Dumaguete Info Search


Another Malaysia Plane Down

Discussion in 'News and Weather' started by Rye83, Jul 18, 2014.

  1. OP
    OP
    Rye83

    Rye83 with pastrami Admin Secured Account Highly Rated Poster SC Connoisseur Veteran Army

    Messages:
    13,106
    Trophy Points:
    451
    Occupation:
    FIRE
    Location:
    Valencia
    Ratings:
    +16,069 / 3,796
    Blood Type:
    O+
    Pretty big words. Is he planning on a personal visit? Politicians, ugh, I wish they wouldn't waste the oxygen. I'd be demanding some information from Malaysia Airlines other than "the aircraft's route was declared safe by the ICAO and IATA. We appreciate your concern during this trying time." Completely incompetent airline.
     
  2. Jack Peterson

    Jack Peterson DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster SC Connoisseur Veteran Air Force

    Messages:
    9,103
    Trophy Points:
    451
    Occupation:
    Happily Retired
    Location:
    Northern Junob, Dumaguete City
    Ratings:
    +5,246 / 1,090
    Don't buy Shares in this Company!

    The airspace Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was flying in when it was shot down was not restricted, but airlines had been warned about the potential dangers, it has emerged.
    The International Transport Association said that an initial assessment revealed that the airspace the aircraft was travelling through was 'not subject to restrictions'.
    The Malaysian Airlines flight lost contact with aircraft control when it was flying over eastern Ukraine.
    Nine Britons and 27 Australians, according to Dutch authorities, and fears of up to 23 Americans are among the 295 that have lost their lives.
    The Geneva-based group said in a statement: 'Based on the information currently available, it is believed that the airspace that the aircraft was traversing was not subject to restrictions.'


    Read more: Was MH17 flying through warzone to save fuel? | Mail Online

    Something I came across that may, tell a thing or two ???

    JP
     
  3. Jack Peterson

    Jack Peterson DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster SC Connoisseur Veteran Air Force

    Messages:
    9,103
    Trophy Points:
    451
    Occupation:
    Happily Retired
    Location:
    Northern Junob, Dumaguete City
    Ratings:
    +5,246 / 1,090
  4. Jack Peterson

    Jack Peterson DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster SC Connoisseur Veteran Air Force

    Messages:
    9,103
    Trophy Points:
    451
    Occupation:
    Happily Retired
    Location:
    Northern Junob, Dumaguete City
    Ratings:
    +5,246 / 1,090
  5. oztony

    oztony DI Senior Member Blood Donor

    Messages:
    605
    Trophy Points:
    170
    Ratings:
    +211 / 39
    It looks extremely likely that although this is a tragic event , resulting from the fact that imbeciles have access to weapons
    way above their area of responsibility , that it still could have been averted had of Malaysian airlines made more intelligent
    decisions , their operational decision making can be described as nothing less than a failure , I myself will now never fly with
    this airline under any circumstances. Below is a statement from the worlds safest airline.

    Earlier, Qantas released a statement saying it has flown that route in the past, "but hasn't flown it for several months".
     
  6. Vicmico

    Vicmico DI Member

    Messages:
    206
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0
    The relevant authorities make the assesment whether a particular part of the airspace is safe to operate in or not - not the airlines. Airlines follow (have to) stipulations issued by the afore mentioned authorities. Air France, British Airways, KLM etc. all used the same corridor as Malaysian, so to put the blame on Malaysian is not justified.
    Vicmico
     
  7. oztony

    oztony DI Senior Member Blood Donor

    Messages:
    605
    Trophy Points:
    170
    Ratings:
    +211 / 39
    I was not putting the blame on Malaysian Airlines ,
    (from my post) this is a tragic event , resulting from the fact that imbeciles have
    access to weapons way above their area of responsibility


    I didn't see a Qantas plane shot down over there recently because they decided to avoid
    flying that flight path because of the risks , along with other airlines. Malaysian Airlines
    are most certainly a victim of a barbaric act , but why did they fly that route if others were avoiding it.

    It is more about making intelligent operational decisions .
    If you were a passenger with your wife and children and were aware that recently there
    had been other planes shot down in that area , and that militants below had surface to air missiles ,
    would you choose to fly that path, or take another path even if it was a bit longer ?
    Basically would you transport your family through a war zone , or go around it?
    No way are Malaysian Airlines to blame , and I never said that. But there were choices available.

    The fact that their flight path is chosen by others is if they want to fly that route ,
    they can choose a different route if they want to, which is what other Airlines that
    reached their destinations had decided to do. This was not a mechanical failure with the aircraft ,
    this was the result of flying over the top of a war zone

    My comment about never flying with that airline may have been a bit harsh

    Regards Tony

    Malaysia Airlines shouldn't have been anywhere near Ukraine, an Australian safety specialist says.

    Flight MH17 was carrying 298 people, including 27 Australians, from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur when it was shot down in rebel-held east Ukraine.

    Central Queensland University accident investigation and safety specialist Professor Geoff Dell says the airline shouldn't have been flying over Ukraine.

    "From as soon as the conflict started they shouldn't have been going anywhere near it," Prof Dell said.

    "They should've shifted to alternate routes, like all the other airlines seemed to have done."

    Did you see link that JP pasted in his post ? I will paste it below.

    Was MH17 flying through warzone to save fuel? | Mail Online
     
  8. Vicmico

    Vicmico DI Member

    Messages:
    206
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0
    Very easy to make that sort of remarks in hindsight. Easy to become a self-proclaimed specialist on security issues. The mere use of the word 'ALL' is a clear indication that the dear professor needs to do his homework - only AFTER the tragic event (in which 154 of my fellow countrymen and -women perished) other airlines that were still using this corridor changed their flightplans. The altitude the plane was operating at (+ 10km) was assumed safe as shoulder-fired missiles do no reach that altitude, and there was no indication from intelligence sources that the rebels had gotten hold of heavier missiles that would be able to hit a target flying that high. If there WAS such information, it was clearly not disseminated to the authorities involved in validating and signing off on flightplans.
    Vicmico
     
  9. PatO

    PatO DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster Showcase Reviewer Veteran Marines

    Messages:
    6,197
    Trophy Points:
    451
    Ratings:
    +4,665 / 1,020
    A CNN reported or expert guest reported the no fly zone was up to 32,000ft in that are (has now been changed to DON'T F'N FLY OVER THERE) and the MA plane was flying at 33,000ft. Too close and stupid to fly over.
     
  10. oztony

    oztony DI Senior Member Blood Donor

    Messages:
    605
    Trophy Points:
    170
    Ratings:
    +211 / 39
    Vicmico , granted, the accident investigation and safety specialist Professor Geoff Dell ,
    may have some things wrong , I don't know , without the inclusions , I suppose I can only
    respond to my own words , which is everything above where it says regards Tony ,
    I am truly sorry for the loss of your countrymen , who a lot of , were actually on their way
    to my country , before their lives were taken away from their families , just like the 29 Australians
    I suppose some airlines decided to avoid that area , by using their own risk assessment protocols and
    some decided to continue using that route because it was deemed to be safe by the relevant authorities
    Initially we were informed that it was a no fly zone up to 32,000 feet and that flight was at 33,000 feet
    1,000 feet doesn't seem to be a great deal of distance difference wise


    Sorry for the loss of your people

    regards Tony
     
Loading...