Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    Thailand Expat
    dirtydog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Pattaya Jomtien
    Posts
    58,774

    Air crash 'miracle' for Colombia as plane breaks up

    Air crash 'miracle' for Colombia as plane breaks up

    Passengers had feared that the plane would burst into flames after the crash


    Survivors have been telling how a Colombian airliner broke into three on landing yet all but one of the 131 people on board escaped death.

    The Boeing 737 crashed as it came into land during a storm on the Caribbean island of San Andres.

    In what officials called a miracle, the aircraft's engines shut down on impact and its fuselage did not catch fire.

    A honeymooner spoke of seeing the plane split near his seat, then walking away from the wreck with his wife.

    "It was very surreal, like science fiction," Alejandro Murillo Pedrosa told BBC World Service.

    Passengers were scattered over the end of the runway and at least 119 people were hurt, some seriously. The only death was that of a woman, believed to have been 68, who suffered a heart attack on her way to hospital.

    Operated by the local airline, Aires, the plane had left the capital, Bogota, at around midnight (0500 GMT) on Monday and crashed at 0149 (0649 GMT).

    At least 16 non-Colombian nationals are reported to have been on the plane, from countries including the US, Brazil, Costa Rica and France.

    Barefoot on the runway Mr Murillo Pedrosa said he and his wife are recovering in the hotel they had booked for their honeymoon on San Andres, a popular holiday destination.

    His wife has a broken foot and bruising to her face and body, while he escaped with a broken collarbone and 15 stitches in his forehead.



    The flight, he said, had been uneventful until the approach to the island, in heavy rain, when the pilot ordered the crew to prepare for landing.

    "The back wheels of the plane touched down, but on this occasion it was much harder than usual - much, much louder," Mr Murillo Pedrosa said.

    "I remember being thrown forward against the seat in front, hitting my head, and from then on the chaos started, the banging around - the plane split more or less where I was seated."

    "I remember grabbing my wife and another person next to me and everyone was screaming and crying and shouting out that the plane was going to catch fire," he told the BBC.

    "What I did was get out, walking as best I could, get us away as far as I could - 150, 200m - walking with my wife and another woman who was asking about her husband.

    "I didn't know what to tell her because I felt like I wasn't really there, like it was a nightmare. I just walked, looked at my wife, I saw she didn't have some of her clothes - she was barefoot - but I saw she was OK, at least she could walk, limping."

    Low altitude Mr Murillo Pedrosa and his companions walked as far as a runway light, where they waited as ambulances and fire engines rushed to the scene.

    An airport taxi driver then arrived and took them to hospital, where they were among the first survivors to arrive.

    The authorities said the crash happened so quickly that the pilot did not even report an emergency to the control tower, according to the Associated Press.

    Investigators are trying to understand how the plane, built in 2003, hit the ground short of the runway, skidding on its belly with its fuselage fracturing, and its landing gear and at least one engine being ripped off.

    Flames which broke out on one of the wings were quickly extinguished.
    Col Donald Tascon, deputy director of Colombia's civil aeronautics agency, suggested the plane's low altitude as it approached for landing - perhaps 30m (100ft) just before the crash - might have prevented more severe damage being done to the plane and saved lives.

    "It's a miracle," Gen Orlando Paez of the national police said, commending the pilot's skill for keeping the plane on the runway.








  2. #2
    Member Mordechai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    10-08-2011 @ 07:47 AM
    Posts
    199
    I think maybe this might explain what happened to the Air France plane
    that disappeared over the Atlantic last year. I thought a plane could take
    a lightning strike no problems, seen it on youtube.

  3. #3
    Thailand Expat
    Thai Pom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 01:51 PM
    Location
    Back in BKK
    Posts
    1,856
    I dont think the strike, if it had anything to do with it, will not cause this...I would expect Windshear to be the cause.

  4. #4
    Member
    Bettyboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:27 PM
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    30,077
    wow!!

