The plane took off, rose to 625 feet, lost power to rise further and crashed into a hostel. There was one survivor who jumped out as he was sitting near an emergency exit. He could provide useful information.
These was no indication of a bird strike either, with no fire or smoke emitting from the engine that was evident with the Jeju crash. That the landing gears were still visible probably indicates a massive electrical power failure. We just have to wait for the result to be culled from the black boxes.
This is a very sad accident. Sympathies to the families of those who lost their lives.
By the way, Singapore Airlines has a 25% investment in Air India, with Tata Group holding a 75% stake. How this will play out for SIA is still not clear. Air India had been suffering losses over the decades, and this crash is undoubtedly going to add to its financial trouble.
Anonymous
6 comments:
Everything seems to point away from the plane itself. They tried the bird strike theory and the pilot error theory. Nothing about the state of the plane, which according to one passenger who flew on Air India saying that the electrical system on Air India planes was never seriously taken care of, with entertainment systems not working, lights not working, communication with crews not working as well. And they just brushed those aside as the norm.
The possibility of both engines failing at the same time is a one in a million times event. For both engines to fail at the same time called for something more than just electrical failure or bird strike, definitely not pilot error.
The crash of Air India and Jeju both involved the landing gears. In Air India's case, the landing gear was down. The first thing the pilot did was to bring up the landing gear once the aircraft is airborne. However, even if the landing gear is up, if both engines flame out, there is no chance to fly the aircraft at that height.
In Jeju, the landing gear could not be lowered which was the main cause of the crash. In both cases, the landing gears were the symptom of trouble the aircraft were having.
Was the pilot already aware of serious issues and not retracting the landing gears for a possible turnaround to land. But the plane was already losing height for that.
$$ is the main cause of this crash. I believe they are not spending enough to do a proper maintenance, just like the super efficient mrt in sinkieland. Top management will claim huge bonus if airline make tonnes of $$. When there is a problem, they all become "taichi" expert. Just like in sinkieland, sia asked for tax payer $$ when it is not doing well. But after making tonnes of $$, only they themselves enjoy the $$.
Boeing is toast. It has been reported that KLM and two other Middle East airline operators are making a beeline for Airbus planes, hundreds of them on order. China's domestic airlines are looking inwards toward Comac for thousands of planes needed over the next decade. Where does all this leave Boeing with all the bad publicity over its planes.
Post a Comment