Yemenia Airlines Airbus crash

[Olle Q]

And this is from the Airbus website:

The aircraft involved in the accident, registered under the number 70-ADJ was MSN (Manufacturer Serial Number) 535. It was first delivered from the production line in 1990 and has been operated by Yemenia since October 1999. The aircraft had accumulated approximately 51,900 flight hours in some 17,300 flights. It was powered by Pratt and Whitney engines PW4152. At this time no further factual information is available.

[Greg McDonald]

More:

The A310 jet had aborted a landing attempt in the Comoros islands and was making a second attempt when it crashed.

It was the second time in less than a month that an Airbus has crashed into the ocean. This time French authorities said the Yemeni carrier had been under surveillance and that the 19-year-old jet had been banned from French airspace.

[Gerard M]

The news channels are reporting that the black box has now been located. What i find appalling is that this particular aircraft was allowed by the operator to be flown when other countries throughout Europe have banned it from their airports due to the level of maintainence or lack there of that it has received. I would have thought there should be some sort of universal standard that aircraft have to be maintained at?

http://www.smh.com.au/world/yemeni-a...0701-d3zr.html

[Andrew Ewen]

Originally Posted by Gerard M

The news channels are reporting that the black box has now been located. What i find appalling is that this particular aircraft was allowed by the operator to be flown when other countries throughout Europe have banned it from their airports due to the level of maintainence or lack there of that it has received. I would have thought there should be some sort of universal standard that aircraft have to be maintained at?

http://www.smh.com.au/world/yemeni-a...0701-d3zr.html

actually the aircraft was not banned from Europe , in fact it flew to LHR a couple of times recently . the aircraft was inspected two years ago in France and at the time there were some problems , the aircraft had not been back to France since but that does not mean that the problems were not fixed , nor does it mean that the aircraft was banned from flying throughout Europe .

Unfortunately the news media prefer quick and sensational stories ( often reprinting verbatim the same unchecked stories that have appeared in other publications ) rather than taking the time to check facts ( how often have we seen that in the last month with regard to AF447 ! ) .

[Gerard M]

Thanks Andrew. Happy to be corrected. Theres my slap on the wrist for repeating what the media are pumping out to boost their ratings. The now updated article has a rather large contradiction now that i re-read it.

This time French authorities said the Yemeni carrier had been under surveillance and that the 19-year-old jet had been banned from French airspace.

It then goes on to say:

The flight left Paris on Monday for Marseille and Sanaa, where passengers switched to the older Airbus to continue to Djibouti and Moroni.

Is there any truth in the "facts" in this article?

[Grant Smith]

Gerard,

Where's the contradiction?

As I understand it two different aircraft operated the flight: The A332 operated the LFML-OYSN sector and the A310 operating the OYSN-FMCH sector.

[Gerard M]

That's the first time that i heard that the flight was operated by the two different aircraft Grant so i thought that the article was referring to the aircraft that crashed. My apologies.

[Mike W]

I guess it's like United UA839 into Sydney. Sometimes the same aircraft from LA kicks on to Melbourne and back and sometimes it's the aircraft that comes in from San Francisco as UA863 that operates the UA839 Melbourne extension.