http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 8&t=115417
Hello, I'm AC. Enjoy your flight, remember though if anything goes wrong, we're not responsible.
Unbelievable, while not surprising.
-
ScudRunner-d95
- Posts: 1349
- Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 5:08 pm
Looks like avcanda pulled the thread lol pussys
Did you mean this ?
http://www.bnn.ca/air-canada-suing-airb ... h-1.710434
Did you mean this ?
http://www.bnn.ca/air-canada-suing-airb ... h-1.710434
-
Trey Kule
- Posts: 250
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 4:19 am
Well that makes me feel better, and a whole lot of people owe me an apology. Telling me all these years that it was my fault I could not stay on the localizer and glide path. Piss poor manufacturing. I expect Trump had his people hack their website and influence their design.
I guess terrain warning does not work. Or the radar alt., or the fact the needles were not where they were supposed to be. All the plane's fault.
Kudoss to the pilots. You have to be thinking quickly to land short and get people to believe it was all the plane's fault.
I guess terrain warning does not work. Or the radar alt., or the fact the needles were not where they were supposed to be. All the plane's fault.
Kudoss to the pilots. You have to be thinking quickly to land short and get people to believe it was all the plane's fault.
-
Liquid Charlie
- Posts: 524
- Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:34 pm
I don't know why people beat up Air Canada over this. It really has nothing to do with Air Canada. They just happened to be the carrier involved. If it were WS or any other 705/121 carrier the result would have been the same. It's called a legal department, bunch of lawyers going over details with a magnifying glass. Air Bus will likely counter sue for poor training or whatever. I'm not sure what fall out could follow but remembering Freddie and the shit show that followed I'm always wondering how much more they can "dumb down" aviation. Having said all that I still fail to understand "ops specs" and why all the bullshit to change the rules and then issue a "special" rule for people to go back and do what has always been.
Dryden is another mile stone in Canadian aviation. To take a regulation that has always been there and expand it to the insanity of today, yet they are dragging their ass with a real issue like FDT -- enough to cause one to wander off into the tundra carrying on a conversation with all your imaginary buddies.
Dryden is another mile stone in Canadian aviation. To take a regulation that has always been there and expand it to the insanity of today, yet they are dragging their ass with a real issue like FDT -- enough to cause one to wander off into the tundra carrying on a conversation with all your imaginary buddies.
-
Rookie Pilot
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:44 am
[quote author=Liquid Charlie link=topic=5959.msg15721#msg15721 date=1491056697]
I don't know why people beat up Air Canada over this. It really has nothing to do with Air Canada. They just happened to be the carrier involved. If it were WS or any other 705/121 carrier the result would have been the same. It's called a legal department, bunch of lawyers going over details with a magnifying glass. Air Bus will likely counter sue for poor training or whatever. I'm not sure what fall out could follow but remembering Freddie and the shit show that followed I'm always wondering how much more they can "dumb down" aviation. Having said all that I still fail to understand "ops specs" and why all the bullshit to change the rules and then issue a "special" rule for people to go back and do what has always been.
Dryden is another mile stone in Canadian aviation. To take a regulation that has always been there and expand it to the insanity of today, yet they are dragging their ass with a real issue like FDT -- enough to cause one to wander off into the tundra carrying on a conversation with all your imaginary buddies.
[/quote]
It's their PR machine that irritates me. On these forums we are constantly exhorted not to pass judgement on accidents and wait for the report.
That applies to everyone except AC and WS, who are free to make alleged factual statements immediately following to protect their image:
"It was a hard landing, NOT an accident" (are they going to try to use that in court -- and get laughed out)
"It was (Airbuses) fault not ours"
(WS) "it was not an abnormally low approach".
These kind of statements should be muzzled. No, AC, you don't have the right to opine on an accident cause before the report.
Or ground all A320's if they are dangerous. Now.
I don't know why people beat up Air Canada over this. It really has nothing to do with Air Canada. They just happened to be the carrier involved. If it were WS or any other 705/121 carrier the result would have been the same. It's called a legal department, bunch of lawyers going over details with a magnifying glass. Air Bus will likely counter sue for poor training or whatever. I'm not sure what fall out could follow but remembering Freddie and the shit show that followed I'm always wondering how much more they can "dumb down" aviation. Having said all that I still fail to understand "ops specs" and why all the bullshit to change the rules and then issue a "special" rule for people to go back and do what has always been.
Dryden is another mile stone in Canadian aviation. To take a regulation that has always been there and expand it to the insanity of today, yet they are dragging their ass with a real issue like FDT -- enough to cause one to wander off into the tundra carrying on a conversation with all your imaginary buddies.
[/quote]
It's their PR machine that irritates me. On these forums we are constantly exhorted not to pass judgement on accidents and wait for the report.
That applies to everyone except AC and WS, who are free to make alleged factual statements immediately following to protect their image:
"It was a hard landing, NOT an accident" (are they going to try to use that in court -- and get laughed out)
"It was (Airbuses) fault not ours"
(WS) "it was not an abnormally low approach".
These kind of statements should be muzzled. No, AC, you don't have the right to opine on an accident cause before the report.
Or ground all A320's if they are dangerous. Now.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
They should sue the airport for making those approach lights so hard to get through after the hard landing.
-
Rookie Pilot
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:44 am
What's the difference, really -- between the Asiana disaster in which the pilots were castigated and this one? Really?
Weather?
Please. Sorry, not buying. Landing short is landing short. Doesn't happen at that level with professionals. Weather, not to be casual about it, shouldn't be that relevant to a safe outcome. Go to the alternate.
Yet unlike Asiana, the community -- and AC -- is ready to completely absolve the pilots and blame airbus. Don't get it.
And yes, while a pure amateur, I've flown a little in weather, and a few non precision approaches to minimums, too.
Weather?
Please. Sorry, not buying. Landing short is landing short. Doesn't happen at that level with professionals. Weather, not to be casual about it, shouldn't be that relevant to a safe outcome. Go to the alternate.
Yet unlike Asiana, the community -- and AC -- is ready to completely absolve the pilots and blame airbus. Don't get it.
And yes, while a pure amateur, I've flown a little in weather, and a few non precision approaches to minimums, too.
-
Liquid Charlie
- Posts: 524
- Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:34 pm
At the end of the day it's up to the consumer. If you are worried about safety or anything it's pretty simple. Don't buy the product. Back in the day when airlines supplied newspapers they never seemed to show up on a day when an aircraft accident made the news. Violation of our rights??? -- No it's their right not to supply the news paper. The whole world is bombarded with bullshit advertising, scam phone calls, info commercials and if we choose to be sheep shame on us. We are the consumer, so if Air Canada and WestJet pisses you off that much don't fly them. The whole world of commerce is to make people "feel good" and most people really don't want to know that pilots fucked up and Air Canada is using "old" equipment and refuses to update their FMS with a GPS module. Air Bus haha - our fly-by-wire saved the crew's lives but neglected to tell people it was got the pilots into the situation in the first place and on a demo flight -- Damn -- and they sold the aircraft anyway. Boeing with the Dream Liner and installing lithium Ion batteries even with all the controversy and exploding batteries. The list goes on and on and it's part of life. We obviously need consumer advocates but to sit and whine about it does nothing.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