  5. #5
    Thailand Expat
    Thai Pom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 01:51 PM
    Location
    Back in BKK
    Posts
    1,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Mordechai
    I think maybe this might explain what happened to the Air France plane
    Totally differant

  6. #6
    Member Mordechai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    10-08-2011 @ 07:47 AM
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by Thai Pom View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Mordechai
    I think maybe this might explain what happened to the Air France plane
    Totally differant
    I know they thought it was the speed indicator, but earlier on they also thought
    the plane just got caught in a big thunderstorm.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    11-10-2012 @ 09:43 AM
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by Thai Pom View Post
    I dont think the strike, if it had anything to do with it, will not cause this...I would expect Windshear to be the cause.
    Same here,

    I experienced a lightning strike on a BA jumbo while landing at Don Muang. We were low just before the pond at the end of the runway. There was a bright flash on the port wing followed by a loud bang and plenty of oooo's and arrr's. The landing continued as normal.

  8. #8
    I am in Jail
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    22-08-2010 @ 12:57 AM
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by Larn View Post
    There was a bright flash on the port wing followed by a loud bang and plenty of oooo's and arrr's.
    And likely quite a few squirt's.

  9. #9
    Thailand Expat
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    60,017
    Holy crap. Buy a lotto ticket.

  10. #10
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:13 AM
    Posts
    60,408
    It's not beyond the realms of possibility to suggest a lighting strike could cause an outage in a critical flight control system at a critical point during landing. No doubt the Flight Data recorder will be able to prove or disprove this; I assume they won't have any problem finding it. But it's only speculation without hard data.

    As for Air France, without the FDR there is absolutely no point in speculating. Even Airbus can only make mildly educated guesses, although the weather at the time was severe enough to suggest it may have played a part. If they don't find the recorder, they almost certainly will never know exactly what happened.

    Until every single perfectly aligned set of destructive circumstances has befallen an aircraft, and the cause identified beyond doubt, you can guarantee that there will be accidents in the future. You can also guarantee that if there is no definitive cause, the manufacturers will try and blame the airlines or pilots, the pilots will try and blame the manufacturers or the airlines, and the airlines will try and blame the manufacturers or the pilots - unless they have something else they can blame it on.

    Either way, how lucky are all but one of those people:



    It will be interesting to see what the results are here. With all of the data intact, there can be no excuse for not finding a definitive cause of this crash.

  11. #11
    Mmmm, Bowling......
    mobs00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Last Online
    05-09-2015 @ 03:26 AM
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    2,161
    On a wing and a prayer

    Air travel is a question of trust, but a People & Power investigation asks what happens when that trust is shaken.

    People & Power Last Modified: 15 Dec 2010 15:20 GMT

    On a wing and a prayer - PEOPLE AND POWER - Al Jazeera English







    Air travel is a question of trust.

    We trust the science which says that air pressure over the leading edge of a wing can support a giant passenger plane across thousands of miles of sky.

    We trust that the design which shapes the plane matches the needs of this mysterious science.

    We trust that the aircraft's manufacturer follows this meticulous design to the very letter.

    And we trust that the official regulatory agencies have fulfilled their side of the bargain by monitoring and policing every step of that process - from drawing board to airport runway.

    But what happens if that trust is shaken?

    Every five seconds

    For more than a year Al Jazeera has been investigating allegations - made in US Federal Court proceedings - that between 1996 and 2004 ill-fitting, illegal and dangerous parts were assembled on to many of the most commonly-used passenger planes in the world today.

    The allegations concern the Boeing Company - the most respected name in international aviation and the world's second-largest commercial aircraft manufacturer.

    The claims were made by then employees of Boeing in Wichita, Kansas who were working on a radically new passenger plane - the 737 Next Generation (NG).

    Boeing had produced 737s since the mid-1960s, and the 737 series is the world's most popular short and medium-haul passenger aircraft. It is estimated that, throughout the world, a 737 takes off or lands every five seconds.

    But by the mid-1990s Boeing had begun to lose market share to its European rival, Airbus. To regain its pre-eminent position, Boeing decided to build an entirely new version of the 737 - the Next Generation.

    Earlier models were built by hand: as a result the dimensions or accuracy of each individual part would often be marginally different, resulting in the need for assembly workers to pack out gaps with "shims" or fillers. These added to the overall weight of an aircraft, making it more expensive to fly.

    Parts for the new 737NG plane were to be designed, manufactured and built by a revolutionary new computerised process called ATA. Not only would this ensure that each individual part was identical, but that each would be precise to within 3000ths of an inch.

    According to leading aircraft engineer, Dr Michael Dreikorn: "This ATA was designed so that the tolerances on putting the aeroplane together would be so tight that the aircraft would have higher strength and reliability. And in response to that, this aeroplane was certified to have higher gross weight and be able to operate at higher altitudes."

    Boeing through and through

    Every new aircraft design has to be assessed and approved by a regulatory authority: for American manufacturers like Boeing, the regulator is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

    Boeing submitted all its engineering drawings and data to the FAA and, in 1996, the FAA gave Boeing the thumbs up. It issued what the industry calls a Type Design Certificate - essentially a licence to manufacture the aircraft provided to all the specifications laid out in the engineering data which had been submitted and approved.

    Boeing planned to assemble the 737NG fuselages in Wichita. But it subcontracted the manufacture of some key parts to a company called AHF Ducommun, based in Gardena, California.

    Gigi Prewitt was Boeing through and through. Her family had worked for Boeing in Wichita for three generations and she was excited when she was asked to look after buying key parts for the 737NG. But within a short space of time, she noticed something was wrong.

    "The minute that I took the desk of buying 737NG parts I had shop personnel coming to me talking to me about the problems and the issues they were having with the parts not being manufactured accurately. [They reported] Shy-edge margins and were, out of contour, parts not fitting correctly ..." Prewitt says.

    'Catastrophic failure'

    The parts in question were some of the most crucial elements of an aircraft fuselage - parts known as "chords" and "bear-straps".

    An aircraft fuselage is like a giant tube. That tube is made up of interlocking semi-circular pieces of metal - these are the "chords" and put together they form the 'frame' around which every other part of the airframe is built ... and on which the external 'skin' is assembled.

    Exit doorways and cargo hatches are potential weak points in this fuselage: to strengthen them, huge re-enforcing sheets are assembled around the holes - these are the "bear-straps".

    So vital are these parts to the safety of an aircraft, that Boeing's own 737NG Structural Repair Manual - obtained by Al Jazeera in the course of its investigation - lists them as "Primary Structural Elements" and warns: "The failure of PSE's could result in the catastrophic failure of the airplane."

    According to lawyer Bill Skepnek - who for the last six years has become intimately acquainted with almost every nook and cranny of the 737NG design - when Boeing talks of the potential for these parts to cause "catastrophic failure", it means exactly what it says.

    "These are the parts of airplanes that, if they fail, we can have a decompression at altitude or we can have a rupture in the vessel, in the fuselage vessel of the aircraft. And as long as we can make that [fuselage] hold together we can keep the passengers safe."

    But in Wichita, Gigi Prewitt was not the only Boeing employee coming across reports of ill-fitting and badly made parts. In another building on Boeing's vast factory site, Taylor Smith was getting very similar-sounding complaints.

    "One of the shop managers sent me an email saying they were having problems with the fail-safe cords which are the long ribs that go all the way along the aircraft [...] They were telling me that from the beginning of the 1996 timeframe when they started manufacturing these parts, that they were coming in with shy edge margins, they were out of contour," Smith says.

    Boeing's internal documents, which Al Jazeera obtained, give a snap-shot of the scale of the problem.

    Part out of contour: quantity 1 … Part width – oversize: Quantity 4 … Material thin: Quantity 6… Part undercut: Quantity 26 … Hole mis-located: Quantity 17….

    They also show the source of the problem: AHF Ducommun.

    'Putting our foot down'

    But, according to Gigi Prewitt and Taylor Smith, Boeing rejected only a handful of these defective parts. The rest were assembled on to 737NG aircraft.

    "We were putting our foot down and not going to participate in allowing non-conforming parts to come in and be put on planes. But one of the managers was very upset in procurement and wrote an email and said 'this is stupid - there are already 300 of them out there on planes; why would we scrap them now?' So they used them, they put them on planes," Prewitt says.

    Finally, in early 2000, Boeing sent Prewitt, Smith and 12 other specialist employees to conduct an audit of the Ducommun manufacturing plant. What they found - and documented with photographs as well as reports - shocked them profoundly.

