|
Originally Posted by newcx12345
Actually after seeing the Air Diaster documentary on the MD80 AS flight. I will NOT fly AS unless there is absolutely no other alternative.
|
Accident investigation
Ah, at last a subject rather close to my own heart...
Now as someone who has appeared in at least 7 of those documentaries, what makes you think that the story was entirely correct? What makes you think that AS is any better/worse than the other 1W carriers? What makes you think that AS is any better/worse than other US airlines in general? Would you like to see documentaries which would lead you to the conclusion about never flying on AA, BA, US, UA, DL, CO, KL, QF, SK, LH and certainly never fly to JFK, ORD, EWR, HKG, SYD and so on. AS did have maintenance failures. AS did spend less on maintenance, as they all have since 9-11. AS operations in Alaska do have a much higher level of risk associated with them than an airline operating in lower 48. However, they do invest in a lot of technology and new procedures to try to mitigate the weather and mountain factors. It is a general rule that after the accident, things get a lot better. If you want to avoid all these types of risks, do not fly in South America, except on LAN, do not fly in Central America on anybody, do not fly in Africa ever, forget the Gulf on local carriers (except perhaps Emirates and they had a crunch in JNB recently), ditch 90% of Asia and only ever fly on CX, visit Australia (but not Cairns) and Auckland in SWP, do not fly to any European country touching the Med, avoid former Eastern Europe and if you want to go to Scandinavia then you should avoid western Norway. I still fly 300 times a year on commerical carriers and don't give a stuff about the risk level as it is so low as to be not worth bothering with. Hijacking, violent robbery, car crashes and other stuff are far more likely for me. End of spottie rant. That's a wrap, OK let's go down the pub and let the lighting man join us later when he has packed up. |
Well said, spotwelder, and fascinating at that. As for the Med countries, your comment brings back memories... such as the one time when when on final approach the pilot lost radio contact with VCE.
Too much time in Terraces today, so no pubs here. Hic. |
Originally Posted by spotwelder
China Eastern in at the same time as Star get a Chinese link.
|
Originally Posted by spotwelder
A
AS did have maintenance failures. AS did spend less on maintenance, as they all have since 9-11. . According to the documentary they said AS Management deliberately delayed maintainenace and caused the plane to crash. |
Originally Posted by newcx12345
According to the documentary they said AS Management deliberately delayed maintenance and caused the plane to crash.
Yes - it was a very complex conspiracy whereby AS management could profit from the crash - I think each exec got to by an insurance policy on one PAX on the flight but of course they needed to pay off the maint people from their profit. :eek: :eek: |
Originally Posted by mhtaipei
Air China is already an associated member, full membership expected 2005.
* A MU/KA/CZ etc. OW CX/CA etc. What is the consensus on SQ eventually getting hold of QF and moving it into *A? |
Originally Posted by newcx12345
Actually after seeing the Air Diaster documentary on the MD80 AS flight. I will NOT fly AS unless there is absolutely no other alternative.
...Please no substandard airlines in Oneworld! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../ixportal.html summary here: A Jumbo Jet carrying more than 350 people from London came close to crashing near Hong Kong after the pilots failed to realise that the autopilot was disconnected. The aircraft flew uncontrolled for three minutes, veering almost 180 degrees off course toward mountains and coming within seconds of a catastrophic stall. No one in the four-person crew took any intervening action because they believed the Boeing 747-400 was being directed by the autopilot. They assumed the aircraft's unusual movements resulted from a local windshear effect, which their weather radar had warned them about. The airline involved, Cathay Pacific, is conducting an inquiry into the incident, rumours of which have caused alarm and concern among long-haul pilots. |
Originally Posted by spotwelder
If you want to avoid all these types of risks, do not fly in South America, except on LAN, do not fly in Central America on anybody
Much better than some of the US carriers! |
Originally Posted by CTPremEx
Oh well, I guess no more CX for you then?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../ixportal.html summary here: Article turned out to be factually wrong. CX considering legal action. Check CX board. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:41 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.