benthomas010 Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I think huge assumptions are being made that the chose to continue flying this route due to cost. They continued flying this route because they were told there wasn't a risk above 31000 feet. Why deviate unless there is good reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 That is an assumption too, although they were allowed to fly at that height. Quite a number of airlines had chosen to avoid the route though, so clearly they must have thought there was at least some risk involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucharmily Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I don't have an answer. It's just such a sad day on the news. Most of us on this forum will have flown this route at some point. Just feel so sorry for the victims and their families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Clearly. But whoever put that zone in place (CAA? ) obviously made some estimates not knowing the extent of range available to the separatists. The airlines have to be able to trust the relevant authorities not to put them at risk. The airlines have to take responsibility for the safety of their passengers. There were no restrictions but there were warnings that other airlines were heeding. This airline needs to explain why it chose not to heed those warnings. Is it poor risk practices and cost cutting? Are they generally complacent on risk management? It has to be looked into. Maybe losing two planes in one year is purely bad luck, but it is unusual to say the least and hence why I would boycott until they are exonerated of all fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 After this latest horror- do you think it is jinxed in some way? Would you re-consider travel plans because of this terrible incident? To be honest i was put off after the first plane disappeared. A workmate took a flight with them only a week or so after the first plane disappeared i told her she was nuts. Her response it was cheap well yes it was for a reason. No i wouldn't fly with them but i'm a fairly nervous flyer anyway so i'd rather not add to the distress flying causes me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucharmily Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Just looking on the Malaysian airlines website, they call this the MH17 incident? I'd call it an horrific tragedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 The airlines have to take responsibility for the safety of their passengers. There were no restrictions but there were warnings that other airlines were heeding. This airline needs to explain why it chose not to heed those warnings. Is it poor risk practices and cost cutting? Are they generally complacent on risk management? It has to be looked into. Maybe losing two planes in one year is purely bad luck, but it is unusual to say the least and hence why I would boycott until they are exonerated of all fault. and why pray tell would MAS be at fault for a Russian SAM bringing down one of their aircraft ????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 and why pray tell would MAS be at fault for a Russian SAM bringing down one of their aircraft ????? Well Les, it is a debateable point, but Qantas for example re-routed flights to avoid the area back in March. Several other airlines did too. The fact that several aircraft had been shot down in the past week in that very area begs the question should Malaysia also have re-routed elsewhere. Easy to be smart in hindsight of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Is a plane at 30000 feet visible from the ground if no cloud ? I presume not and that they pick it up on radar ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 and why pray tell would MAS be at fault for a Russian SAM bringing down one of their aircraft ????? Read my post? Because I am quite sure I have not said that they are. I have questioned whether there are any shortcomings in their risk assessment and management practices. I don't know that there are, but I do believe it needs to be looked into. They are in the aviation industry and should be monitoring and assessing the external environment such as the safety of airspace they intend to use. The investigation, will for sure look into the processes they had in place for this and I will reserve my judgement until then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Is a plane at 30000 feet visible from the ground if no cloud ?I presume not and that they pick it up on radar ? Yes they are, depending of course on atmospheric conditions.....MH17 was at FL330 and usually vapour contrails are visible.....if there is no cloud you can clearly tell the difference between a B777 and a military transport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Read my post? Because I am quite sure I have not said that they are. I have questioned whether there are any shortcomings in their risk assessment and management practices. I don't know that there are, but I do believe it needs to be looked into. They are in the aviation industry and should be monitoring and assessing the external environment such as the safety of airspace they intend to use. The investigation, will for sure look into the processes they had in place for this and I will reserve my judgement until then. I have during the course of my airline flying career flown over a few notable hotspots........you don't expect a bunch of lunatics who have been given a BUK Missile System by a "Superpower" to use said system. But of course after a 40 year Military and civilian flying career.......WTF would I know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 No I wouldn't. Not rational or scientific decision making but there's something to be said for gut instinct. To be honest I find it barely conceivable that that area was a designated safe zone...how the bloody hell can it be...its a war zone, despite altitude...mistakes are made..safest option...steer well clear. Possible and some airlines (Quantas for one) chose NOT to....Lots of questions will be asked about why some airlines chose to disregard the information.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MicheleW Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 If the flight suited my schedule and my budget then I would still fly with Malaysian, it could just as well have been the Singapore Airlines flight, or maybe the Emirates one that flew over Ukraine around the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 A combination a of factors lead to the tragedy. 1. As already sayd MA flown were they flown to save money and fuel when other airlines avoided the route altogether. 2. It was known to Ukrainian government for some time and has been shown many times in the news that rebels have taken over some Ukrainian military bases in the area and got access to those powerful missiles that were originally made in Russia (so yes they are russian made weapons but Russia did not supply them to the rebels, Ukrainian forces owned them and lost them in battles with their own people who are pro russian and don't recognise current Ukrainian government). 3. Ukraine closed its air space in that area but then reopened it above 10000km officially for economical reasons and as it was deemed "safe" yet this detail was not communicated publucly, intersepted communication between rebels proves that they believe that the air space is closed for all civilian flights as there is a civil war on in full swing. 4. So knowing all this, making rebbels to believe that the air pace is closed for civilian flight and knowing that they ve got missiles and have shot down two Ukrainian military planes already Ukrainian forces start cassette bombing the area a day before the MA flight, which brings the rebbels to full alert and ready to shoot at anything in the sky and then they open the corridor and fly the MA plane through there (It was also navigated by Ukrainians on the ground at the time)... The disaster was pretty much inevitable and predictable. Ukrainian garment basically wanted to discredite the rebbels big time and the ve succeeded but at what cost... Politically the outcome is to good for the new Ukrainian government for it all to be an accident. It totally shifts the weight towards them being the good guys Russia being evil since the rebels are pro russian , the US is already promissing more support and mordern weapons to Kiev, russian imaged is severely damaged etc... is is basically I don't believe for a sec that it was an accident. BUT it couldn't have happened to any airline like said here before! MA was only chosen for the sacrifice cos they were the only once who chose to fly that way to save money when other airlines avoided the route altogether... So for that matter no I will never fly MA and I think they well deserve to go bust Yet another "expert" :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slean Wolfhead Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 BUT it couldn't have happened to any airline like said here before! MA was only chosen for the sacrifice cos they were the only once who chose to fly that way to save money when other airlines avoided the route altogether... So for that matter no I will never fly MA and I think they well deserve to go bust There were 300 flights a day through that airspace. I think Kenny Everett had it right about the Russians, been nothing but a stubborn pain in the arse for 2 generations now, with another lunatic dictator who wants to wind the clock back 30 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammy1 Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Personally I find all the speculation and blame laying distasteful. Nobody on here has a clue yet and as usual allow themselves to be led by the media. Wait, then when the full details are known, well then you can go for it. It won't happen, but it would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johndoe Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Personally I find all the speculation and blame laying distasteful. Nobody on here has a clue yet and as usual allow themselves to be led by the media. Wait, then when the full details are known, well then you can go for it. It won't happen, but it would be nice. And who else, but the media will avail us of the full details? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I would definitely fly with them. Its not like this incident was remotely their fault from what we know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishgirl1 Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Yep wouldn't have a problem flying Malaysian Airlines at all, they are a brilliant Airline so if the price was right on the dates I wanted to fly I would book ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishenka Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Not an expert, I am just fluent in Russian and Ukrainian so have access to much more info and detail on the matter from all sides... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 And who else, but the media will avail us of the full details? You mean the full..'official version of events'...there's too many madmen with too many fingers in too many pies...they're all led by greed and power.....all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Not an expert, I am just fluent in Russian and Ukrainian so have access to much more info and detail on the matter from all sides... I speak English but I'm afraid the CIA, the US State Department, the British Home Office, MI6 and do I say Julie Bishop and Defence Signals Directorate aren't forthcoming with a lot of information to myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish.01 Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Reports that a family in queensland who lost family on the MH370 flight also had family on this flight http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/burrows-family-from-biloela-who-lost-family-in-missing-flight-mh370-mourning-again-after-malaysia-airlines-mh17-shot-down/story-fnihsrf2-1226993905493 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenon4017 Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 In any case it is hardly Russians fault that some bunch of UKRANIAN idiots ended up getting their hands on UKRANIAN military missiles in a civil war... No, but if they've supplied the missiles or recent training with a view to "evening up the fight", then they are to blame if their attack dogs bite the wrong bait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.0ad3ad7bc9a213b8cd17da1aa4ed9c73.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.