    Instead of being manufactured by the approved computerised process, Ducommun employees were cutting the parts by hand - literally using a felt-tipped pen to mark out the shape and then cutting the metal with a hand-cutter.

    Not only did this result in parts which could never meet the mandated 3000ths of an inch accuracy - but the Boeing team realised it violated the official type design: any aircraft with these parts on them would be legally "unairworthy" - and therefore not allowed to fly.

    But there was worse to come: every part in the production process has to be signed off at each stage of its manufacture on a document called a "shop traveller". This records that each individual stage of manufacture has been carried out in accordance with the type design.

    The Boeing team discovered that Ducommun had apparently falsified these records: it had two sets of "books" - the official one recording that each part had been made by the computerised process and a second set recording the actual, handforming process which had really been used.

    What that meant, in the eyes of the Boeing team, was that every single chord and bear strap manufactured by Ducommun had to be viewed as unlawful.

    Mystery

    Initially Boeing itself seems to have agreed: Al Jazeera obtained an internal draft memorandum prepared by senior Boeing officials in August 2000 and intended to be sent to the company's top management. It warned:

    "The severity of these conditions is documented via photographs and poses a quality risk to the production of quality airplane parts ...

    "Misrepresentation of the manufacturing process jeopardises the integrity of airplane parts ...

    " ... this situation cannot be ignored ...

    " ... the integrity of AHF-Ducommun as a partnered supplier places the Boeing Company at risk.

    "Immediately cease all new business activity with AHF-Ducommun and consider disengagement ..."

    What happened to this memorandum is a mystery: today, Boeing refuses to discuss it - or what actions it took on the recommendations.

    But Gigi Prewitt and Taylor Smith say that ill-fitting and out of contour parts continued to arrive from AHF Ducommun - and that assembly workers in Wichita took dangerous short-cuts to get them to fit.

    Some parts were so badly out of shape that they had to be beaten on to the airframe with hammers - a process which builds in potentially lethal pre-stress.

    The FAA had given Boeing "delegated authority" to police itself on matters like this - provided it reported problems voluntarily.

    Turning whistle-blower

    Both Smith and Prewitt wanted to come clean to the FAA, but claim that Boeing management threatened to sue them if they did so.

    Reluctantly, they turned whistle-blower - taking their concerns to the US Justice Department, which, under American law, is responsible for protecting whistle-blowers.

    According to Taylor Smith: "We actually met with the government and told them our story - they had the same reaction most people have when they first hear the story - we will protect you, we will not let you be retaliated against, we will keep you safe."

    The Department of Justice ordered two investigations - one by the FAA and, because Boeing had sold some 737NGs to the military, one by the Defence Criminal Investigative Service.

    But the whistle-blowers have been dismayed by these investigations. Al Jazeera obtained a copy of the FAA investigation - which the administration redacted. The only publicly-viewable "investigative actions" appear to be that the FAA looked up Ducommun's address and visited its website.


    The DCIS report was another matter altogether. Again, Al Jazeera obtained a copy of its investigative files - and these appeared to confirm some of the allegations about the manufacture and the safety of the Ducommun parts.

    Yet the Department of Justice finally ordered that both investigations be closed without action.

    The Boeing whistle-blowers lost their jobs during this period. For the past six years they and their lawyer, Bill Skepnek, have spent their own money trying to bring a legal action against Boeing and Ducommon on behalf of the American public.

    They are supported by highly-respected aircraft industry specialists and engineers like Dr Michael Dreikorn, a former FAA official.

    "It is getting to the point where there is going to be a catastrophic failure of a 737NG. We do not know when that hour is going to hit but we know it is going to happen," Dreikorn says.

    "I am very seriously concerned about a catastrophic cabin failure at altitude. And I think it would be a 737NG that will lose its ability to stay together and unfortunately will be a smoking hole in the ground."

    But the story of what has happened during this legal battle reads like the plot of a John Grisham novel. And it has left the whistle-blowers convinced that today they are fighting not simply one of the world's most powerful companies - but the power of the US government itself.

    As Taylor Smith tells the Al Jazeera filmmakers: "It's a tough road if you take a stand against large companies and the government and it's had a personal effect on me ... and my family. It's a heavy burden to bear. But my greatest fear is that the aircraft will start having big issues and there will start being crashes and there will be hundreds of people that are being killed and I'll wonder whether I did enough."

    DCIS REPORT
    DCIS files part one
    DCIS files part two
    DCIS files part three

  12. #12
    Thailand Expat
    phunphin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Last Online
    19-01-2018 @ 02:02 PM
    Location
    christchurch, NooZland
    Posts
    1,442
    I work in medical manufacturing, every 6 months our company is audited by our US parent company , they go over everything, every process we use has to be documented and certified..from raw materials to the media used to finish products.
    If anything does not pass inspection we have to fix it or we lose our ISO rating and our bussiness.

    In fact some of our products are machined at the airline workshops.(in NZ i should add)
    .
    Last edited by phunphin; 31-12-2010 at 03:19 PM.
    number of the beast

  13. #13
    Thailand Expat
    Marmite the Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Last Online
    08-09-2014 @ 10:43 AM
    Location
    Simian Islands
    Posts
    34,827
    Quote Originally Posted by phunphin
    In fact some of our products are machined at the airline workshops.
    Boeing's problem is that they are a huge employer so no external agency is going to publicly give them a hard time. They are also typical of US manufacturing industry in that they are technically backward and produce middling quality of goods at best.

  14. #14
    Thailand Expat
    phunphin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Last Online
    19-01-2018 @ 02:02 PM
    Location
    christchurch, NooZland
    Posts
    1,442
    that's half the trouble..no accountability..The medical industry is mind boggling regulated...
    Anything that goes in or near a patient must have traceability.including the gauges/instruments used by quality control.

  15. #15
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:43 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    17,681
    Columbia!

    DEA taking out a few runners, the island is a well known transshipment point. Easy to fake a 737 crash; the old lady was the mule.

    We don't waste time with the legal stuff in meraka

  16. #16
    Mmmm, Bowling......
    mobs00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Last Online
    05-09-2015 @ 03:26 AM
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    2,161
    Southwest may cancel another 300 flights Sunday

    By Alex Dobuzinskis

    LOS ANGELES | Sat Apr 2, 2011 6:07pm EDT


    Southwest may cancel another 300 flights Sunday | Reuters


    (Reuters) - Southwest Airlines could cancel 300 flights on Sunday as it continues to inspect 79 aircraft from its Boeing 737 fleet, after one of its planes with a gaping hole in the fuselage made an emergency landing, a company spokeswoman said.

    This comes after the airline said it expects to cancel 300 flights on Saturday, a day after the emergency landing. The airline is planning for possible disruptions on Sunday due to the inspections, said Southwest spokeswoman Brandy King.

    "We don't at this time know what the impact will be, but it's possible that it could be in the 300-flight range again tomorrow," King told Reuters.

    Passengers aboard Southwest Flight 812 from Phoenix to Sacramento on Friday heard a loud noise and the hole appeared suddenly at about mid cabin. As a result, the pilot landed at a military base in Yuma, Arizona.
    (more at link)

  17. #17
    Thailand Expat
    Takeovers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Online
    Today @ 04:40 AM
    Location
    Berlin Germany
    Posts
    5,752
    I came across that AlJazeera Video posted in post 11 by mobs in connection with the latest incident. I don't know what I make of it. If there is any truth in it this is very disturbing and I believe there may very well be much truth in it.

    I recommend anyone who has not seen it yet to have a look. You don't need to see the whole 52 minuts. Just see 15 and I believe you will want to see more.

  18. #18
    Mmmm, Bowling......
    mobs00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Last Online
    05-09-2015 @ 03:26 AM
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    2,161
    Here's another good link which shows all 737's ordered; listed by airline.

    737 Model Summary Through February 2011

    http://active.boeing.com/commercial/...tF=View+Report

  19. #19
    Thailand Expat
    aging one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    Today @ 09:02 AM
    Posts
    17,098
    Just forward of the place Aloha airlines blew out years ago. Metal fatigue, not only the flight hours but the up and down cycles flying short hops island to island. Southwest flies shorter flights compared to other major carriers. They are using a multi hub system.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •