Search results

Its his judgement call bro, he is the man on the spot trying to either restore or isolate the airconditioning problem. If he assessed that the problem required an immediate landing eg if someone said they smelt smoke ( not that this happened to this flight ) then the pilot would have to minimise...

This was a high energy landing as a result of quickly stopping a very heavy plane. You can actually google samples of brake energy limit performance charts to see that above certain energy levels, different things happen to the brakes/tires.

Yes dumping fuel would have been a good thing to do to land lighter and not require so much braking action, but it all depended on what kind of airconditioning problems they were experiencing and if there were any other related issues that had to do with safety thereby requiring a speedy landing.

An aircraft departing Singapore for London would be a very heavy aircraft. If it returned to land after only 35 minutes it would have landed still very heavy requiring heavy braking in order to stop within the landing distance available. A lot of heat would have been generated by the brakes and...

If this really happened then its very bad. Mutiny even in the form of unruly behaviour must be dealt with otherwise it will add to the hazards of every trip.

So many possibilities , but I was merely offering a counterpoint in response to TFBH's post.

If the fire was a slow type then the pilots would have had a chance to make a Mayday call. If it was so fast as to cut off all forms of communications then it would have also reached the two ( crew and passenger ) oxygen systems very quickly and the plane would have become an instant fireball...

Equipment on board aircraft can be a source of fire and hence they should be able to be switched off for isolation purposes . It is a safety consideration.

Yes it is really big money but the insurers will definitely be reinsured. As an aside, some airlines these days try to find ways to cut cost on safety and security because of high fuel prices and low yields affecting their profitability. This is really stupid because if they think safety and...

You are welcome GD.

I reckon insurance will have to pay no matter what caused of the event. I think Allianz is involved. There may be other separate suits if the accident involved the manufacturer, or maintenance and even the way the dangerous goods were loaded and if the maximum quantity was exceeded if indeed...

Re: MAS CEO confesses MH370 was carrying highly flammable cargo Insofar as lithium ion batteries are concerned, it depends on the Watt hour ratings. The conditions for carrying can be found in the relevant handbook.

Re: MAS CEO confesses MH370 was carrying highly flammable cargo Inflight problems may occur however if these packages of dangerous goods were not packed properly as prescribed or if they exceeded the amount allowed per package. Also certain types of dangerous goods are not supposed to be...

Re: MAS CEO confesses MH370 was carrying highly flammable cargo The carriage of dangerous goods in an airplane is governed by set down rules and regulations. Lithium batteries can be carried under certain conditions. As long as these goods are packaged in a safe manner and in small quantities...

The carriage of dangerous goods in an airplane is governed by set down rules and regulations. Lithium batteries can be carried under certain conditions. As long as these goods are packaged in a safe manner and in small quantities per package , their uplift on planes is allowed. There was a...

Thats correct, some planes are already wifi enabled, its just whether the airline operators choose to install or not. Coverage is not world wide however as some governments block access when you overfly their airspace. Some trial runs have been conducted and the FRs have been positive although...

If you are referring to the 777-200's tank capacity then the answer is yes, but it would depend on the amout of fuel that the pilot uplifted. In this case the pilot would have taken enough fuel for the trip to Beijing so purely from the fuel point of view, if he wanted to change course to fly to...

Usually 43,000 feet for commercial airplanes. They can go slightly higher but they are usually certified to 43,000 feet (43,100) to be exact.

Wahaha please dont promote me, I am just sadshishamo. The landing distance required for any aircraft is dependent on many factors eg, landing weight, temperature, altitude of the destination airfield, how many brakes, thrust reversers, speedbrakes. The most significant item would be the landing...

Its ok, I dont know much about many other things too. We all learn from one another here and have a fun time on this forum.