Air France Jet Crashes In Toronto

GotZoom

Senior Member
Apr 20, 2005
5,719
368
48
Cordova, TN
Let's see....is this something the CIA is behind too?

TORONTO — A passenger jet has caught fire after reportedly skidding off a runway at Toronto's Pearson International Airport. According to reports, black smoke billowed from the wreckage as the aircraft burned.

Police said the plane was an Air France passenger jet that was trying to land when it ran into trouble.

According to reports, the plane had around 200 passengers on board.

A row of emergency vehicles lined up behind the wreckage, and a fire truck sprayed the flames with water. The operation was broadcast live on television in Canada and the United States.

The flaming ruin was next to the four-lane Highway 401, Canada's busiest highway, and some cars and trucks stopped on the roadway after the crash.

There was no immediate word on casualties.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,164534,00.html
 
Apparently CBC is reporting it skidded off the runway on a good landing due to bad weather. Thank God, everyone is okay.

(Double yikes, because I fly out of there tomorrow!)
 
Based on the facts coming out of this one, it sounds like once again the arrogance of those glorified button pushing bus drivers who call themselves "pilots" has once again nearly ended in catastrophe.

Too many airline "pilots" are not pilots at all in the conventional sense. They have allowed their flying skills to atropy because the airplane essentially flies itself. Taxi the crowd killer to the runway, line it up, push the throttles forward, punch "George", then kick back and relax. The plane flies itself to destination, lands itself, the "pilot" retards the throttles, parks the thing, then heads for the airport bar. There's your average airline "pilot" - a person no more worthy of the title "pilot" than someone eating a burger is worthy of being called a rancher.

So once again dumbass airline "pilots" have nearly killed a plane load of passengers simply because they were too stupid or too arrogant to respect the power of a thunderstorm and they allowed that arrogance to lead to an extremely faulty decision making process.

It is a lesson which apparently goes unlearned and needs to be re-taught in the blood and lives of passengers again and again. That lesson is rudimentary, but it requires a degree of respect and humility which results in good judgement. That lesson is short and simple - "I don't care what you're flying, how big it may be or how fast it is - if you fail to respect her, MOTHER NATURE WILL KICK YOUR ASS!"
 
Merlin1047 said:
Based on the facts coming out of this one, it sounds like once again the arrogance of those glorified button pushing bus drivers who call themselves "pilots" has once again nearly ended in catastrophe.

Too many airline "pilots" are not pilots at all in the conventional sense. They have allowed their flying skills to atropy because the airplane essentially flies itself. Taxi the crowd killer to the runway, line it up, push the throttles forward, punch "George", then kick back and relax. The plane flies itself to destination, lands itself, the "pilot" retards the throttles, parks the thing, then heads for the airport bar. There's your average airline "pilot" - a person no more worthy of the title "pilot" than someone eating a burger is worthy of being called a rancher.

So once again dumbass airline "pilots" have nearly killed a plane load of passengers simply because they were too stupid or too arrogant to respect the power of a thunderstorm and they allowed that arrogance to lead to an extremely faulty decision making process.

It is a lesson which apparently goes unlearned and needs to be re-taught in the blood and lives of passengers again and again. That lesson is rudimentary, but it requires a degree of respect and humility which results in good judgement. That lesson is short and simple - "I don't care what you're flying, how big it may be or how fast it is - if you fail to respect her, MOTHER NATURE WILL KICK YOUR ASS!"
Exactly..And after 28 years, 10,000 hours, duel rated, three type ratings and an ATP..I'll NOT fly an airline...Cuz I know how they operate and whos up front.
 
Thank God, everyone is okay.

thanks also the crew of the Air France's Airbus, they did the evacuation very quicly, more than 300 people out from the plane in a really little time.

So the fact that everybody is alive is for a large part because the staff was good and well formed.


So you can fly with Air France, the Air Crew are excellent !


Merlin, it's not necessary the fault of the pilots, the weather was simply AWFUL on Toronto's airport.
If there is water on the land, too much, the plane can do an "aquaplaning" and can't use its brakes. Then, crash.
 
padisha emperor said:
....
Merlin, it's not necessary the fault of the pilots, the weather was simply AWFUL on Toronto's airport.
If there is water on the land, too much, the plane can do an "aquaplaning" and can't use its brakes. Then, crash.
It was 100% the Pilots fault..
 
The jet's co-pilot, ..... was in control of the jet upon landing, officials said.

Opps...It's bad enough you choose to try an land in a thunderstorm, that's plain stupid Captain, but at least you should have been at the controls.

*BTW folks..co-pilot flying is common practice*

Mr. P will go out on a limb before an investigation is complete...This accident was due to pilot error..yes weather was a factor, but poor judgement on the part of the flight deck crew was the cause. I'll bet money on it.
 
Mr. P said:
Opps...It's bad enough you choose to try an land in a thunderstorm, that's plain stupid Captain, but at least you should have been at the controls.

*BTW folks..co-pilot flying is common practice*

Mr. P will go out on a limb before an investigation is complete...This accident was due to pilot error..yes weather was a factor, but poor judgement on the part of the flight deck crew was the cause. I'll bet money on it.


aquaplanning is well known of pilots, and it does that the plane can hardly use brakes and be under control.

But I don't say that the pilots have no responsability.

We'll see it after the investigations ;)
 
padisha emperor said:
thanks also the crew of the Air France's Airbus, they did the evacuation very quicly, more than 300 people out from the plane in a really little time.

So the fact that everybody is alive is for a large part because the staff was good and well formed.

First, I'm no aviation amateur. I got my wings in 1967. I can tell you unequivocably that it is a somewhat dubious rationale to laud a crew which just creamed an airplane because they manage to offload all of the potential victims. Whopee-doo. Perhaps this particular crew needed less training in passenger evacuation and a little more time studying the proper decision making process for landing an airplane if the weather is questionable.

padisha emperor said:
So you can fly with Air France, the Air Crew are excellent !

You may note that I avoided all references to the nationality of the airline in my criticisms. I did this intentionally because I know that Air France does not have a monopoly on the stupidity market. Accidents like these have been occurring for decades and the only commonality is that nearly all airlines have experienced them.

padisha emperor said:
So you can fly with Air France, the Air Crew are excellent !

I will not fly on ANY airline unless there is some extremely compelling reason for me to do so. Since deregulation of the American airlines, economics has trumped safety and airline equipment is operated right up to the ragged edge of failure. Maintenance is the bare minimum required to keep the machinery in the air.

Seems to me that your primary interest in commenting on this particular incident is based on the fact that it involves French pilots. As I stated before, this type of incident is not unique to Air France. I wonder if your defense of the crew would be quite so enthusiastic had an American airline been involved???

padisha emperor said:
Merlin, it's not necessary the fault of the pilots, the weather was simply AWFUL on Toronto's airport.

And this is where you are most certainly wrong. There can be no good reason for any crew to endanger its passengers by landing during a severe thunderstorm. It is HIGHLY likely that impatience, arrogance and bad judgement led to this mishap. Landing in "awful" weather is ALWAYS the fault of the pilot since he is the one who makes that decision.

padisha emperor said:
If there is water on the land, too much, the plane can do an "aquaplaning" and can't use its brakes. Then, crash.

Not quite true. Hydroplaning can present a controllability problem, but this type jet does not rely on brakes alone for stopping power. Ever hear of reverse thrust? That works no matter how much water is on the runway.

The only part of your statements with which I can agree is that we need to wait for the result of the investigation. But I'm betting my money on stupidity. That's a fairly reliable wager regardless of the nationality of the crew.
 
Hey, stop right now Merlin.

I duidn't say that the crew was excellent because it was Air France. The crew can also be not French, it can be every nationalities......so, stop.

I only said that the Air France's crew was really good. Did I speak of the pilot ? no, only of the crew : air hotess and stewards.

When I said you can fly with Air France, it was like a little joke, but you didn't take it as it.

So, you went inot a speach without really link with what I said or meant.
 
padisha emperor said:
Hey, stop right now Merlin.

:huh:

Your reply is on a qualitative par with the landing by these two bozos.

Initial results of the investigation are already surfacing - human error. Gee, what a surprise.
 
The association of the american pilots said that the Toronto's airport was unsafe and not according to the safety and security norms. Particularly, at the end of the taxiway, this hole, where the Air France's airbus crashed.


So, awful weather, and unsafe airport. It can be the fault of the pilots, but all was made for an accident that day.
 

Forum List

Back
Top