Boeing 737-800 crash @ Schiphol

A place for 'real world' pilots and aviation enthusiasts to discuss their hobby

Postby gojozoom » Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:15 am

Bad news again, however "only" 9 died. It lost both engines, some say it was low on fuel. Details here

It's kind of scary for me, as I'll have a long haul to Europe next week, and land @ Schiphol...
Image
User avatar
gojozoom
Sim-holic
 
Topic author
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:37 am
Posts: 947
Location: Wellington

Postby nalbers » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:10 am

gojozoom wrote:
QUOTE (gojozoom @ Feb 25 2009, 08:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Bad news again, however "only" 9 died. It lost both engines, some say it was low on fuel. Details here

It's kind of scary for me, as I'll have a long haul to Europe next week, and land @ Schiphol...


The crash is certainly the news of the day here in the Netherlands. The Dutch media has been totally silent about possible causes though. At the moment all anyone is saying is thank god so many passengers survived, and to speculate about the accident rate of the airline involved. I imagine the media frenzy will be long gone and forgotten before we hear about the actual cause of the tragedy.
Niels Albers: Flying unskillfully with MS Flight simulator since version 1...
Image

David Gunson on Soviet ATC: "They have a super system there. When you want to fly from say Moscow to Leningrad, you are give three things: A height, a route and a speed. If you deviate from any of these three things you are joined by two MIG's on each wing and you land at the nearest available airfield. The passengers continue by coach, and the crew are never seen again. ... It's a super system, they don't get repetitive faults...
nalbers
Member
 
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:26 am
Posts: 59
Location: Driebergen, The Netherlands

Postby jastheace » Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:16 am

interesting when you look at the engine in the picture, it dosen't have much blade damage that you would expect from an engine that is turning under its own power. and again as they say the lack of fire tends to suggest that there may not have been much fuel left in the tanks. it will be interesting to see what caused this one.

RIP to those killed. could have been much worse

oh a side note, not to hijack this thread, has anyone heard what the offical cause of the BA 777 crash last year? last i heard they had almost said ice in the fuel caused it.
Last edited by jastheace on Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
In the ongoing battle between objects made of aluminum going hundreds of miles per hour and the ground going zero miles per hour, the ground has yet to lose.

Image
User avatar
jastheace
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:33 pm
Posts: 1032
Location: Hastings

Postby flightnse » Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:09 pm

How can you say ONLY 9 died. that still 9 people's family's with out loved ones!!!!! angry.gif
Last edited by flightnse on Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
stephen
flightnse
Member
 
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:34 pm
Posts: 96
Location: Auckland,whangaparaoa

Postby Chairman » Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:42 pm

gojozoom wrote:
QUOTE (gojozoom @ Feb 26 2009, 08:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Bad news again, however "only" 9 died. It lost both engines, some say it was low on fuel. Details here

It's kind of scary for me, as I'll have a long haul to Europe next week, and land @ Schiphol...

It should actually be kind of comforting for you - major airports do have planes drop out of the sky on approach every now and then, but has a major airport ever had it happen twice in 2 weeks ?

Gary
The above post is in the public domain and is guaranteed by the manufacturer to contain no references to anything illegal or discussion of piracy, although this signature may contain traces of nuts.
Chairman
Sim-holic
 
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:07 pm
Posts: 912

Postby victor_alpha_charlie » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:32 pm

flightnse wrote:
QUOTE (flightnse @ Feb 26 2009, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
How can you say ONLY 9 died. that still 9 people's family's with out loved ones!!!!! angry.gif


If you consider the fact that only 7% of the passengers died, it certainly could've been a lot worse. People die all the time, and I hate to sound insensitive but these things happen.
User avatar
victor_alpha_charlie
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:09 am
Posts: 2372

Postby Njbb1995 » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:38 pm

VAC has a point, Disasters like this could be alot worse and we are lucky that these things dont happen more often.
User avatar
Njbb1995
Sim-holic
 
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 5:02 pm
Posts: 860
Location: Blenheim

Postby jetscream » Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:57 pm

R.I.P to those that died.
I'm glad it wasn't any worse.
jetscream
 


Return to New Zealand Aviation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests