Fewer flights on larger aircraft - i.e., mainline.

You would have to eliminate service to some cities and reroute other flights to combine the market share of two or more cities while just upsizing the aircraft on the rest of the flights.

 

Fewer flights on slightly larger aircraft = RJ's...THEN upgrade to mainline from that re-routed RJ's city...

 

A search of the NTSB database pulls up a whole 2 (not including recent Colgan accident) fatal part 121 turboprop accidents related to icing.

And that is this guy's basis for grounding all turboprops? Like my Grandfather used to say, "he talks like a man with a paper a**hole".

 

Wasn't this the same NTSB head-bozo behind the TWA 800 crash investigation. Ya' know the crash that had the CIA produce the "zoom climb" theory animation. Whereas the 747 managed to climb for several thousand feet without a nose section forward of the wings, and with serious aft CG in order to account for the wittness reports of a missle hitting the plane so they could make believe that it was burning fuel trailing from the plane that wittnesses thought was the trail of the missle that hit it?

'nuf said.

Then ya' got the guy from the FBI, James Kalstrom, who supported this garbage theory.

I wouldn't listen to anything Jim Hall has to say.

Also, I am sure some of you actually think TWA 800 went down due to a spark in the mostly empty center fuel tank too along with AA587 going down being solely due to Sten Molin, the FO, and his use of the rudder after a wake turbulence encounter.

Otherwise, I wouldn't hire Hall to shine my shoes, and I don't need to be a 121 left seat guy to say that either.

 

Well, there goes this thread ...

 

I hope they ground all the turbo-props and give the flying to the better pilots who fly REAL airplanes so I can get my job back.

KIDDING OF COURSE!

It's like the sand-pile effect. To those who haven't heard of it: picture a sand-pile with a never-ending stream of sand pouring on top of it (like an hourglass). Sometimes a small part of the pile collapses and every once in a while a large part collapses. What I'm saying is that small collapses occur much more frequently than larger collapses (so the size of the pile is inversely proportional to the frequency of collapses). Anyways, the correlation I'm trying to make between it and aviation is that usually flying occurs without any problems. Often, very small things go wrong (VSI on a 172 fails in VMC, EFIS Comp Mon message in the RJ,etc). Sometimes, some bigger things go wrong (Lost Comms in VMC, having to punch through a line of thunderstorms during the summer at FL310, etc). Every once in a while we get ever bigger things to wrong (engine failure, landing gear problems). And some of the most rarest of occurences that occur include a crash.

The point I'm trying to make is that these things happen and they will always continue to happen from discovering a bad magneto during run-up to the unfortunate crashes like Flight 1549 and Flight 3407. So to ground aircraft will not stop these problems from occuring. Although we have experienced great technological advances during our time, we now have more things that can go wrong. We cannot stop these events from occuring. They are random events that occur and usually we walk away from them and come back the next day to continue doing something we love but unfortunately, tragic events do happen and all we can do to prevent them is timing (not being caught in a microburst on short final), brains (knowing not to be caught in a microburst on short final if the field is reporting wind shear or a t-storm is right over your approach path) and a little bit of luck.

 

Just curious and I know I'm way off subject.... But what did happen on these flights?

 

Deleted. . . . . .

 

I think the issue here is not whether it should have been reported but that they in aviation should have seen that it was an attempt to stir up fear of turbo props with the flying public, simply to make money off of misery. I feel that they as an aviation news outlet, could have excercised not to run it, due to the fact it would perpetuate falsehoods that would do nothing constructive in getting to the bottom of this tragedy, but only harm aviation in gerneral...But again the media are only concerned if someone else is reporting it than they are afraid they'll lose out on revenue if we dont. They are all the same, its its in my right not to accept the argument "its news" in this case. Mabye Im alone in my thinking, but you cant teach an old dog new tricks...lol

 

I sympathize with you two, but I think you're being a little hard on Aero-News (and AvWeb reported it too, btw). A former NTSB chairman opining that all large turboprops should be grounded is NEWS and should be reported. Nearly all pilots - and a plurality of the general public, believe it or not - will realize the impracticality, rashness, and idiocy of this statement. Freedom of speech (and the press) is great - we now know where this moron stands.