Yemenia Airways Crash

[Fobulous]

Didn't see this anywhere else on the forumn...

2nd jetliner crash in less than a month...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/...ash/index.html

[malcolmk14]

Tragic news. My dad lives in Sanaa. This is no doubt big news over there.

Apparently nobody on the flight was Yemeni, only the pilot and the co-pilot.

A five year old survived.

[Tron_fdc]

Haven't most of these crashes been airbuses?

[firebug]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/...rss_topstories

Possible child survivor. Will have to see if it is legit.

~firebug

[Fobulous]

Yeah both crashed in the last month were Airbus planes...

I realize flying is one of the safest ways to travel but with these two crashes in the past month it kind of makes me nervous.

[Peanut]

Interesting that they say it's "not related at all" to the Air France Airbus crash, but then at the end of the article they talk about high wind and bad weather being the probable cause. Which also was the case for the Air France flight I thought...

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Fobulous

Yeah both crashed in the last month were Airbus planes...

I realize flying is one of the safest ways to travel but with these two crashes in the past month it kind of makes me nervous.

Your odds of being killed in a crash are 1 in 70 million.

[ken0042]

I think they mean that it isn't a design issue with the Airbus fleet; not that there may not be similarities between the crashes.

Basically saying "Don't cancel your flight if it happens to be on an Airbus."

[mykalberta]

Big differences in aircraft here.

The A310 is an older model aircraft - not sure the exact year of this one but the airline has only 10 planes (now 9) normal operation for these startups is to purchase old planes and fly them till they break or get extremely cheap leases.

The Air France plane was an almost brand new A330-300 - very moden and reliable which is why it was so strange.

An A310 crash is similar to a 737-200 (older generation) or an A300 etc. Just because the A310 is still in production doesnt mean this one was new. If i had to guess its likely 12+ years, possible 17+ depending on what type or airline this is.

[Bagor]

The airline was banned from France due to "irregularities".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8126576.stm

With cheap air fares and a 40kg baggage allowance - double the European standard - the flights were very attractive to those on a budget. Air France and Emirates no longer fly to the Comoros Islands, making choice limited. Last August, the protest group SOS Voyage aux Comores held a 300-strong demonstration outside Marseille airport to denounce conditions on the flights between Yemen and the Comoros, complaining that they failed to meet safety standards.
Group spokesman Farid Soilihi claimed the flights often had technical problems and failed to respect timetables.
In a letter to the French authorities, he said the airline operated a service which was "a disaster waiting to happen". The group had also planned a boycott of the airline for 2009.
In an interview given to the Journal du Dimanche, Mr Soilihi described conditions on board the flights. "The toilets were blocked... bags fell on top of passengers. There was absolutely no safety on board," he said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8127244.stm

[worth]

This is what freaks me out about these cheap airlines. If you ever watch mayday, some of those crashes have to do with planes that have poor safety records that are operated by cheap cost saving airlines. Sure you save a couple hundred dollars. But to be honest, i'd much rather fly on an airline that has hundreds of planes and a well thought out safety plan and training for crew and piliots.

Sure, any plane can crash due to any number of things, but these discount airlines just freak me out.

I'm pretty sure to get your airline banned anywhere, you have to do some majorly wrong things. Like major safety issues. Stick to the larger reliable airlines.

Edit, I see it's the plane they banned, not the airline, which seems kind of strange to me. If they are having safety issues with one plane, wouldn't they be likley to follow through with safety issues in the rest of their fleet? Not to mention Yemenia Airways isn't really a discount carrier. But looking at them it seems they only have 14 planes total.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by worth

This is what freaks me out about these cheap airlines. If you ever watch mayday, some of those crashes have to do with planes that have poor safety records that are operated by cheap cost saving airlines. Sure you save a couple hundred dollars. But to be honest, i'd much rather fly on an airline that has hundreds of planes and a well thought out safety plan and training for crew and piliots.

Sure, any plane can crash due to any number of things, but these discount airlines just freak me out.

I'm pretty sure to get your airline banned anywhere, you have to do some majorly wrong things. Like major safety issues. Stick to the larger reliable airlines.

I don't think you have to be overly concerned with discount carriers in North America or Europe, the safety controls are the same for everyone. When you get to places that don't really care about policing safety the concern is definitely elevated.

[MelBridgeman]

But people want airfare deals....

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I think they mean that it isn't a design issue with the Airbus fleet; not that there may not be similarities between the crashes.

Basically saying "Don't cancel your flight if it happens to be on an Airbus."

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Big differences in aircraft here.

The A310 is an older model aircraft - not sure the exact year of this one but the airline has only 10 planes (now 9) normal operation for these startups is to purchase old planes and fly them till they break or get extremely cheap leases.

The Air France plane was an almost brand new A330-300 - very moden and reliable which is why it was so strange.

I was wondering if they could have had the same airspeed detector probes (sorry, the actual name of them eludes me right now) since they are both Airbus? Or maybe not since the A310 is so much older.

Just that those probes still seem to be a big piece of the Air France investigation, so it would be pretty bad if another crash was related to the speed probe issues.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Peanut

I was wondering if they could have had the same airspeed detector probes (sorry, the actual name of them eludes me right now) since they are both Airbus? Or maybe not since the A310 is so much older.

Just that those probes still seem to be a big piece of the Air France investigation, so it would be pretty bad if another crash was related to the speed probe issues.

pitot static?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Fobulous

Yeah both crashed in the last month were Airbus planes...

I realize flying is one of the safest ways to travel but with these two crashes in the past month it kind of makes me nervous.

On an average day, air traffic controllers handle 28,537 commercial flights (major and regional airlines), 27,178 general aviation flights (private planes), 24,548 air taxi flights (planes for hire), 5,260 military flights and 2,148 air cargo flights (Federal Express, UPS, etc.). At any given moment, roughly 5,000 planes are in the skies above the United States. In one year, controllers handle an average of 64 million takeoffs and landings

http://www.natca.org/mediacenter/bythenumbers.msp
.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Your odds of being killed in a crash are 1 in 70 million.

The disturbing thing, though, is that despite the much higher odds of dying in a car crash at least if you are in a car crash you have a reasonable shot at survival. If you go down in an airplane you're done.

I know it doesn't make sense mathematically, but psychologically it's a huge difference.

I'm not afraid to fly, but I don't enjoy it like I did as a kid. I can't imagine what it must be like in an air crash where you have a couple of minutes of knowing what's about to happen. Ugly, ugly way to go.