Emirates A345 tail strike

[Carsten Bauer]

Hi all,

Does anybody know who the report is, who asks the question at 10:49 into the media conference.

"Given the damage to the aircraft, was there any way that this flight could have made it to it's destination safely"
"I dont think continuing to the destination would have been an option for the crew..." Interrupted by report
"I know, but what I'm trying to clarify is, could it have made it, if there was no warning"

What a total **** head???
If you check out the QF71 media conferences, he makes several stupid comments and questions in those conferences as well.


Other than that, why isn't the fuel load shown anywhere in the report?
What sort of burn rate does the A345 have, and how long is the flight from MEL to DXB?

Cheers,

Carsten

PS. Does anybody have a list of the ULD's on board this flight? I'm missing some entries in my logbook!

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Originally Posted by Carsten Bauer

Does anybody know who the report is, who asks the question at 10:49 into the media conference.

"Given the damage to the aircraft, was there any way that this flight could have made it to it's destination safely"
"I dont think continuing to the destination would have been an option for the crew..." Interrupted by report
"I know, but what I'm trying to clarify is, could it have made it, if there was no warning"

What a total **** head???
If you check out the QF71 media conferences, he makes several stupid comments and questions in those conferences as well.

If you don't know who the report(er?) is, how do you know it's the same one who "made several stupid comments and questions" in the QF71 media conferences? It's probably a reasonable question for a lay media person to ask. I have much greater issues with his questions late in the media conference about wheter QLD is the most dangerous place to fly in Australia!?!?!?

What annoyed me was the ATSB guy's reluctance to state that, due to the apparent damage to the pressure bulkhead and the full thickness damage to the aircraft's skin, it is unlikely the aircraft would have pressurised and thus, it would not have been possible to proceed to Dubai!

[chrisb]

Originally Posted by Carsten Bauer

"I know, but what I'm trying to clarify is, could it have made it, if there was no warning"

What a total **** head???

Why is that silly? What's he's probably pressing for is the fact that there was rear bulkhead damage and he wanted a good quote regarding the potential disaster if they'd tried pressurizing it.

[NickN]

Sometimes playing dumb gets you the answers you want and who better to feign stupidity than a reporter looking for a break.

[Robert Zweck]

He could be the same guy who thinks that jets land on the "tarmac "

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Originally Posted by NickN

Sometimes playing dumb gets you the answers you want and who better to feign stupidity than a reporter looking for a break.

*sigh*

That's funny, because I've always found if you ask a stupid question, you'll often get a stupid answer (dare I say, like half the questions on these forums sometimes...), whereas if you go to the effort of doing a bit of research before hand and can at least display a bit of knowledge on the subject, you're more likely to get a more detailed answer.

Originally Posted by Robert Zweck

He could be the same guy who thinks that jets land on the "tarmac "

But jets DO land on the "tarmac", Robert. Tarmac is short for 'tarmacadam' which is a type of paved surface commonly used on roads, runways, ramps and taxiways.

[Nigel C]

A further report in the media today...

From http://www.news.com.au/travel/story/...014090,00.html

Emirates pilots say another crash is 'highly probable'
By James Campbell and Ellen Whinnett
Herald Sun
May 03, 2009 08:20am

Warning ... Emirates pilots fear fatigue could lead to a crash.
Emirates pilots complain about fatigue
Say passenger safety is under threat
Blame safety problems on morale, management

THREE Emirates pilots have spoken out about fatigue problems at the airline, saying passenger safety is under threat.

The pilots, who all currently fly for the airline, spoke separately to the Sunday Herald Sun to outline concerns about fatigue, morale and management of the United Arab Emirates-based airline.

"I don't want to see a smoking hole in the ground with an Emirates tail on it, but the way we're going that's highly probable," one pilot said.

The men's concerns came after the Australian Transport Safety Bureau made a preliminary finding that fatigue did not appear to be a factor in the accident of an Emirates jet at Melbourne Airport on March 20.

The comments by the ATSB came even though the pilot had barely slept in the day before the accident and had flown 98.9 hours in the previous month.

He was allowed to fly a maximum of 100 hours.

One pilot insisted fatigue was a major problem for ultra-long-haul pilots, who were averaging 90 hours of flying time every 28 days and often reaching their maximum allowable limit.

The pilots who spoke to the Sunday Herald Sun asked for their names to be withheld, fearing repercussions from the airline.

Australian and International Pilots Association president Barry Jackson said Qantas ultra-long-haul pilots flew significantly fewer hours than their Emirates colleagues.

While they had a limit of 100 flying hours in 30 days, compared with Emirates' 100 hours in 28 days, they usually averaged 60-70 hours.

Mr Jackson, a serving Qantas pilot, said Emirates' long-haul flying policy was "a lot tougher on their pilots".

"They would be working a lot harder than us," Mr Jackson said.

One of the Emirates pilots urged the ATSB to examine the crew records of the pilot and first officer in charge of EK407, the flight that almost crashed at Melbourne Airport after the wrong numbers were entered into the plane's computer.

He said all pilots were being worked incredibly hard as Emirates struggled through the global economic crisis.

"If there is going to be a fatigue-related accident, it is probably going to be Emirates," he said.

Emirates has grounded four other pilots as a result of near-fatal blunders in the past month.

In Ghana, an Emirates crew typed the wrong take-off calculations into their aircraft when they took off from Kotoka International Airport in Accra.

The problem was discovered because the plane took off too low and a noise complaint was lodged when the plane flew over the presidential palace, a no-go zone.

In England, an Emirates flight lined up to land on the wrong runway at Manchester.

The pilot did a "go-around" - but tracked the wrong course as he climbed away from the runway.

"When people are tired, these mistakes happen," a second Emirates pilot said, referring to the Melbourne accident.

"There is a huge issue with fatigue."

A third pilot questioned whether Emirates took seriously the contents of any air safety reports filed by pilots.

[D Chan]

Originally Posted by Andrew McLaughlin

What annoyed me was the ATSB guy's reluctance to state that, due to the apparent damage to the pressure bulkhead and the full thickness damage to the aircraft's skin, it is unlikely the aircraft would have pressurised and thus, it would not have been possible to proceed to Dubai!

They are not paid to speculate other than to investigate the evidences, establish the hard facts and provide recommendations to the industry for the improvement of safety etc.

[David M]

That's funny, because I've always found if you ask a stupid question, you'll often get a stupid answer

My favourite quote:

"There's no stupid questions, only stupid people"

David.M.

[Joseph Saragozza.]

A6-ERG tail strike has been a bit quiet lately. so i was wondering if there is anymore more news. i haven't had a chance to go to the airport to have a look to see if she still here or been flown to TLS for further repairs

it would be appreciated if i can get an update.
thanks.