It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Air France A340 Catches Fire, 291 Passengers Believed Safe

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Glad to hear lots got out safely. Hopefully in the end all of the passengers will be safe.

It's been storming in waves today. Every 45-90 minutes there's been thunder and heavy heavy rain, and then a quiet period to be followed by more rain. Apparently the 401 West is closed fully now, which has gotta suck seeing as it's rush hour.




posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I was driving east at the time, I'm just west of the airport, the weather was nasty there, I haven't seen clouds that black without a hurricane. Lots of lightning too. These storms move fast and can clear quickly. So it was the weather, not a drunk pilot.

The question being posed now is, "Why did they allow it to land in that weather"?



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   

The report of 291 passengers on board is a little too many, since it was an A340-300 with a maximum passenger count of 252 (the Air France A340s have differnt cabin layouts and thats what the AF website gives the passenger count for this particular aircraft to be).

Eye witness reports point to a heavy tail wind picking up just after landing, lifting the aircraft up and gliding it down the runway.

[edit on 2/8/2005 by RichardPrice]


That's just what the local station, which happens to be one of Canada's largest and best established stations, is reporting. They have information that this was a model with a passenger capacity of roughly 350, and 291 passengers on.

I wouldn't be surprised, as they had earlier suggested 200 people on, and 250 max, if it was actually 191 people on board and a small typo that they don't want to scrutinise, just in case.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:37 PM
link   
If you've ever had the privelige to fly a plane, especially take-offs and landings, then you will appreciate what a fine art it is.
I've been in the pilot's seat before with the instructor landing and suddenly the wind's caught us and we've both crapped ourselves and had to go round, and he was an instructor!.
For the record I've been in the Pilot's seat many a time and actually been landing the plane myself and it isn't the easiest thing in the world, and you have to hope that you don't suddenly get caught by the wind at the wrong moment, or hit a bad patch on the 'runway' (grass strip in my case).

The best bit was when we were doing stall recoveries and I pointed out that the plane actually exceeded it's maximum recommended airspeed with the flaps up while performing the manoever, which no-one had pointed out before and he didn't know or even had noticed. What worried me most was when he frowned and said 'emm I see what you mean, I'd better check that out..'!

Like the plane that crashed after 9/11 doing the rudder reversal, I was taught that as well but they have since decided that it puts too much stress on the aircraft (in that particular case it snapped the tailfin off).
But my instructor didn't know about it, I believe it was more specific to that particular aircraft though.

That was only flying a small 4 seater Piper, so imagine what flying a huge Jumbo is like...

Aircraft have only been around just slightly over 100 years, I personally think it's amazing there arn't more accidents.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
If you've ever had the privelige to fly a plane, especially take-offs and landings, then you will appreciate what a fine art it is.
I've been in the pilot's seat before with the instructor landing and suddenly the wind's caught us and we've both crapped ourselves and had to go round, and he was an instructor!.
For the record I've been in the Pilot's seat many a time and actually been landing the plane myself and it isn't the easiest thing in the world, and you have to hope that you don't suddenly get caught by the wind at the wrong moment, or hit a bad patch on the 'runway' (grass strip in my case).

The best bit was when we were doing stall recoveries and I pointed out that the plane actually exceeded it's maximum recommended airspeed with the flaps up while performing the manoever, which no-one had pointed out before and he didn't know or even had noticed. What worried me most was when he frowned and said 'emm I see what you mean, I'd better check that out..'!

Like the plane that crashed after 9/11 doing the rudder reversal, I was taught that as well but they have since decided that it puts too much stress on the aircraft (in that particular case it snapped the tailfin off).
But my instructor didn't know about it, I believe it was more specific to that particular aircraft though.

That was only flying a small 4 seater Piper, so imagine what flying a huge Jumbo is like...

Aircraft have only been around just slightly over 100 years, I personally think it's amazing there arn't more accidents.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
If you've ever had the privelige to fly a plane, especially take-offs and landings, then you will appreciate what a fine art it is.
I've been in the pilot's seat before with the instructor landing and suddenly the wind's caught us and we've both crapped ourselves and had to go round, and he was an instructor!.
For the record I've been in the Pilot's seat many a time and actually been landing the plane myself and it isn't the easiest thing in the world, and you have to hope that you don't suddenly get caught by the wind at the wrong moment, or hit a bad patch on the 'runway' (grass strip in my case).

The best bit was when we were doing stall recoveries and I pointed out that the plane actually exceeded it's maximum recommended airspeed with the flaps up while performing the manoever, which no-one had pointed out before and he didn't know or even had noticed. What worried me most was when he frowned and said 'emm I see what you mean, I'd better check that out..'!

Like the plane that crashed after 9/11 doing the rudder reversal, I was taught that as well but they have since decided that it puts too much stress on the aircraft (in that particular case it snapped the tailfin off).
But my instructor didn't know about it, I believe it was more specific to that particular aircraft though.

That was only flying a small 4 seater Piper, so imagine what flying a huge Jumbo is like...

Aircraft have only been around just slightly over 100 years, I personally think it's amazing there arn't more accidents.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
If you've ever had the privelige to fly a plane, especially take-offs and landings, then you will appreciate what a fine art it is.
I've been in the pilot's seat before with the instructor landing and suddenly the wind's caught us and we've both crapped ourselves and had to go round, and he was an instructor!.
For the record I've been in the Pilot's seat many a time and actually been landing the plane myself and it isn't the easiest thing in the world, and you have to hope that you don't suddenly get caught by the wind at the wrong moment, or hit a bad patch on the 'runway' (grass strip in my case).

The best bit was when we were doing stall recoveries and I pointed out that the plane actually exceeded it's maximum recommended airspeed with the flaps up while performing the manoever, which no-one had pointed out before and he didn't know or even had noticed. What worried me most was when he frowned and said 'emm I see what you mean, I'd better check that out..'!

Like the plane that crashed after 9/11 doing the rudder reversal, I was taught that as well but they have since decided that it puts too much stress on the aircraft (in that particular case it snapped the tailfin off).
But my instructor didn't know about it, I believe it was more specific to that particular aircraft though.

That was only flying a small 4 seater Piper, so imagine what flying a huge Jumbo is like...

Aircraft have only been around just slightly over 100 years, I personally think it's amazing there arn't more accidents.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:46 PM
link   
According to Global TV, there are no fatalities, so if that's true it's a miracle...it looks like it could have been much worse.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:49 PM
link   
They say that the lightning detection system wasn't working. That make no sense. Jeez, look out the window.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:50 PM
link   
The latest reports are that all have made it off the plane!



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
BBC say those reports are uncomfirmed, Asala



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Is reported there's not many people injnured, there's only 6 people injured if I remember correctly with minor injuries.

Alot of the people walked out of the plane before the fire got huge.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Atomix theres a press conference on TV now,

14 injured

[edit on 2-8-2005 by asala]



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:57 PM
link   
The 14 injured is an estimate, but certainly shows that all passengers got of in fairly good shape. The spokesman from Pearson stated the aircraft overshot the runway in severe weather.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Asala the person reporting on the news now is Steve Shaw who is the Greater Toronto Airports authority -- and he is saying 14 minor injuries and that everyone got off the plane -- He is still saying that it is unconfirmed but I think that is just being said just in case. That the figures are probably right now.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Wow...nobody died. That's great news.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   
One of the passengers was just interviewed on CBC.

He said (and this is quoting from memory of 10 minutes ago, so it's not verbatim) "We landed as normal, nothing seemed out of the ordinary. Then the lights went out, which I've never experienced before. It seemed like the pilot was unable to slow the plane down, and don't get me wrong I am not saying it was his fault, and then the roller coaster ride started and we came to a VERY sudden stop." He then said, "they said on the intercom for everyone to remain seated and stay calm, but I saw the flames outside by the wings and soon as that slide was out I was out of there." When the reporter asked him how many people did he see got off the plane he said, "I don't know, all I did was run like hell." He also said he thought there was around 300 people on the plane.

Based on the light going out right as it landed, perhaps the plane was hit by a lightning strike as it landed and lost electronics and was operating on residual hydrolic pressure and backup brakes (I forget what they're called, off the top of my head).

I watched the crash unfold from about 2 minutes after it happened. I just by chance was watching CBC Newsworld and one of the Newsworld cameramen was driving by and happened to see the end of the crash in rain with about 100m visibility. He called in the crash on his cellphone and CBC immediately went to their traffic camera on the freeway that happened to have a "clear" shot of the crash site. What I saw was a plane split into hull sections, with no fire for the first couple minutes. I could not see any chutes deployed on the port side of the plane. I then saw the fire erupt mid-section and come out both cracks in the hull. Anyone that wasn't out of that plane in the first 5-7 minutes is no longer alive.

I also watched the firetrucks come up the runway, prior to the fire, and it appeared like the lead truck got stuck in the mud not far from the end of the strip. Then no trucks approached the plane for at least 3 or 4 minutes after the start of the fire. Finally a small pumper managed to run close to the plane (into the ravine) and unload his tanks on it. It helped a bit, but not completely. After about another minute a second, larger, truck approached and unloaded his foam. That put most of the fire out, but again not completely. By this time, at least 8-10 minutes had passed from the first moment I saw flames. Eventually 3 or 4 other trucks arrived and began to hose/foam everything down. I think the previous heavy rain had a huge impact on the ability of the heavy fire trucks to cross the muddy grass at the end of the runway.

That's my take on the initial events.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Steve Shaw confirmed that the Airbus overshot the runway by 200 meters.
I'm wondering if the water conditions on the runway caused the plane to begin swerving. 300 plus passengers and crew got of...remarkable.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
Wow! This is incredible! I don't think this plane simply ran off the runway and exploded. I would hope planes are built better than that.

I feel horible for all those that died in this tragic accident.

I think this "could" be a terror act? We will know if something else happens within the next hour or so.

Toronto would be a good soft target in the extremist muslim holy war.



Nobody died! I guess this post is old.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice
The report of 291 passengers on board is a little too many, since it was an A340-300 with a maximum passenger count of 252 (the Air France A340s have differnt cabin layouts and thats what the AF website gives the passenger count for this particular aircraft to be).


Apparently Air France does not agree with what Airbus is stating when it comes to passenger capacity.


Air France said it appeared all 297 passengers and 12 crew had survived.

Skynews Air France Statement



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join