AirAsia QZ8501 Missing
Discussion
Scuffers said:
SpeckledJim said:
King Herald said:
kapiteinlangzaam said:
Air Asia has actually (up until now) being historically a safe airline. With no incidents at all in its 10yr history.
Unfortunately, the longer they go without an accident, the more likely one is to occur. They used to say that about Qantas, the only accident-free airline in the world, until people realised it didn't mean all they thought it did. (anecdotal evidence, I have no facts or figures to back up any of the above, before anybody asks)
I'm not sure if there is any remote chance the plane could turn up undamaged, after this period of time, but fingers are crossed here.
I haven't seen any reports of wreckage found at all yet?
I think I heard it is a 2 hour flight from Surabaya to Singapore, have seen them regularly at FL380 on a longer leg in and out of Perth. Of course no idea on how full they are.
Not trying to be picky but it is an Air Asia Indonesia aeroplane that is missing, ie it is technically an Indonesian airline not Malaysian.
One of the Wagons is missing.
At my work we affectionately call them Wagon Wheels after the biscuit.
All very sad, I hope they are found safe and well. The search has been called off for the day.
Not trying to be picky but it is an Air Asia Indonesia aeroplane that is missing, ie it is technically an Indonesian airline not Malaysian.
One of the Wagons is missing.
At my work we affectionately call them Wagon Wheels after the biscuit.All very sad, I hope they are found safe and well. The search has been called off for the day.
djc206 said:
MitchT said:
I went to Munich in May on an A319 and we flew at 39,000 the whole way. It's it really a big deal for an A320 to be flying at 38,000?
No I've worked dozens myself this morning. Perfectly routinesebhaque said:
djc206 said:
MitchT said:
I went to Munich in May on an A319 and we flew at 39,000 the whole way. It's it really a big deal for an A320 to be flying at 38,000?
No I've worked dozens myself this morning. Perfectly routineThat is, of course, groundspeed, not airspeed, which could have been significantly different.
Edited by Super Slo Mo on Sunday 28th December 13:38
My wife flies into Surabaya at least once a month, she has stopped taking the morning flight either way, as she had had bad experience with turbulence, not dangerous just uncomfortable but the regional weather at the moment is awful.
Worth noting that this is Air Asia Indonesia on a flight between Indonesia and Singapore, no tie to Malaysia except the holding company.
I fly Air Asia most weeks as their schedule fits my needs their safety record has been impeccable, won't stop me using them.
Worth noting that this is Air Asia Indonesia on a flight between Indonesia and Singapore, no tie to Malaysia except the holding company.
I fly Air Asia most weeks as their schedule fits my needs their safety record has been impeccable, won't stop me using them.
Super Slo Mo said:
sebhaque said:
djc206 said:
MitchT said:
I went to Munich in May on an A319 and we flew at 39,000 the whole way. It's it really a big deal for an A320 to be flying at 38,000?
No I've worked dozens myself this morning. Perfectly routineThat is, of course, groundspeed, not airspeed, which could have been significantly different.
Edited by Super Slo Mo on Sunday 28th December 13:38
Eric Mc said:
QF32 - Was that the Airbus A380 that lost bits of its engine?
Yes, uncontained engine failure, disk broke up and parts went though the wing taking out all kinds of hydraulic and electrical systems.MitchT said:
Eric Mc said:
They wanted permission to climb to 38,000 feet - which is pretty high for an A320 with 160 plus people on board.
I went to Munich in May on an A319 and we flew at 39,000 the whole way. It's it really a big deal for an A320 to be flying at 38,000?reason it was not at FL380 was traffic related, hence why their request to climb was denied (according to reports)
Super Slo Mo said:
At 350 kts however, it is very high, possibly very close to being outside of the operating envelope of the aircraft, which is what Kaptainlangzaam was alluding to earlier.
That is, of course, groundspeed, not airspeed, which could have been significantly different.
that's the key point, ground speed is pretty irrelevant, you need to know it's airspeed.That is, of course, groundspeed, not airspeed, which could have been significantly different.
Scuffers said:
SpeckledJim said:
King Herald said:
kapiteinlangzaam said:
Air Asia has actually (up until now) being historically a safe airline. With no incidents at all in its 10yr history.
Unfortunately, the longer they go without an accident, the more likely one is to occur. They used to say that about Qantas, the only accident-free airline in the world, until people realised it didn't mean all they thought it did. (anecdotal evidence, I have no facts or figures to back up any of the above, before anybody asks)
The Qantas thing is about never losing a jet aircraft (as in crashing one), last hull loss they had was a de Havilland DHA-3 in 1951.
QF32 is probably the closest they have come to losing a plane.
Qantas VH-OJH 747 into Bangkok should have been a write off but wasn't. Repaired at a cost approaching $100m. Value at the time was $85m IIRC. There was No Way Qantas was suffering a hull loss. AFAIK, it's still sitting at a hanger in Bangkok.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=...
Mojocvh said:
Super Slo Mo said:
sebhaque said:
djc206 said:
MitchT said:
I went to Munich in May on an A319 and we flew at 39,000 the whole way. It's it really a big deal for an A320 to be flying at 38,000?
No I've worked dozens myself this morning. Perfectly routineThat is, of course, groundspeed, not airspeed, which could have been significantly different.
Edited by Super Slo Mo on Sunday 28th December 13:38
Scuffers said:
that's the key point, ground speed is pretty irrelevant, you need to know it's airspeed.
I know, however, even with a 100mph headwind, it's not that fast for the altitude, although not being anything like an expert, don't actually know the operating window for an A320 at 38,000 ft.TVR1 said:
Qantas are playing semantics with that one though. Their USP is never having suffered a hull loss in a jet aircraft as a result of an accident.
Qantas VH-OJH 747 into Bangkok should have been a write off but wasn't. Repaired at a cost approaching $100m. Value at the time was $85m IIRC. There was No Way Qantas was suffering a hull loss. AFAIK, it's still sitting at a hanger in Bangkok.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=...
don't disagree with the point, but that plane did fly again, was used till 2012, last passenger flight was Johannesburg - Sydney as QF64 - September 3 - 4, 2012, flown to Marana as QF6019 for storage - October 4, 2012, deregistered from Australian Aircraft Register - November 20, 2012, finally scrapped at Marana - 2013.Qantas VH-OJH 747 into Bangkok should have been a write off but wasn't. Repaired at a cost approaching $100m. Value at the time was $85m IIRC. There was No Way Qantas was suffering a hull loss. AFAIK, it's still sitting at a hanger in Bangkok.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=...
TVR1 said:
Qantas are playing semantics with that one though. Their USP is never having suffered a hull loss in a jet aircraft as a result of an accident.
Qantas VH-OJH 747 into Bangkok should have been a write off but wasn't. Repaired at a cost approaching $100m. Value at the time was $85m IIRC. There was No Way Qantas was suffering a hull loss. AFAIK, it's still sitting at a hanger in Bangkok.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=...
VH-OJH was sent to Marana boneyard in 2012, and scrapped in 2013. Qantas VH-OJH 747 into Bangkok should have been a write off but wasn't. Repaired at a cost approaching $100m. Value at the time was $85m IIRC. There was No Way Qantas was suffering a hull loss. AFAIK, it's still sitting at a hanger in Bangkok.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff