quote from: james_s on May 07, 2019, 10:21:56 pmNo, the two aeroplanes that crashed were run by "poor countries" that did not purchase the optional feature that warns you that the so called safety system is malfunctioning. The whole way it was done is frightning. They allow the plane to autonomously correct itself relying on one sensor only. They allow a computer to crash a plane because it relys on data from one sensor only. This breaks first eprinciples of safety critical design. You never ever rely on one sensor only. If your selling the bit that makes it a safe for extra then quite frankly you should be nailed to a post by your balls!

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 06:47:57 am
content: Quote from: SkyMaster on May 08, 2019, 02:14:06 amTrue, but sometimes, certain circumstances made us naturally to "suspect" heavily something is not right, or fishy.A fact and example, decades and billions spent project like Lockheed Martin F-35, yet, it doesn't even can fly safely, yep, fly, not failed to fire missile, failed stealth ability and etc, just expect it to fly safely, how hard is that ?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 06:54:57 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on May 08, 2019, 06:47:57 amWhen we were sat down at work and told that the company was going for the ISO standard for enviromental stuff it was heavily emphasised that we were doing it because it was what customers demanded in order to give us contracts. The managinging director had more to say about that than that it was the right thing to do for the environment and ourselves. We were then shown a short film by the consultant that was helping us achieve the standard that was supposed to be about a company that also when through the qualification and we were then shown what amounted to an advert for a whisky company that had nothing to say on the topic at hand and just banged on about it's wonderful wisky.Did anyone care? NO!, was it illegal? NO! was it immoral? yes but who cares it's business. Sure it won't lead to anyone dying but it was not in the spirit of the law or the rules.And now the Quality manager is tearing his hair out as to how he stops people putting the wrong things into the wrong bins.........

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 06:56:27 am
content: On the topic:http://www.ganssle.com/tem/tem373.html#article3That level of "engineering" is for elementary school science fair.Not something that was supposed to leave proof of concept testing..

