Travel thread boi.
Travel thread boi.
Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | Big Bash League tipping champion of the universeCome and Paint Turtle
Cathay for me.
Do Ansett still fly?
Some people are still waiting for back-pay from when they did if that counts.
They still have a functioning website ftr.
Anyone flown into Queenstown who can give their view of the approach? 300m sounds a lot given the way the terrain around there is described in the article...
Originally Posted by Peter Mooresforever 63*
100ft below MSA is iffy territory, let alone 1000ft. Even practising stalls, the most I've lost is about 600ft (and that was early days). Some serious inattention all up in here.
I gather it was a clear day but if the plane was in IMC, you'd consider it really careless. That shouldn't change if the conditions were clear.
Last edited by Top_Cat; 24-08-2012 at 01:43 AM.
I do love the irony pointed out in the article - Jetstar saying that a plane flying below the minimum safe altitude is safe. One'd think that they necessarily contradict each other.
MSA has some margin but, well, I didn't realise it was that much...
Anyone remember this? The ditching off Norfolk by the Pel-Air bird? This was the hero pilot who was a Cleo Bachelor of the Year contestant at that time. The press abandoned him fairly quickly and this final report explains why, really.
The pilot in command did not plan the flight in accordance with the existing regulatory and operator requirements, precluding a full understanding and management of the potential hazards affecting the flight.In short, they only carried enough fuel for a normal ops flight, if they'd lost an engine on the way, regardless of bad weather, they wouldn't have made it either. This on top of several instances of flights from various operators *cough* QANTAS *cough* in that neck of the world operating without sufficient numbers of floaties. This a REX subsidiary, information relevant to your choice of carrier in future.Given the forecast in-flight weather, aircraft performance and regulatory requirements, the flight crew departed Apia with less fuel than required for the flight in case of one engine inoperative or depressurised operations.
More interesting bits;
Pilot in command
The PIC reported checking that the copilot was responding before moving rearwards into the cabin and ascertaining that the main door was not usable (Figure 7). Continuing rearwards to the two emergency exits in the fuselage centre section, the PIC opened the port (left, looking forward) emergency exit, and exited as water flowed in through the door opening.Chivalry is dead, it would appear.Copilot
The copilot recalled being alone in the cockpit before moving to the main door and attempting unsuccessfully to open it. The copilot reported that the fuselage then tilted nose downward and that a quantity of equipment and baggage descended or rolled down the fuselage as it filled with water. The copilot abandoned the main door, swam up towards the rear of the fuselage, located an emergency exit door by touch, and exited the aircraft.
CASA about to restore this bloke's fixie license, by the way.
Last edited by Top_Cat; 31-08-2012 at 12:52 AM.
New evidence undermines credibility of Pel-Air inquiry | Plane Talking
Okay, this is now actually getting quite serious. I mean, ****, if you're operating a company (REX subsidiary, again) in the middle of the bloody ocean and you can't land at the most logical alternate in the event of an emergency because you can't be arsed getting your planes up to standard, there's a serious problem because something like this was inevitable. That CASA and the ATSB seems to be taking it easy on them and pinning absolutely everything on the pilot is utter crap too. This is hot on the heels of a slew of CASA not being harsh enough on other carriers too. I'm wondering what on earth they are doing? Chasing ****s like me on the ramp to make sure I'm not on speed instead.
Last edited by Top_Cat; 07-09-2012 at 06:56 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)