GEORGETOWN, Guyana (AP) — Officials say a U.S. team is expected soon in the South American nation of Guyana to probe the crash of a Boeing 737 jetliner that all 163 people aboard survived.
Authorities so far have given little idea about the cause of Saturday's crash. The Caribbean Airlines plane ran off the end of a runway at Guyana's main airport and broke in two. About 30 people had to be treated at a local hospital, including the pilot.
The airline is largely owned by the government of Trinidad and Tobago and its prime minister has visited the crash site. Kamla Persad-Bissessar says she is worried that the accident will hurt tourism to the Caribbean, a region that depends heavily on the industry. [Reply]
This incident brought about changes as to how often aging aircraft are inspected for metal fatigue and corrosion. Although it was catastrophic and one flight attendant died, the airplane held together and was able to land. BTW… this is the same basic airframe involved with Caribbean Airlines Flight 523 proving that it had an incident on the ground right after landing (the photo shows the engine thrust reversers still deployed as they would be after landing).
Originally Posted by Stewie:
I think you need to look up the de Havilland Comet. They had catastrophic fatigue failures in flight that killed everyone on board and eventually grounded the fleet. The two most famous crashes were operated by British Overseas Airways Corporation. The planes flew in the '50s. It changed aircraft design forever.
I'm familiar with the Comet. Their fuselages didn't break in half like the aircraft in the OP. The British dorks used rectangular passenger windows, which led to the skin of the fuselage ripping at the corners. But, no, the fuselage didn't break in half. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Iowanian:
Frankie is so smart, he can sniff 3 day old farts from a metro bus seat and tell you what the provider had for dinner the day before.
The provider probably had flying monkeys for dinner. They tried to fly out while the person was on the bus. [Reply]
The Chiefs PR staff just pulled this thread up in a meeting and said "the threadstarter is the same dumbass criticizing your off-season moves, Scott". [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
I'm familiar with the Comet. Their fuselages didn't break in half like the aircraft in the OP. The British dorks used rectangular passenger windows, which led to the skin of the fuselage ripping at the corners. But, no, the fuselage didn't break in half.
I was pointing out the fact that metal fatigue has caused catastrophic disasters. They don't know that the failures were caused by the windows. It was more likely a combination of the unknown properties of aluminum and rivets used in the construction. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mensa:
Haha! Incorrect from the first word to the last.
Nervous agitated laughter is not laughter of joy nor of belittlement. My extensive experience here has been the "people" you speak of are only those who can't handle being outwitted, out-debated, and outsmarted by the "ferner." I'm used to dumb rednecks and particularly enjoy getting under their skin.
Frankie, Frankie, Frankie. Let me clear up the argument everyone is making since you were unable to tie all the pieces together. Planes do not just break in half while flying through the air. Not modern planes anyhow. Planes are designed to take off of a runway, fly through the air, and then land on a runway. They are not designed to careen off the runway and into a ditch. When they do that, yes, there is a chance they may break in two being as they aren't designed to do it. The article never mentions the plane ever got off the ground, and simply states that the plane ran off the runway. Therefor, buy deductive reasoning alone, you should be able to see that this in no way proves anything other than the fact that 737's flying in Guyana, can split in two when they run off of the end of the runway. Nothing else is implied here. You are welcome. [Reply]