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 08:35:02 am
content: Quote from: SkyMaster on May 08, 2019, 02:14:06 amNobody is perfect, and everybody makes error. - - That is why there are procedures to check, crosscheck, double check and check again. You do not leave crucial decisions to a single point where mistakes can happen.QuoteCorruption to me is a word that encompasses a lot more that bribing someone. A cozy relationship between the (government) supervisor and the supervised company where they both take it easy because it suits them both is corruption. Anything that impairs the final intended result of stringent supervision and guaranteeing the objectives are met is corruption. An organization can be totally corrupt and yet nobody is taking bribes. The people there can be individually doing their jobs but the overall result is worthless. That is also a corrupt organization.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 11:30:53 am
content: Quote from: soldar on May 08, 2019, 08:35:02 amPrecisely, did my employer break any rules in their poor implementation of the laws? no, but I still deem it correct. The odviser was more about how to get through the audit than how to do it properly.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 11:37:17 am
content: Quote from: Simon on May 08, 2019, 11:30:53 amThis is a massive problem and exactly nails it. You can pass an audit with paperwork in place and people looking like they're doing the right things but it's still a cargo cult.One of my favourites is the failure in risk management. A company passes the audit if it has a risk register. So anything risky gets added to the risk register. This turns into a massive rug that all the shit is swept under as the risk is accepted by management. All that does is legitimise failure.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 11:44:53 am
content: For the ISO 9001 you have a clear up and choose which project you will show so that you know the paperwork is all in order. The auditor is a private company that want to be coming back to do the ordit.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 12:09:36 pm
content: For a while I worked for a company which built aerospace and military electronics and it was rife with "soft corruption". Smoking where it was forbidden, doors kept open which should have been kept shut, cabinets unlocked, use of illegal solvents, etc.The day we were going to have an audit/inspection by the military everybody was warned beforehand and things were made to look right for a while until the charade was over and we could go back to normal.Granted, this was 25 years ago and things are probably not as bad today.What is most important is a culture of real excellence and not just a culture of getting by. This is more important than the rules. The best of rules are worth nothing in a culture that does not strive for excellence.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 12:27:31 pm
content: Yea, a bit like tht where i work and no doubt everywhere.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 12:28:19 pm
content: As a contractor I have worked for about 20 companies in the last decade or so. They're all just as bad as each other.The problem is humans.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 12:59:21 pm
content: Anecdote time:We had a clean room where a bunch (20 to 30) young women soldered and built whatever assemblies they were working on. Getting in and out of the clean room was a pain so they had toilets in there, so they didn't need to come out.The clean room was surrounded by panoramic windows so you could see from outside what they were doing inside. We called it the "fishbowl". My office was right there and I enjoyed the view of the clean room. All this was in an underground basement so no windows to the outside. It's probably illegal today to have so many people working in a basement with insufficient egress.One day, mid-morning, the air quality alarm in the clean room went off and all work was halted. My boss, who was also in charge of the clean room, inquired to see what had caused it but nobody could provide any useful information. Finally, after some intense pressure, one of the girls admitted she had secretly smoked in the toilet. A couple hours wasted, a lot of work needed to be redone etc.Later I was walking with my boss to lunch in another building and he was furious and ranting about "women" (cannot imagine such thing today) and how they were no good in the workplace. I pointed out that the woman in question had done exactly what he did all the time everyday: smoke where it is forbidden. He was a heavy smoker and would smoke everywhere where it was forbidden but, obviously, not in the clean room because he understood the problem. He said it was not the same smoking in the elevator (where we were), than smoking in the clean room but I said ultimately it is the same, it is each person judging which rules should be followed and which could be ignored.I am a non-smoker and militant anti-tobacco. My boss would come into my office smoking and I would put up with it but I had an underling who would also keep coming into my office with a cigarette in his hand in spite of the many times I told him not to do it because it bothered me.So one day, when he walked in with a cigarette, I cried "fire! fire!" and I doused his cigarette (and him) in water. Guess who got in trouble. Yup, yours truly. Not real trouble but my boss talked to me and told me that, even though smoking was "technically" not allowed, I could not expect people to abide by it because we all knew it was just a "technical" rule. And what I had done was assholish.But the underling never again walked into my office with a cigarette in his hand.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 01:12:57 pm
content: Ugh that's horrid. I sympathise. I did a summer placement at a company doing surface testing of nicotine staining. I had to make a smoking machine to get the nicotine out. This was basically a smokers pipe, large vacuum chamber, filter and vacuum pump. So I was 17 at the time, fortunately in age, and had to go down the local off license with about 100 quid in petty cash, buy several packs of cheap tobacco and a couple of pipes and a box of matches. The guy gave me the stink eye when I bought all that. Back in the lab, this worked pretty well but I spent two damn weeks covered in sticky tar and in a lab without an extractor that the top half was basically full of tobacco smoke. Felt sick, irritable and ugh. I never smoked and never will and hate anyone who does. The engineering company I worked for actually had a smoking room. In rebellion, when this was closed, a couple of the engineers tried to be clever and put a tupperware box over the smoke detector and fired up in the lab. Someone hit the alarm and the whole site got evacuated. Only 2500 people on that site down for an hour.Sounds off topic perhaps. Well no. The security team were first back in when they had the opportunity and did a site sweep and found 100 doors propped, classified paperwork all over the place, PCs unlocked, the lot. Doesn't matter how much six sigma and ISO you throw at something if you employ people who don't give a shit.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 02:46:22 pm
content: Well, employees do what the culture allows. In some countries rules are more lax than in others but even within countries different companies are different from one another. An employee who joins a company with lax attitudes will soon have the same attitude. An employee who comes from a lax culture but joins a company where they are strict about following the rules will soon join the same attitude... or be kicked out.I think it is the leadership who set the tone and the culture. If you are in a company with low morale and shoddy work you will not give your best.

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 02:49:14 pm
content: Getting back to the Russian jet crash, it seems they had a real emergency where they could hardly control the plane and flying around dumping fluids was not an option. They had to land immediately PDQ.We shall see what comes out of the investigation.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 03:10:21 pm
content: Quote from: soldar on May 08, 2019, 12:59:21 pmTake your nonsense gobeligook stories to your own thread, it has nothing to do with Russia jet crash!

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 03:15:36 pm
content: Quote from: MT on May 08, 2019, 03:10:21 pmWho made you moderator here?

author: Gyro
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 07:01:11 pm
content: Quote from: soldar on May 08, 2019, 03:15:36 pm@MT: Best that you don't get in the way of soldar's personal quest to get to 1k posts faster than anyone else in forum history!

author: Dude111
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 07:04:15 pm
content: I read about this the other day,its quite sad indeed...........

author: windsmurf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 07:30:11 pm
content: Quote from: soldar on May 08, 2019, 12:59:21 pmIn the U.S., dousing someone in water is considered assault, with potential jail time and fines.

author: windsmurf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2019, 07:31:36 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on May 08, 2019, 12:28:19 pmThe Borg collective agree.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2019, 09:12:12 am
content: Quote from: windsmurf on May 08, 2019, 07:31:36 pmThe humble percentage of Collective on this Cube don't quite agreeThe problem is money borrowing profiteers buying and running companies they shouldn't be, to make a fast buck whilst staying on top of the interest payments,and cutting corners on high risk 'no oops option' industries, like aviation and utility power systems etcPeople are living in a fools paradise to be flying about so much anyway,most do it because it's too cheap and something to gab about at their monotonous shallow gatheringsand guess where 'cheap' comes from = cutting maintenance and staffFlying with any airline not following regulations and engineer/designers maintenance routines is playing Russian Roulette at bestThe unfortunate people on this flight lost

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2019, 09:24:55 am
content: All those are human issues.I would gladly accept assimilation at this point. At least the borg all worked together on something

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2019, 11:10:17 am
content: The current Borg Collective hovering about had better not assimilate any OneHungLow districts to score cheap parts for implants

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2019, 11:27:59 am
content: Yep. Assimilated 1000x 2n3055s from Aliexpress for deflector array.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2019, 12:05:02 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on May 09, 2019, 09:12:12 amThat and not paying tax on fuel.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2019, 12:31:41 pm
content: My guess is, the first hard landing ruptured a fuel tank and the trail strike on the second bounce ignited it. As to why the dodgy landing in the first place no idea.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2019, 01:33:39 am
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on May 09, 2019, 11:10:17 amQuote from: bd139 on May 09, 2019, 11:27:59 amDeparting Enterprise chat:"Serves those Borgbitchesright for not heeding our hails about big assimilation woes coming,way beyond concerns for Earth and a knackered time line.."

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 25, 2019, 09:04:34 pm
content: Was Russian aviation better under soviet goverment rather then post soviet union collapse in terms of safety? Serious question I am interested in, on the influence of communist rule on safety.

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 25, 2019, 09:27:07 pm
content: That's difficult to access. Due to extreme secrecy, a lot of accidents/losses in the Soviet union weren't reported and no doubt that many that were were blamed on other causes such as "Bogey Man" Americans. Other things such as the rise in aircraft bombings and hijackings have also played a part in the changing numbers.

author: SparkyFX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2019, 10:36:08 am
content: Quote from: paulca on May 09, 2019, 12:31:41 pmOver here there are some lakes, said to be the place where planes should dump their fuel while over, in case of emergency and too heavy to land (right after takeoff). How often that is used is hard to tell, as they are surrounded by forest, close to the airport. You still need to have the time for that and a good reason.As long as the cause is unknown, it is all speculation and with hindsight there is a lot to argue.If they lost contact to the tower and decided to return to the airport, burned excess fuel and then landed, there might not have been the foresight or time to prepare for a fire in the first place. I am certain there are rules when to do that.OTOH the rough landing caused the fire, maybe that was caused by higher weight, maybe they had no glide path estimations available due to a defect, maybe pilot error.

author: Kleinstein
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2019, 10:55:05 am
content: Some of the better early contributions (video from a pilot) noted that this plane does not have the option to dump fuel. It's a short to medium distance plane and thus there is not as much fuel anyway. So they should be safe landing with essentially fully fueled. They even got some 45 minutes of flight time so already quite some fuel used.The landing did look hard. So far there is little information on what problem they had with the plane and if this caused or contributed to the hard landing or if it was just a stupid pilot error.