#21
|
|||
|
|||
I'm sure the airline's liability would be diminished, Mark. In this particular instance, there is one video on youtube in which you can clearly hear a FA repeatedly yelling "leave everything behind, get out", and I'd be very surprised if a court didn't find that some or all of the airline's liability is discharged as a result.
I'm less sure how the airline, regulators, etc. would actually go about laying charges against pax who essentially compromise an evacuation to take their belongings (or, for that matter, don't remove high-heeled shoes). What I can say is that, in Australia, "disobeying a lawful direction from a member of the crew" (or words to that effect) is a federal offence and, therefore, no jurisdictional issue... it would fall under CASA's remit and they would refer to the AFP. I completely agree with everything others have said that there are many factors which 'make' people stop to gather their belongings... culture, panic, heat of the moment, the works. Something needs to be done about it, though, before it does cost someone their life, assuming it hasn't already. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
I'm not one to defend what happened but I will comment that if every single time you leave and aircraft you take your bag with you, in an emergency you go into autopilot mode in a sense and your brain just does what it's used to. There has been talk of auto-locking overhead lockers for dep/arr. I think there are some ideas to be explored.
Still, BA, Asiana and this, all impacts close to the ground and in all cases everyone survived the impact! Solid jet. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Though cost will likely win out. Most airlines will not do it unless they have been mandated. This also doesn't address carry-on that is placed under the seat.
__________________
Robert Myers Photography - Aviation Spotting Australia Flightradar24 feeder (F-YSWG1 & T-YSWG2) FlightAware feeder (YSWG/6482) |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Some interesting opinion in today's OZ, which has a number of aviation stories, and remarkably well written IMHO.
Quote:
(And enjoy the readers comments ) |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Subscriber-only article unfortunately.
__________________
I am always hungry for a DoG Steak! :-) |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
His theory is that the aircraft's sensors detected a touchdown, therefore restricting auto TOGA and that the pilots, being drilled to trust the flight systems weren't able to override quickly enough to spool up before impact.
Not entirely clear what he thought should be done in future..... |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting reading from flight.org somewhat elaborating on training for such scenarios:
Quote:
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Flight Global has some more info on the investigation:
Quote:
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
Here is the link to the Preliminary Report by the General Civil Aviation Authority.
Apparently the aircraft remained at idle thrust for 12 seconds after the Go Around was called. During the final approach, the headwind turned to an 8kts tail wind component that then increased to 16kts. Aural cockpit messages were "LONG LANDING, LONG LANDING" followed by "DON'T SINK, DON'T SINK". If TO/GA is activated before touchdown it remains activated and the Go Around continues. On touchdown the TO/GA is deactivated and requires manual Go Around power to be applied ("The F/D go around mode will not be available until go around is selected after becoming airborne"). I was surprised by the number of Emergency Slide problems, mainly caused by the wind lifting them back up and covering the doorway. A couple of doors had smoke/fire outside and were not opened, and slide another did not touch the ground. Also interesting to note :- "Full control of the fire was achieved approximately 16 hours after the impact".
__________________
Joined 1999 @www16Right FlightDiary Airliners Web QR Retired PPL C150/172 PA28-161/181 Pitts S-2B SIM: 12Hr QF B767 B744 CX B742 Nikon D100-D200-D300-D500 Last edited by Grahame Hutchison; 7th September 2016 at 01:33 PM. |
|
|