> > From: "Anthony Farr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2004/10/28 Thu PM 01:35:18 GMT > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Re: OT: Re: Tangentially ... (Gas Guzzlers) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (snip) > > Quantas was the only major airline not to have had a crash involving > fatality. > > > (snip) > > Not strictly true, but an example of good spin doctoring. Qantas hasn't > "crashed" a large modern jet, but it did lose a small propliner in New > Guinea in the late '50s or early '60s. They've also lost a small commuter > plane on a feeder route in more recent times, IIRC, although that subsidiary > airline went by a different name. A few years ago one of their 747-400s > aquaplaned off the runway in a severe rain squall when landing in Bangkok. > Although there were a few minor injuries during the evacuation, and no > fatalities, the aircraft was a total write-off. Photos are at: > http://tinyurl.com/6c5kv
It was the "with fatality" that was stressed. Interesting site. A bit less bloody 8-) but more interesting from the engineering view: http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_accidentinvest/documents/sectionhomepage/dft_accidentinvest_page.hcsp Click on "air investigation" link and then follow links to full reports, monthly journals, etc. From scratch, there's probably about 3 weeks' solid reading there. It can be a bit slow, sometimes. mike ----------------------------------------- Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
