Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Safety
Asiana Cargo 744 Crash >

Asiana Cargo 744 Crash

Notices
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc

Asiana Cargo 744 Crash

Old 07-28-2011, 07:39 AM
  #21  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,480
Default

Besides, they're just pilots and insurance will cover the hull loss. After all, no passengers were killed, so its not a problem. Right?
Fishfreighter is offline  
Old 07-28-2011, 01:52 PM
  #22  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TheFly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Seat 0B
Posts: 2,300
Default

Originally Posted by unitedflyier View Post
If it's not safe enough for a passenger plane it shouldn't be safe in a cargo plane in even bigger quantities? Pilots and crew members lives are just as important as passengers or people on the ground.
Amen to that....all life is sacred.
TheFly is offline  
Old 07-28-2011, 04:16 PM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Default

Originally Posted by johnso29 View Post
Look how many deaths it took to get a change to FTDT regs.
And look how long that took, or rather, it taking from time of most recent accident/deaths to fruition.
dojetdriver is offline  
Old 07-28-2011, 05:16 PM
  #24  
Nice lookin' tree, there!
 
frozenboxhauler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD-11, old man
Posts: 2,193
Default

Rest In Peace.
fbh
frozenboxhauler is offline  
Old 07-29-2011, 06:28 AM
  #25  
Moderator
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Default

Originally Posted by dojetdriver View Post
And look how long that took, or rather, it taking from time of most recent accident/deaths to fruition.
Exactly........
johnso29 is offline  
Old 07-29-2011, 10:34 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
KC10 FATboy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,094
Default

Originally Posted by Airbum View Post
add UPS Flight 1307 in PHL in 2006 which also carried lithium batteries. This flight had the batteries located at the source of the fire. Flight 1307's crew survived the in flight fire however the aircraft was destroyed by fire on the runway.
Wow, I didn't know that's what caused the UPS fire in Philly. That morning I drove past the airport on I-95 as I commuted to McGuire AFB. Those guys were very lucky.

This has me worried about a cell phone in a checked bag or overhead baggage that has a battery that experiences a thermal runway.

Our unions better get on this !!
KC10 FATboy is offline  
Old 07-29-2011, 10:45 AM
  #27  
With The Resistance
 
jungle's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Default

Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jungle is offline  
Old 07-30-2011, 03:18 AM
  #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: What day is it?
Posts: 963
Default

Originally Posted by jungle View Post
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time for you to head back to the planet Debbie. Your spacepod is double parked and the meter is expired.
ATCsaidDoWhat is offline  
Old 07-30-2011, 03:22 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: What day is it?
Posts: 963
Default

Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy View Post
Wow, I didn't know that's what caused the UPS fire in Philly. That morning I drove past the airport on I-95 as I commuted to McGuire AFB. Those guys were very lucky.

This has me worried about a cell phone in a checked bag or overhead baggage that has a battery that experiences a thermal runway.

Our unions better get on this !!
There is an FAA finding out that shows a marked increase in KNOWN cargo and baggage fires caused by batteries since 1991. During the '91-'95 time frame there were 5, since '06 it has grown to 55.

[URL="http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/07/29/360161/fire-risk-in-air-freight-increases-dramatically.html"=URL]


My understanding is that CAPA and IBT have continued to push the issue and were going to try and get it added to the TSA funding bill since it got killed on the FAA reauthorization funding bill. I'm guessing ALPA is on it as well. The pushback from the manufacturing industry is huge and they are throwing a LOT of money at killing the amendment.

Hey, what the heck...it's only a couple of cargo pilots, right? Just a "cost of doing business" to them.

Last edited by ATCsaidDoWhat; 07-30-2011 at 03:39 AM.
ATCsaidDoWhat is offline  
Old 07-30-2011, 07:17 AM
  #30  
With The Resistance
 
jungle's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Default

Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat View Post
There is an FAA finding out that shows a marked increase in KNOWN cargo and baggage fires caused by batteries since 1991. During the '91-'95 time frame there were 5, since '06 it has grown to 55.

[URL="http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/07/29/360161/fire-risk-in-air-freight-increases-dramatically.html"=URL]


My understanding is that CAPA and IBT have continued to push the issue and were going to try and get it added to the TSA funding bill since it got killed on the FAA reauthorization funding bill. I'm guessing ALPA is on it as well. The pushback from the manufacturing industry is huge and they are throwing a LOT of money at killing the amendment.

Hey, what the heck...it's only a couple of cargo pilots, right? Just a "cost of doing business" to them.
My point exactly, this points to complete regulatory failure, the only groups actually doing something about this are within private industry. Voting present just doesn't get it.

Not a single NTSB report has named the batteries as a causal factor. Read them yourself.

Please feel free to quote anything to the contrary.

Until you have had the "pleasure" of participating in an investigation involving your friends, you obviously don't understand the failure.

Last edited by jungle; 07-30-2011 at 06:58 PM.
jungle is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Whale Pilot
Cargo
6
11-14-2008 07:13 AM
StripAlert
Mergers and Acquisitions
354
07-07-2008 08:05 PM
10iron
Cargo
7
07-02-2008 05:38 AM
Freighter Captain
Major
24
02-03-2008 08:59 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices