davidthai Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Does anyone know of any Airlines ,Bangkok to London that do not use A330 Airbus , i am a bit wary of travelling on the A330 because of the recent Air France crash and the incident last week that , Quantas had with the A330. Do you think my worries are unfounded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angiud Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Do you think my worries are unfounded ? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyh Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 When you look at ticket prices they will tell you what aircraft. However you may want to look at what brand and model taxis have been involved in fatal accidents as you will find your risk of dying will be far greater on the way to and from the airport! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Amadeus dot net. You can check flight availability and it tells you the equipment fot that days flight. Given that the Boeing 787 is delayed again cos it's not strong enough, you might want to think about walking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alant Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 the 330 is a bit short on legs for direct flights so most would use jumbo B747 or the 330 big brother 340, qantas, ba and eva tend to be 747 whilst thai use 747 for the lunchtime flight andthe 340 for the evening flight from bangkok (therefore the other way round on the return trip). if you are flying economy on thai though the airbus offers a 2-4-2 config and seatback video with indivibual control. if you include hubs then emirates could get you there on the 380 (superjumbo) and or the 777. i wouldnt worry, there is probably no safer aircraft than the 330 at the moment as they wilol probably been checked over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 (edited) Does anyone know of any Airlines ,Bangkok to London that do not use A330 Airbus , i am a bit wary of travelling on the A330 because of the recent Air France crash and the incident last week that , Quantas had with the A330. Do you think my worries are unfounded Until that crash the A330 had a perfect record of not one single fatality in airline service. Out of the almost 1000 built, only one aircraft from the entire A340/A330 series has had a fatal incident in airline service. Only the Boeing 777 has a perfect non-fatality record, and it hasn't been around as long, nor are there as many in service. Are you worried about taking a taxi to Suvarnabhumi? If only they were as safe. It's understandable to be worried if you don't know aircraft, at least to the point of nerdiness like me. But if you are on an A330/A340, or 777 you are statistically on the safest planes in the sky. Air France has had several major crashes this decade though. I'm a bit concerned about them. (Two involved flying into dubious weather) Edited June 25, 2009 by cdnvic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Who, me ? Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 cdnvic is right. The problem is not with the aircraft, but mainly with the airline. Moreover, we still don't know what caused the crash of the AF 447. It could be anything, including a human error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Burr Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 From wikipedia:- "In total, 56 customers have placed orders for 1,107 777s, with 784 delivered as of May 31, 2009". "By the end of July 2008, a total of 1,006 A330s[4] had been ordered and 555 delivered". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 From wikipedia:-"In total, 56 customers have placed orders for 1,107 777s, with 784 delivered as of May 31, 2009". "By the end of July 2008, a total of 1,006 A330s[4] had been ordered and 555 delivered". The numbers I quoted were for the A330/340 series. They are twin and four engined variants of the same aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brigante7 Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 It's all irelevant, when your time is up, your time is up. Why worry? Just get on with enjoying life. Brigante7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datsun240Z Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Planes crash sometimes, it's a machine, the things do fail sometimes. A plane should have a life of about 30 years, if maintained properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norwayeagle Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 It's all irelevant, when your time is up, your time is up. Why worry? Just get on with enjoying life. Brigante7. Yeah I wish i could stop worry,I try hard! but its kind of an everyday task.guess thats life (at least 4 me).But but, still there are not many that are so happy,a problem solver and positive as me (they are hard to find) ( in my "world"). eee what am i saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tw25rw Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 It's all irelevant, when your time is up, your time is up. Why worry? Just get on with enjoying life. Brigante7. Like the Italian woman who missed the AF flight. Disaster can happen to anyone at any time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidthai Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share Posted June 26, 2009 US safety officials have said they are investigating two incidents in which airspeed and altitude indications in the cockpits of Airbus A330 planes may have malfunctioned. The aircraft are the same type as the Air France plane that crashed into the Atlantic Ocean just off Brazil on May 31 after sending out low airspeed messages, killing all 228 people aboard. This is from the Press agenct today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tw25rw Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 There was a similar problem on a 767 recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carib Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 There was a similar problem on a 767 recently. http://avherald.com/h?article=41b7477b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ucantbeserious Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 gotta say personally now i am a bit leery about the A330. last year near Perth (Aus) one had a sudden descent injuring many people, then the Air France one, last week a Quantas one had a fire in the cockpit going Japan-Aus. i came BKK-Melbourne 2 weeks ago on Jetstar A330, was very unusual, we had quite strong turbulence continuously for maybe 3-4 hours, (god i hate that bumpy stuff), then quite instantly it stopped and the rest of the flight was smooth. can't help thinking was it caused by the atmosphere or by the plane itself. I have never experienced turbulence like that on this flight path over many trips and many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbaldwin Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 (edited) Does anyone know of any Airlines ,Bangkok to London that do not use A330 Airbus , i am a bit wary of travelling on the A330 because of the recent Air France crash and the incident last week that , Quantas had with the A330. Do you think my worries are unfounded If I told you that there had been more than one fatal accident involving a Toyota Camry, would you still be willing to travel in one? Edited June 27, 2009 by jbaldwin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackdanielsesq Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Previous Airbus disasters * August 2000: Gulf Air A320 crashed in Gulf off Bahrain * January 2000: 169 killed when A310 crashed off Ivory Coast. * February 1998: 197 killed when A300 crashed in Taiwan. * September 1997: 234 killed when A300 crashed in Indonesia. * July 1994: Seven killed when A330 crashed in Toulouse, France, when crew were testing simulated engine failure * April 1994: 259 killed when A300 crashed in Japan. * March 1994: 75 killed when A310 crashed in Siberia. * September 1992: 167 killed when A300 crashed in Kathmandu, Nepal. * July 1992: 113 killed when A310 crashed in Kathmandu. * January 1992: 87 killed when A320 crashed in Strasbourg. * February 1990: 90 killed when A320 crashed in Bangalore. * June 1988: Eight killed when A320 crashed in Habersheim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datsun240Z Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Not only Airbus Jack, alot more Boeings went down. http://www.airdisaster.com/features/top100/top100.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carib Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Previous Airbus disasters* August 2000: Gulf Air A320 crashed in Gulf off Bahrain * January 2000: 169 killed when A310 crashed off Ivory Coast. * February 1998: 197 killed when A300 crashed in Taiwan. * September 1997: 234 killed when A300 crashed in Indonesia. * July 1994: Seven killed when A330 crashed in Toulouse, France, when crew were testing simulated engine failure * April 1994: 259 killed when A300 crashed in Japan. * March 1994: 75 killed when A310 crashed in Siberia. * September 1992: 167 killed when A300 crashed in Kathmandu, Nepal. * July 1992: 113 killed when A310 crashed in Kathmandu. * January 1992: 87 killed when A320 crashed in Strasbourg. * February 1990: 90 killed when A320 crashed in Bangalore. * June 1988: Eight killed when A320 crashed in Habersheim. You are doing it again Jack, all you prove here is that airbus has the `effect` of the crash, nothing more than just that. The real cause doesn't have to be related to Airbus at all. Just as it applies to all other manufacturers. You do moderation on a technical forum I read somewhere, well Jack, the level on that forum cannot be very high, and the subjects discussed cannot be above that of what went wrong with three wheeled kiddy bikes . If anything a bit more higher up the technical ladder is discussed there than you absolutely must know that you are constantly talking BS about this subject, and are just out for the wind up of things. That can of course be fun, but now you are on a topic from someone who is concerned because of the latest crashes and the manufacturer / plane type involved. The probable reason this gentleman to be concerned is that the press does the same as you do Jack. No background information, no real cause , no conclusions are given, just simply pointing the finger at a manufacturer or type of plane is the easiest way. Wind up can be fun, but not when answering a question like this IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Previous Airbus disasters* August 2000: Gulf Air A320 crashed in Gulf off Bahrain. Undetermined, indications are that incorrect flap settings and confusion of the pilots after an aborted landing led to a stall. (Gulf Air) * January 2000: 169 killed when A310 crashed off Ivory Coast. Captain ignored stall warning indicator due to earlier false alarm. (Kenya Airways) * February 1998: 197 killed when A300 crashed in Taiwan. Pilot pulled up too fast while executing a missed approach and stalled the aircraft. (China Airlines) * September 1997: 234 killed when A300 crashed in Indonesia. Air traffic control error during low visibility approach. (Garuda Indonesia) * July 1994: Seven killed when A330 crashed in Toulouse, France, when crew were testing simulated engine failure. Accidents happen during testing extremes. It's taking risks like this that makes airliners as safe as they are. (Airbus test aircraft) * April 1994: 259 killed when A300 crashed in Japan. Pilot error, pulled aircraft into a nose high attitude and stalled it. (China Airlines) * March 1994: 75 killed when A310 crashed in Siberia. Captain allowed his children to operate flight controls, ended badly. (Aeroflot) * September 1992: 167 killed when A300 crashed in Kathmandu, Nepal. Pilot descended prematurely in mountainous terrain. (Pakistan International) * July 1992: 113 killed when A310 crashed in Kathmandu. Pilot ignored the alarm shouting "terrain! terrain!" while flying through fog in Nepal, thinking it was a false alarm. It wasn't (Thai Airways) * January 1992: 87 killed when A320 crashed in Strasbourg. Training/crew error. Pilot set wrong descent rate on autopilot. (Air Inter) * February 1990: 90 killed when A320 crashed in Bangalore. Pilot error, left glidepath and approached too steeply at low power. (Indian Airlines) * June 1988: Eight killed when A320 crashed in Habersheim. Pilot error, flew approach much too low. (Air France) Only is the January 2000 incident is there any hint that a fault in the aircraft contributed to the crash. Even then, had the pilot followed the correct procedure, the crash would have been averted. In addition, the two earlier A320 crashes, and the recent river landing in New York are good examples of an aircraft taking tremendous impacts and not breaking up. It's hard to say how many lives that saves. Sorry for injecting balance and facts into your post Jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyh Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Pehaps it would be helpful to list crashes by airline rather than manufacturer, then we can get a better idea of which has better maintence and crew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kf6vci Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Does anyone know of any Airlines ,Bangkok to London that do not use A330 Airbus , i am a bit wary of travelling on the A330 because of the recent Air France crash and the incident last week that , Quantas had with the A330. Do you think my worries are unfounded Until that crash the A330 had a perfect record of not one single fatality in airline service. Out of the almost 1000 built, only one aircraft from the entire A340/A330 series has had a fatal incident in airline service. Only the Boeing 777 has a perfect non-fatality record, and it hasn't been around as long, nor are there as many in service. No offence, the last part is wrong as prohibition. the 777 outsold the Airbus A 330 and 340 many times. Are you worried about taking a taxi to Suvarnabhumi? If only they were as safe. It's understandable to be worried if you don't know aircraft, at least to the point of nerdiness like me. But if you are on an A330/A340, or 777 you are statistically on the safest planes in the sky. Air France has had several major crashes this decade though. I'm a bit concerned about them. (Two involved flying into dubious weather) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 No offence, the last part is wrong as prohibition. the 777 outsold the Airbus A 330 and 340 many times. My sources are Boeing and Airbus, what are yours? Total 777 Deliveries: 784 (Boeing) http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders...stTimeout=20000 Total A330/340 deliveries: 974 (Airbus) http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a330a340/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackdanielsesq Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Airbus has had two major wrecks in one month - two different airlines. BR>Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Airbus has had two major wrecks in one month - two different airlines.BR>Jack You certainly have a hardon for Airbus. Did they fire you or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tw25rw Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 How old was the thing that went down today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 How old was the thing that went down today? 19 yrs old, 51,900 flight hours. The aircraft in question had been cited for faults during an inspection and there's no info yet as to whether or not those faults had been repaired. Yemeni Airlines was subject to stricter monitoring by EU aviation authorities due to worries about aircraft maintenance. Miraculously, a 5yr old from the flight has been pulled from the sea alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHammer Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Previous Airbus disasters* August 2000: Gulf Air A320 crashed in Gulf off Bahrain. Undetermined, indications are that incorrect flap settings and confusion of the pilots after an aborted landing led to a stall. (Gulf Air) * January 2000: 169 killed when A310 crashed off Ivory Coast. Captain ignored stall warning indicator due to earlier false alarm. (Kenya Airways) * February 1998: 197 killed when A300 crashed in Taiwan. Pilot pulled up too fast while executing a missed approach and stalled the aircraft. (China Airlines) * September 1997: 234 killed when A300 crashed in Indonesia. Air traffic control error during low visibility approach. (Garuda Indonesia) * July 1994: Seven killed when A330 crashed in Toulouse, France, when crew were testing simulated engine failure. Accidents happen during testing extremes. It's taking risks like this that makes airliners as safe as they are. (Airbus test aircraft) * April 1994: 259 killed when A300 crashed in Japan. Pilot error, pulled aircraft into a nose high attitude and stalled it. (China Airlines) * March 1994: 75 killed when A310 crashed in Siberia. Captain allowed his children to operate flight controls, ended badly. (Aeroflot) * September 1992: 167 killed when A300 crashed in Kathmandu, Nepal. Pilot descended prematurely in mountainous terrain. (Pakistan International) * July 1992: 113 killed when A310 crashed in Kathmandu. Pilot ignored the alarm shouting "terrain! terrain!" while flying through fog in Nepal, thinking it was a false alarm. It wasn't (Thai Airways) * January 1992: 87 killed when A320 crashed in Strasbourg. Training/crew error. Pilot set wrong descent rate on autopilot. (Air Inter) * February 1990: 90 killed when A320 crashed in Bangalore. Pilot error, left glidepath and approached too steeply at low power. (Indian Airlines) * June 1988: Eight killed when A320 crashed in Habersheim. Pilot error, flew approach much too low. (Air France) Only is the January 2000 incident is there any hint that a fault in the aircraft contributed to the crash. Even then, had the pilot followed the correct procedure, the crash would have been averted. In addition, the two earlier A320 crashes, and the recent river landing in New York are good examples of an aircraft taking tremendous impacts and not breaking up. It's hard to say how many lives that saves. Sorry for injecting balance and facts into your post Jack. Seems to me that the issue is not the aircraft but crappy third world pilots. Something to think about next time you book a cheap flight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now