Thread: Airline News

I didn't know that. Bring back the Hughs or De Havilland names then.

Originally Posted by Bonecollector

I have heard they have a bit of an 'old boys club' mentality.

You watched this too?

Originally Posted by Backspin

I didn't know that. Bring back the Hughs or De Havilland names then.

You don’t need the opening sentence. Everyone knows that you only post dumb shit anyway.

Originally Posted by Backspin

Boeing should be broken up into 2 different companies. Bring back the Douglas name

Skiddy goes out on a limb.....

Originally Posted by Troy

McDonnel Douglas is everything that is wrong with the current Boeing.

Gets called on it by a poster who knows something about aviation.

Originally Posted by Bonecollector

Originally Posted by Troy
McDonnel Douglas is everything that is wrong with the current Boeing.
I have heard they have a bit of an 'old boys club' mentality.

Again is challenged.

Originally Posted by Backspin

I didn't know that. Bring back the Hughs or De Havilland names then.

Skiddy descends into absolute idiocy, as is his norm..... Go back to your room skiddy, let the big boys play...

Yes, fuck off skiddy, your witless background noise adds nothing to any thread.

Fire on Airbus A319-115 Injures 36 Passengers in China


An Airbus A319-115 passenger bus veered off the runway during takeoff and caught fire in the Tibet region of China Thursday. The crash sent black smoke billowing into the air and injured more than 36 passengers and aircrew.


The Airbus A319-115, with 122 people aboard, left Chongqing for Nyingchi, in the Tibetan region of China, after leaving the city of Chongqing in the southwestern part of the country.

In videos shared by state media, the aircraft’s left side appeared to be on fire as people headed away from the scene.


Tibet Airlines said that the videos also showed fire trucks spraying water on the Airbus A319. Tibet Airlines reported that the accident occurred at 8:09 a.m. (0109 GMT).


All 113 passengers and nine flight crew aboard the Airbus A319-115 jet were evacuated.


Passengers injured evacuation the Airbus A319.


According to the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC), 36 people were injured during the evacuation.


During the takeoff, the flight crew discovered an abnormality with the aircraft and stopped takeoff as required by procedure.


About two hours after the accident, the airport announced that flights had resumed and an investigation was underway. The CAAC said that one runway remained closed.

According to Wikipedia, as of June 2020, there have been 20 aviation accidents and incidents involving the Airbus A319, including three hull-loss accidents.


No fatal accidents have been recorded involving the A319 aircraft.


The A319 is a short-fuselage version of Airbus’ single-aisle A320 jetliner that proves versatile with a range of seating options, from a 110-seat configuration to a capacity of 160, all of which offer the highest level of passenger comfort.

VIDEO Fire On Airbus A319-115 Injures 36 Passengers In China

Well done the pilots.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Well done the pilots.

Yes, well done the pilots for not taking off in a plane that was obviously on fire.

^ are you blabbering again?

A fooking great bang coming from the engine gave them a hint there was something wrong.
Rejected takeoff is part of the take off brief and it's memory items.

The pilots lost control either due to mechanical failure, or due to error; we'll find out in the accident report.

Originally Posted by Troy

^ are you blabbering again?

Maybe this is why he relies on cut and paste so much.

How many Chines pilots would have followed a ‘big bang’ from the engine, with an exemplary take off? You utter fucking thoughtless moron. (Addressed to OhOh) You can read, but you can’t fly a commercial aircraft.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Which may or may not indicate your "big bang coming from the engine" being the:

Agreed, it may not have come from the engine, it may not even have been two explosions. It's possible the MLG collapsed during the take-off roll, in which case the pilots were just passengers during the episode. However, a MLG collapse during take-off is a very rare event, I can't actually recall an occurrence, which is why I went with engine.

Either way, during the take-off roll you don't have time to get the books out so you brief RTO before take-off and stick to the plan in the event it is required.

No need to enlarge words or put them in bold. Nor is it necessary to waffle.

Originally Posted by OhOh

"The aircraft left the runway and caught fire after the engine hit the ground.

So what are you saying hoohoo, "well done the pilots" for crashing the plane on take off?

Whooooo they'll have lost their no claims.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Thanks for one possibility.

MK's posted report, in words and via it's video, only shows a plane burning on the grass. It does report:



Do have a link supporting your opinion that the engine blew up prior to the plane leaving the runway, prior to the wing dropping, and prior to the engine falling off?

The Washington Post reports slightly more:

"The aircraft left the runway and caught fire after the engine hit the ground. Currently the fire has been put out,” the aviation authorities said in a statement.
One passenger, Long Anquan, told China News Service that during takeoff he heard an unusual noise, after which the plane started to lean to one side and hit the ground with its wing. Long quickly bent forward and put his hands over his head, but the impact was so strong that he was still injured."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...33f_story.html


The ABC report's better video shows the nose on the ground and no engine under the left wing.

https://www.xxx.xxx.xx/news/2022-05-...fire/101062794

Which suggests the "abnormality", occurred

1. prior to the plan leaving the runway,

2. prior to the wing dropping, - possibly caused by the pilots turning off the runway, IMHO a dubious thing to be done by the pilots, as opposed to staying on the runway.

3. prior to an undercarriage failure,

4. prior to the engine falling off

5. and only then did the engine burst into flames.


As opposed to you blaming the poster instead of offering an opinion:

I await the:



Which may or may not indicate your colective, "big bang coming from the engine", being the:

I agree that your assumptions and thought processes are alarmingly naive. You have based the causes (in your own damaged mind) on the damage being done after the pilots aborted the take off. If there was nothing wrong prior to that, why would they abort?
Your tiny brain didn’t think it through did it.
Sick Buffalo syndrome.

Originally Posted by Troy

MLG collapse during take-off is a very rare event

Generally, planes stay on the runway during take off. Although the area either side is normally well manicured.

Originally Posted by Switch

You have based the causes (in your own damaged mind) on the damage being done after the pilots aborted the take off. If there was nothing wrong prior to that, why would they abort?

The "damage" was the:

Originally Posted by OhOh

the discovery of the abnormality

Which is a strange, to me, phrase.

Everything else was after that.

The effect, on the up till then normal take-off was, reportedly:

Originally Posted by OhOh

during takeoff, he heard an unusual noise

the plane leaving the runway to its right, a wing dropping, an engine dropping off and at some stage, one or more fires. Followed by an evacuation.

What caused the abnormality and reported sequential five events, I will leave to qualified crash investigators to report.

As, reportedly, the crash happened in

Originally Posted by misskit

the Tibet region of China

Any blame attributed to THE LORD is unlikely.

^Thank fuck you are not an aircraft accident investigator.