A bad month for Airbus 3x0s

[Weird Harold]

After the Air France crash on the first, another Airbus has "crashed into the ocean."

Bad weather blamed for Yemen Airways crash
30/06/2009 - 15:30:40

Bad weather is believed to have been the main cause of the crash today of an Airbus A310 plane in the Indian Ocean.Bad weather is believed to have been the main cause of the crash today of an Airbus A310 plane in the Indian Ocean.

The only survivor so far of the accident, involving a Yemenia Yemen Airways plane, with 142 passengers and 11 crew aboard, is a five-year-old child.

French transport authorities raised safety concerns about this individual aircraft following checks in 2007.

The accident is the second to involve an Airbus plane in the last four weeks and follows the June 1 crash in the Atlantic of a Rio to Paris Air France Airbus A330 with the loss of 228 lives, including three Irish nationals.

Today’s accident involved a flight from Sana’a in Yemen to Moroni in the Comoros Islands.

“It’s likely that we will find that this accident was primarily weather-related,” said Chris Yates, aviation analyst for publishing company IHS Jane’s.

...

This crash might not be manufacturer related, though, since Yemeni Airlines has been on the verge of being banned from EU airspace because of poor maintenance and the specific aircraft involved has a history of maintenance problems. Still, the publicity can't be good for the company.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I was thinking much the same. In a time when both the big airliner manufacturers are having some technical difficulties and delivery delays, news like this doesn't give a prospective buyer a lot of confidence.

 

[neonlyte]

Bound to happen once the ratio of Airbus planes reached par with Boeing. It's a one in three chance that any plane crash will be Airbus, Boeing or one of the myriad of minor aircraft.

The French government banned this particular Yemen plane from European airspace in 2007 due to 'irregularities'... which I think can be taken to mean poor or improper maintenance schedules.

 

[DesertPirate]

Memories of the DC 10 anyone?

 

[TE999]

Memories of the DC 10 anyone?

How 'bout the Lockheed Electra...or the DeHavilland Comet?

 

[Dragonlipz]

Memories of the DC 10 anyone?

meaning what? The DC 10 was a good airframe as is the A-310.....maintenance means everything when you're operating a vessel that routinely gets airborne at 100 mph, cruises at 400 mph, and lands at 130 mph.....four or five times a day, every day......The A-310 in question was not maintained per FAA or EASA Standards..

 

[voluptuary_manque]

From what I can glean from the media, this particular plane was maintained like it was a camel or something.

 

[Dragonlipz]

From what I can glean from the media, this particular plane was maintained like it was a camel or something.

As a 30 yr aerospace veteran, (built most of what's flying today or designed it) there are some criteria that cannot be ignored - like maintenance and vigilance.....Third world fuel hangars are no substitute for an FAA or EASA facility........

 

[voluptuary_manque]

As a 30 yr aerospace veteran, (built most of what's flying today or designed it) there are some criteria that cannot be ignored - like maintenance and vigilance.....Third world fuel hangars are no substitute for an FAA or EASA facility........

An excellent reason for being very careful about which airline you fly with!

 

[Weird Harold]

meaning what? The DC 10 was a good airframe as is the A-310.....maintenance means everything ...

A pending similarity is that public perception of the safety of A3x0 in bad weather is going to hurt the companies that operate them, just as public perception that DC-10s were prone to lose their cargo doors at the slightest bit of turbulence pushed them out of passenger service -- despite the fact that IIRC, only three DC-10s were lost to that particular design flaw and one was a cargo version and one was a Turkish Airways plane with a similar maintence history to this A310.