Here we go again: another missing airplane

User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Here we go again: another missing airplane

Post by maryjane48 »

Officials now say 162 people were on board the AirAsia plane that went missing after leaving Indonesia for Singapore. Search and rescue operations are underway.

The Airbus A320 was last heard from at about 7:30 a.m. local time, when the crew contacted air traffic control in Jakarta. It was believed to be over the Java Sea between Kalimantan and Java islands when it disappeared.


http://www.castanet.net/news/World/1296 ... 2-on-board
zookeeper
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 12102
Joined: Mar 25th, 2012, 5:05 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by zookeeper »

I am not an aviation expert by any means but wonder why a plane would not be reported missing for a half an hour?
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17124
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by maryjane48 »

yes its a web weaved by who knows . im stunned this is happening again and now they saying a ferry with 300 people burning by greece
Dizzy1
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10778
Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by Dizzy1 »

zookeeper wrote:I am not an aviation expert by any means but wonder why a plane would not be reported missing for a half an hour?

International standards ...

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publicat ... c1003.html

... its not uncommon for an aircraft to disappear briefly off a radar or to loose communications briefly (wrong frequency as an example) so there has to be a window put in place to cover all possibilities of error before a massive search effort is launched. Even if, in this instance, the flight was reported missing within 5 minutes, nothing would be different ... the information we have to organize a search would be the same.
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
User avatar
omisimaw
Guru
Posts: 7402
Joined: Mar 1st, 2007, 4:08 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by omisimaw »

FAA rules are american and do not apply world wide and most definitely not in Canada
To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else. - David A. Bednar
User avatar
omisimaw
Guru
Posts: 7402
Joined: Mar 1st, 2007, 4:08 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by omisimaw »

Indonesia will have there own rules as does Singapore but here in Canada this is a good start to what we require for aircraft in our airspace

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/part6-standards-625-2451.htm

lots of links to other parts of the Canadian rules as well
To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else. - David A. Bednar
zookeeper
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 12102
Joined: Mar 25th, 2012, 5:05 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by zookeeper »

Briefly yes, but one would think the bar would have been raised to set the alarm off earlier given past experience.
User avatar
omisimaw
Guru
Posts: 7402
Joined: Mar 1st, 2007, 4:08 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by omisimaw »

To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else. - David A. Bednar
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 23039
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 10:53 am

Re: here we go again

Post by JLives »

Merry Christmas CNN, you get to bust out your plane props again!
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."
Dizzy1
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10778
Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by Dizzy1 »

omisimaw wrote:FAA rules are american and do not apply world wide and most definitely not in Canada

Many of the rules followed by the FAA, JAA, NavCanada are the same as elsewhere - there are international standards followed by various agencies.
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
User avatar
omisimaw
Guru
Posts: 7402
Joined: Mar 1st, 2007, 4:08 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by omisimaw »

omisimaw wrote:FAA rules are american and do not apply world wide and most definitely not in Canada

Dizzy1 wrote:Many of the rules followed by the FAA, JAA, NavCanada are the same as elsewhere - there are international standards followed by various agencies.

Or is it simply the other way around and the FAA mimic others LOL......

The fact of the matter is that quoting FAA rules is not the standard for the world, never has been and never will be and it is not NavCanada either, but that just proves you do not even look at the links provided....

Carry on.... it is always interesting seeing all the speculation on air ops from those who think they have it all in the bag, so to speak...
To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else. - David A. Bednar
FreeRights
Guru
Posts: 5684
Joined: Oct 15th, 2007, 2:36 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by FreeRights »

omisimaw wrote:Or is it simply the other way around and the FAA mimic others LOL......

The fact of the matter is that quoting FAA rules is not the standard for the world, never has been and never will be and it is not NavCanada either, but that just proves you do not even look at the links provided....

Carry on.... it is always interesting seeing all the speculation on air ops from those who think they have it all in the bag, so to speak...

So completely ignoring whether or not the FAA is an international standard or not because it's irrelevant, is the 30 minute communications rule international standard or not?
Come quickly Jesus, we're barely holding on.
Dizzy1
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10778
Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by Dizzy1 »

omisimaw wrote:
Carry on.... it is always interesting seeing all the speculation on air ops from those who think they have it all in the bag, so to speak...

Bye bye then :)
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
User avatar
omisimaw
Guru
Posts: 7402
Joined: Mar 1st, 2007, 4:08 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by omisimaw »

The Airbus A320 is equipped with a ditching switch, Diehl said, that essentially turns the plane's fuselage into a boat.

"If they got the aircraft down on the water safely," he said, "it should be floating."
To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else. - David A. Bednar
User avatar
omisimaw
Guru
Posts: 7402
Joined: Mar 1st, 2007, 4:08 pm

Re: here we go again

Post by omisimaw »

omisimaw wrote:Or is it simply the other way around and the FAA mimic others LOL......

The fact of the matter is that quoting FAA rules is not the standard for the world, never has been and never will be and it is not NavCanada either, but that just proves you do not even look at the links provided....

Carry on.... it is always interesting seeing all the speculation on air ops from those who think they have it all in the bag, so to speak...

FreeRights wrote:So completely ignoring whether or not the FAA is an international standard or not because it's irrelevant, is the 30 minute communications rule international standard or not?

You might want to check out this site for information
http://www.iata.org/about/Pages/index.aspx
To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else. - David A. Bednar
Post Reply

Return to “World”